Bill Pierre Ford

Vision Manufacturing LTD’s new high-capacity van (HCV) offers fleets an American-made OEM upfit with the characteristics of the Dodge Sprinter, while taking advantage of Ford and GM’s powerful V-10 and V-8 gas and diesel engines and thousands of service centers.

The HCV, aka the “Armadillo,” is designed to fit the Chevrolet Express, GMC Savana, and Ford Econoline van chassis. The walk-thru van provides more than six feet of headroom and plenty of cargo capacity and good fuel efficiency for its size.

The Ford regular and extended vans are currently available for upfitting. The full GM line is expected to be ready later this year.

“Our vision was to give the Ford and GM customer an intelligent alternative to the Dodge Sprinter,” says Darryl Connors, president and CEO of Vision, an authorized Ford and GM pool manufacturer.

Where the Chassis Meets the Upfit

In business for more than 25 years as a conversion van maker, Vision spent more than $2 million to design a product that Ford and GM customers would embrace.

“We are able to provide a vehicle that has the ergonomic benefits and the same easy ingress and egress as the Sprinter while benefiting from Ford and GM architecture,” says Connors.

In terms of design, consumers will not be able to tell where the chassis meets the upfit, Connors says. The design incorporates a complete van chassis instead of a cutaway. The vehicle is cut below the beltline to enable integration of the upper and lower portions of the vehicle with a seamless finish. “It improves aerodynamic appeal,” Connors says.

The HCV van was designed by Applied Technologies, an automotive engineering firm that specializes in chassis and drivetrain design for the Big Three U.S. OEMs.

The upfit is designed to incorporate factory door hardware and electronics to cut down on servicing issues. Metal support systems were integrated into the top to reinforce the vehicle’s structural integrity.

“Safety is carried through the entire design from the ground up,” says Craig Winn, president of Applied Technologies. “Because the design uses the full body of the van, not just the chassis, the new top and doors incorporate the structural rigidity engineered into the original van body.”

The van has met the government recertification requirement for roof crush, Winn says.

Specs Offer Flexibility

With 75 inches of rear-door clearance and 73 inches of side-door clearance, Vision offers cargo doors on both, compared to the Sprinter’s passenger-side slider. Vision’s standard high top is approximately 6 inches taller than the Sprinter and offers a slightly wider footprint.

Total cargo volume ranges from 395-500 cubic square feet, depending on make and model.

The HCV conversion adds only 90-120 lbs. of extra weight, according to Bill Molitor, fleet chassis manager for Jackson, Miss.-based Watson Quality Ford. Other upfits can add significantly more weight, which reduces payload capacity.

Molitor says the vehicle’s walk-in convenience is ideal for any industry with payload needs ranging from 3,300-3,900 lbs.

The Vision HCV takes advantage of Ford’s numerous powertrain options on the Econoline E-150, E-250, and the E-350 chassis, in both standard and extended versions. The E-150 and E-250 models offer 4.6L and 5.4L V-8 gasoline engines with automatic transmissions. The E-350 models offer 5.4L V-8 gasoline, 6.8L V-10, and 6.0L V-8 diesel engines.

Vision Manufacturing’s HCV van features a complete van chassis instead of a cutaway, incorporating the factory door hardware and electronics. The walk-thru interior has six feet of headroom and can be configured with a variety of rack and bin packages already available to end users.

Price and Ordering

Many fleet customers made the commitment to the Armadillo based on initial cost savings which, according to Connors, can be substantial.

The cost to add the Armadillo body to a Ford or GM ¾- or 1-ton van is $9,995 for regular-length vans and $10,995 for extended models. Shipping is extra.

Vision’s HCV van can be paired with Ford’s E-Series fleet, government, or retail price programs.

The Ford van with the HCV conversion carries a three-year/36,000-mile warranty, while Ford’s powertrain comes with a 60-month/60,000-mile warranty.

GM and Ford cargo van factory orders require a lead time of six to eight weeks, some longer depending on options stops. When coordinated with upfit production and shipping, total lead extends to approximately 10-12 weeks from the time of the signed order.

