The big rigs: Class 4 and 5 trucks are coming

An engineer and communications man from Chrysler have been crossing the country, spreading the word about the new Dodge 4500 and Dodge 5500 trucks. These are very impressive trucks, and they follow on the heels of the Dodge Ram 3500 Chassis Cab which, amazingly, has taken the #1 sales position in Class 3 trucks for two months in a row - coming from out of nowhere to steal Ford’s long-standing sales lead (and GM’s long-standing #2 status).

Some say that people don’t buy a Dodge truck; they buy a Cummins diesel engine with a truck wrapped around it. That’s undoubtedly a huge part of these rigs’ attraction, but there’s more to it than that - though I wouldn’t have known exactly what else there was until today. Yes, Chrysler put out a long press release bragging about unique features, but some of them are “more than meets the eye.” One major draw is the fact that you can take a huge fitting developed for another truck, say a Ford F-450 that’s being retired, and just move it onto the Dodge and expect it to fit — because Dodge has not only gone with industry-standard electricals and rails, but has gone one step further and pushed everything, that is everything, beneath the rails, without the protrusions of some competitors. Part of that, the engineer explained (we’ll have his name and picture in an article next week), is because Dodge was developing the truck knowing what the emissions rules would be from 2007-2009 (and, indeed, past 2009, into the very tightly controlled realm that will see urea treatment become almost standard). Therefore, they were able to engineer the emissions controls into the body from the start - and nothing seems “added on” or “in the way.”

Another interesting story is the brakes. The press release noted that an engine brake is now standard, and the front brakes are the biggest in the industry. Not mentioned was why this is important - namely, cutting back on brake jobs. The Dodge was engineered with long-term cost of ownership in mind, and if you can cut the number of brake jobs in half, that gives you more productivity (the vehicle’s not out of service) and lower costs. Between the in-service items and the Cummins engine, which is powerful but surprisingly quiet - just a little louder than a Hemi - it’s no wonder the upfitters have been lining up to get behind the new Dodges.

Then there’s another advantage - flexible manufacturing. Apparently these rigs can be built on the same assembly line as regular Dodge trucks and the Class 3 chassis-cabs, interchangeably; the diesels take a little longer to build, but they don’t need a separate line (presumably lowering costs) and they don’t need to be run in huge batches, which means that if a customer orders a truck in November, they can get it in November or December. Turnaround time is important in this industry, and Dodge has it.

By the way, these Rams are also sold as the Sterling Bullet; earlier I said that this was a joint effort, but I’ve been corrected — it’s a 100% Dodge engineering feat. That makes it even more impressive.

If you want my guess, this will be a winner - a truck that puts Dodge onto the commercial-vehicle map for the first time since the 1970s. Yes, it looks good, inside and out; but to many the beauty is where you can’t see it (at least not after it’s been fitted out).

Land Rover: the answer to Chrysler’s problems?

As Ford gets closer to a sale of Jaguar and Land Rover, people have started to talk about how it would be a natural fit for Jeep. This is true, but not for the obvious reasons.

Land Rover has two things Chrysler desperately needs: a good four-cylinder engine, and a small diesel.

The four cylinder gas (petrol) engine is really the big item. Cummins can supply diesels to Chrysler, and their new, very modular design, which will be installed in V8 form in various Dodge trucks and presumably Jeeps, can almost certainly spawn a four cylinder for cars. The Cummins is tough, long-lasting, fuel efficient, and endowed with a name beloved by generations of truck owners. A Chrysler diesel could be laughed at by the news media; a Cummins diesel in a Dodge or Chrysler car, on the other hand, would be formidable indeed. On the other hand, the Land Rover 2.2 liter diesel pumps out a respectable 158 horsepower but has lots of low end torque and the usual diesel good mileage; if Cerberus bought Land Rover, it would presumably be able to build them in a present engine factory, preserving jobs (and postponing retirement benefits) and retaining profits.

