I was just reading a ProMaster review on the web, by someone clearly not qualified to be reviewing anything. This professional writer, slammed the ProMaster for being FWD and pointed out a failed FWD pickup truck done years ago. It got my blood boiling.
I threw this sketch together so show why the ProMaster works so well as a FWD drive vehicle. It's all about the center of gravity "empty" and "loaded". The ProMaster has the C.G. working in its favor better than Ford, and nothing like a pickup truck.
Even with the drawings(nice drawings by the way) they just will not get it.
Been in Europe for 30 years,but introduced here and its no good.
Afraid of change.
I know what you mean. I was all set to buy a Ford Transit. Then I found out they changed it to rear wheel drive. To me Ford should have just reworked the Econoline body and gave it a Mcpherson strut front end. They could have saved themselves a bunch of money. When I found the Promaster and saw that Ram didn't butcher it up, I ordered it on the spot.
I'm waiting for the Promaster diesel for my american company, but if it was available I'll prefer the 2.3 mjt 150 hp.
In Italy I have a Ducato L2 H2 with this engine.
It's faster than you expect . When empty, It runs on the steep highway that connect the Venetian plain to the Dolomite mountains (where I live) at 90-95 mph without problems. With 1000 lbs of weight I can keep on the same highway 80-85 mph with a good reserve of power. Fuel consumption average 25-26 mpg...
Here in Europe the 3.0 lt engine is considered an heavy duty unit and it's used only on RVs and always full loaded vans.
Well, let's say they had offered a Fiat Ducato as it is sold in Europe, I would have seriously considered it, knowing it is well tested.
Maybe we should reconsider our need for "big motors". People in Europe don't seam to drive any slower than we do with their "small motors". I mean, some of their highways are just wild (sorry Vale72 ).
We are not so wild now...
They need a lot of money and we have to respect the speed limits: police and alcol tests averywhere.
The situation is not so dangerous...people almost in the northern Italy is driving slower (also because of the fuel prices) and safer.
We have no more accident than in USA. In Italy we have 58 deadly accidents every million people. Europe average is 54 every million.
Too many but almost the same of the USA...
About the engine dimensions, our vehicles have less miles at the end of they operative life, so the engine generally are less lasting than the US ones...
What I meant, Vale72, is that we could well do with the motors offered in Europe, most of us don't need all the power that North American motor have. After all, the speed limits in Europe aren't any lower than they are in America:
According to that article, there are no speed limits on Germany's expressways. I just can't imagine how wild it would be on the highways in Quebec with such a no limit.
We drive faster on the expressways and slower on the other narrower roads that are often full of traffic.
That's the why we have more little accidents but less fatalities.
About the Germany, the expressways are beautiful, often you have no limits, but there are electronic signs every few miles that indicate the limit that can change in function of the traffic and the weather. The sistem check also you speed...and if you go faster you are automatically sanctioned...:crying:
We Italians are famous in Europe to be the most dangerous drivers.
It's true! I thought also you Americans know this...>
I only recall compact FWD pickups in US, but none that were full size. The ones I can recall failed for numerous reasons and not just being fwd. I'm curious which models they were referring to.
Center of gravity is obviously important to any vehicle, but I'm not sure the sketches represent differences between FWD PM, RWD Transit, and a pickup. As an example, loading a RWD van or pickup won't move the CG to essentially over the rear wheels as depicted.
The quote from the article...
" Back in the 1980s, Chrysler fielded a small front-wheel-drive pickup truck; reportedly, when the bed was full, the front wheels had trouble getting traction. "
I won't link the article. Don't want to give author any more site hits
Regarding the CGs shown. Obviously exaggerated, to make the pointer clearer for the non- technical mind.
The quote from the article...
" Back in the 1980s, Chrysler fielded a small front-wheel-drive pickup truck; reportedly, when the bed was full, the front wheels had trouble getting traction. "
I won't link the article. Don't want to give author any more site hits
Regarding the CGs shown. Obviously exaggerated, to make the pointer clearer for the non- technical mind.
Just because the cargo area is not enclosed, as is the case in the ProMaster/Ducato, it doesn't mean that a FWD chassis can't perform equally as well as a pickup as it performs as a van. When loaded with significant cargo the weight distribution would be essentially the same whether it was a ProMaster van or a "ProMaster" pickup -- if such a thing existed. I personally don't agree with the assumption that FWD won't work for all pickups.
For some applications like a F-350 towing a 15,000-pound trailer, then yes, FWD is probably not best. But if a ProMaster can haul over 2 tons of cargo then I see no reason why a pickup based on a ProMaster couldn't do the same without any more center-of-gravity issues than the van version.
If you do a Google search for Ducato Pickup images, you'll find many Ducato cab chassis with pickup beds that are used in commercial duty. The fact is that not only could it work, but it is working. At least in other countries.
That's strange. The European Transit has the engine mounted in transversal position on the FWD versions and longitudinal on the RWD versions... They have also different load floor heights...
That's why it's easier to do the mod in chassis-cab versions, since both have higher frame rails. But yes, I also got kinda skeptical when my friend said it, but he worked at Ford when the Transit was introduced in my country.
We must be talking apples and oranges here just to argue because I can't follow your argument at all.
If you put a pickup truck bed over a ProMaster cab chassis to make a vehicle similar to the one I posted above, why wouldn't the "gas tank, seats, engine, tranny, etc." be exactly the same position over the front wheels?
If we get nit picky, the FWD Pro-Master-based pickup might do slightly better going up a slippery hill than the van version because a pickup bed should weigh less than a van body, hence the pickup would have a very slight weight-distribution advantage over the front driven wheels.
I'm no pro but it seems more natural to pull something up hill then push. I'm happy with 1500.. I haven't loaded up too much but it's been great so far.
The picture you posted is not a pick up truck, it is a cutaway/cab chassis.
An American pickup trucks fuel tank,seats engine and transmission are farther towards the
back.
A distinction without a difference? Even in the US a pickup is often a cab chassis with a bed. Just look at 1-ton models offered both ways. I could post pictures of both side-by-side but seriously doubt it would make a difference to you.
Also, what you describe is based on "US" pickup design which ARE all rear wheel drive. The point of a FWD pickup is to design differently. If you are going to adhere to old RWD design limitations you might as well stay with RWD, which is obviously what you are arguing for instead of discussing the topic.
It's already proven that FWD is as capable as RWD in the most usual operating conditions, with the advantage of an easier handling even for drivers not so used to commercial vehicles.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
Ram Promaster Forum
272.5K posts
40.4K members
Since 2012
We’re a community forum dedicated to Promaster enthusiasts to discuss mods, camper conversions, diesel, fuel economy, reviews and more!