Currently, fleet customers can order the HCV from 23 Ford dealers across the country.

HCV Enters Fleet

Target markets are delivery fleets that require more cargo capacity than the standard Ford or GM vans as well as the ability to stand up inside the van. The unit will also be introduced to floral, dry cleaning, and pharmaceutical companies.

“With the Econoline making up more than 70 percent of the van market, [the HCV] is a great place to start,” says Tom Meeks, CEO and president of Continental First Federal Inc. (CFF), a major truck supplier to FedEx contractors and other logistics companies, located in Mt. Juliet, Tenn.

Meeks sees the van’s expansive panels as good white space for company advertising. He bought the second HCV test van and branded it with his company logo.

Vision Manufacturing is building 600 units for CFF at its factory in Georgia. The first van recently entered the FedEx fleet in Vermont.

CFF is a fleet customer as well as an authorized reseller. Meeks intends to keep 50 upfit units in inventory for immediate sale at CFF’s retail location in suburban Nashville, Tenn.

Built for Adaptability

The HCV upfit will evolve depending on the industry it serves, including installing shelving systems for electricians and plumbers. “Fleets that purchase and use the van will determine future product improvements and options,” says Molitor.

Aftermarket manufacturers will build interior and exterior options for the Vision HCV according to market demand. Ladder racks, lifts, racks, bins, back-up cameras, and other products are already available for the end user.

By Joe Bohn

Rising material costs have made it more tempting for fleets to consider cycling truck bodies and equipment. However, even though it may become more attractive in the future, such cycling typically isn’t cost-effective in most applications, according to fleet management officials.

Cycling Benefits Fleet

“We see with some degree of regularity certain customers contemplating refurbishing bodies for use on new chassis,” says Ken Gillies, manager of truck purchasing and engineering for GE Capital Solutions Fleet Services, based in Eden Prairie, Minn.

Customers believe that repainting and reinstalling the body would be cost-effective.

“As the cost of bodies increase, refurbishment can become more attractive, if a fleet can somehow fit it into their operation without a loss of downtime,” Gillies says.

“But from a general standpoint, we generally discourage our customers from doing refurbishing work for many of reasons.”

The cost of vehicle downtime to allow for remounting requires major consideration.

GE Capital Solutions Fleet Services does have a customer that cost-effectively cycles its bodies, specially designed to transport expensive, oversized panels standing on edge.

“But that’s a rarity,” adds Gillies, noting the company has the advantage of operating extra trucks, so it isn’t impacted by the downtime costs of having out-of-service vehicles during repair or maintenance.

Most fleets aren’t that fortunate — especially in today’s environment, when the trend is to cut back on the number of vehicles operated.

Cycling Costs Pile Up

Palm Beach County, Fla., incurs costs, for example, of about $100 per day for a work or dump truck to be out of commission, according to Doug Weichman, CAFM, director, fleet management division.

Allowing two months to refit a body and equipment onto a new chassis, downtime costs alone would total about $4,000, he adds.

“Beyond that you’d need the capability to do it, such as overhead cranes to pick the body off,” said Weichman.

There’s also the cost of changing out and upgrading older bodies to update company requirements, such as LED lighting.

If the fleet has switched from a different, low-bid chassis supplier, matching the older body to a different chassis can pose additional problems and expense. Such expenses include hydraulics, location of power take-off (PTO), or the chassis’ exhaust system, which has a different configuration.

Considering all the variables, “It’s not as easy as just unbolting a dump truck body,” said Weichman.

Weighing the economics, a fleet also must consider the lost value in selling an older complete truck versus selling just its cab-and-chassis.

Palm Beach County can sell a seven-year-old dump truck for $22,000 – $28,000 (with 12-yard capacity), but loses at least one-third of the profit when selling only a cab-and-chassis.

Still, county officials with a fleet of 4,500 vehicles, found it more cost-effective to refurbish a 10-year-old under-bridge bucket truck and recycle the bodies of some of its animal trucks.

The under-bridge bucket/aerial truck cost $268,000 to refurbish versus $400,000 for a brand new model. Refurbishment included sending the vehicle back to the original equipment manufacturer Aspen, and having it completely upgraded to the level of a new model.

The County’s animal cage trucks are viable candidates to have the bodies moved or reused, said Weichman.

“We did this in the past and we consider each truck as it comes up for replacement on a case-by-case basis,” Weichman adds.

The high cost of the bodies, about $15,000 each, favors their reuse. Their light weight, fiberglass construction and manageable size make them easy to handle. They don’t incur rust and are typically in good shape. And, having no hydraulics or other items to transfer, they’re relatively easy to bolt onto the back of a ¾-ton cab-and-chassis.

As an alternative, Palm Beach County has also sold these trucks to operators at dog tracks for 30 percent of the original purchase price to be used for transporting their greyhounds.

Cold Climates Face Different Issues

Kansas City, Mo., Central Fleet has tried cycling cranes, but with “limited success,” according to Sam Swearngin, CAFM, fleet superintendent.

Because of their expense, “We tried twice with truck-mounted cranes to take them off an old truck and put them on a new one with a new flatbed. But I’m not endorsing that,” says Swearngin.

The cranes were perceived as unreliable and lacked the remote control features of new models. The trucks ended up as “secondary units,” used just for emergencies — not exactly what the County had planned.

Like those in other cold climate areas, Kansas City’s truck bodies and mounted equipment are subject to the corrosive effect of salt, which largely precludes cycling. Dump bodies, in particular, often wear out more quickly than the cab-and-chassis.

Despite rising costs, Swearngin and fellow superintendents has been experimenting with — and spending money on — more expensive, corrosive-resistant steels to stretch out truck life.

“I’ve got trucks here 15 to 16 years old, and I wouldn’t have thought it possible in the past. We literally run them until there’s a catastrophic failure.”

“There are a number of strategies you can use to extend body life,” he notes.

Upgrades to “mild” steel proved inadequate for the fleet’s goals. However, Cor-Ten, commonly termed “weathering steel,” has worked well for Kansas City’s public works division trucks.

The mechanical properties of weathering steel depend on which alloy and the material thickness is. It has been used in bridge and other large structural applications.

“It gets surface rust, but not structural rust,” like mild steels, which are subject to structural failures,” said Swearngin.

In select applications for water department trucks, subject to year-around wetness and corrosion, fleet officials have also been experimenting with stainless steel.

“For a 14-foot tandem dump truck that needs the horsepower to pull backhoes costing around $140,000, you can put a second engine and transmission in it and still be ahead of the game, if everything is structurally sound,” said Swearngin.

T1/tungsten steel in the floor of dump trucks also permits doing away with underbody cross members, which catch hard-to-clean dirt and debris and contribute to premature rusting. “You get a nice, clean floor that goes all the way across,” he notes.

The under-bridge bucket/aerial truck cost $268,000 to refurbish versus $400,000 for a brand new model. Refurbishment included sending the vehicle back to the original equipment manufacturer, and having it completely upgraded to the level of a new model.

Refurbishing “Mini Pumpers”

Canadian fire/emergency-truck producer and refurbisher Holland Enterprises, based in Kakabeka Falls, Ontario, has also seen demand for cycling “mini pumpers.”

These are 1- and 2-ton trucks, scaled-down versions of pumper trucks that provide fire and protection services for cost-conscious customers.

Most fire apparatus vehicles don’t log many miles or hours on the engine. Typically, the bodies wear out much more quickly than the chassis.

Kevin Holland, operations manager notes that cost savings from refurbishment depend on the body’s condition, and the amount of work it requires.

Overall, truck operators need to give as much attention to preventive maintenance on truck bodies, as they do the chassis.

“People give a lot of attention to the chassis, but they often don’t realize the body requires maintenance the same as an engine,” Holland concluded.