The big deal, though, is the gas engine. Chrysler has a lousy four cylinder gas engine now; it went from top of the ranks with the 1994 introduction of the 2.0 to near the bottom with the World Engine, a horrific but buzzword compliant powerplant that, while it makes remarkable power with a turbocharger, is an unrewarding drive without said turbo. The horsepower ratings are great; the driving experience is not, because low end torque is lacking. This engine was foisted upon Chrysler by the overlords of Stuttgart at just the wrong time, as the United States started to value gas mileage and Chrysler increased its drive to take over foreign markets. Just about every review of the Caliber, Compass, or Patriot talks about highlights of the cars, in spite of the engine, which is just about universally disdained.

Land Rover makes four cylinder engines, and an industry insider of note described it as being strong and quite desirable. That is very important.

To deal with the World Engine’s deficiencies, we have been told that there are two choices: either make serious redesigns, or start over. Either might cost billions of dollars, and engines take years to develop, test, and tune properly. Sometimes they turn out surprisingly well, and sometimes they are a disappointment. Buying Land Rover provides a new option: simply use the Land Rover design, retooling the Dundee, Michigan plant to build their existing engine. It would have to be modified, but that would be far less serious than re-engineering the World Engine or creating a whole new powerplant.

That alone could make buying Land Rover worthwhile - just as Ford could justify buying Volvo just in the new Taurus platform. But there’s more.

Sharing with Jeep, Land Rover could make huge profits, because duplication of development costs would be largely eliminated. Jeep could leave markets they are not doing well in; Jeep has pretty much lost its prestige in the luxury 4×4 market, but Land Rover and Range Rover have not. In the United States, Jeep could drop the Grand Cherokee and Commander entirely, and stick with its most desirable vehicles - the hard core Wrangler, the Wrangler Unlimited, the Scrambler pickup, and the Cherokee/Liberty. The basic engineering of the latter could be merged with the equivalent Land Rover for foreign sale, and for an upmarket alternative; while the Range Rover line, with costs dramatically reduced and quality dramatically increased by sharing with Jeep, could be sold in the US, at higher prices. Hummer will always get its “I want to intimidate” buyers, but Range Rover, with some assurance of decent reliability and better appointments and chassis, will be able to get more of its genteel, wealthy, upper-crust buyers.

That would be nice, but that’s not the whole point. The whole point is also to get more people to buy the Journey, Caliber, Sebring, and Avenger, and that will only happen if they have decent engines under the hood. If Land Rover can fix that problem, everything else is gravy - and the Compass can easily disappear, since the capacity will be needed for Calibers and Patriots.

Of course, Cerberus could license an engine design from Fiat or Peugeot, or another company that doesn’t compete in the United States. But with Land Rover, Cerberus could get a massive profit-maker that fits right into their current skills and technologies, with a stellar reputation among those who don’t know any better. It’s a great deal.

Dodge commercial trucks coming

When the “big rig” Ram first appeared with its Cummins turbodiesel and V10 gas engines, quite a few buyers made them into tow trucks, panel trucks, and other heavier-than-usual-duty vehicles, saving quite a bit of cash over buying a standard commercial truck. However, that market never really took off, because commercial vehicle customizers really need a standard frame to attach their equipment to - the kind of frame the GM TopKick and Ford 4500/5500 have. For over a decade, Dodge was reportedly working on such a vehicle (”reportedly” does not mean “actually”).

Now, finally, we will be seeing Dodge commercial trucks designed with an industry standard frame, using the Hemi gas engine and a new-to-Dodge, larger Cummins turbodiesel coupled to an Aisin six-speed automatic or, presumably, a heavy-duty manual transmission. The Aisin automatic eliminates what might be the biggest drawback of the Rams to commercial buyers, which is the perceived or real inefficiency and unreliability of the Ram automatic in medium duty vehicles. (Medium duty in this context means heavier-duty than “heavy duty” Ram, Silverado, and F-350 trucks.)

What we do not know, and are not likely to find out from official sources, is where this truck came from. Was it designed by Dodge or by Freightliner, or, as is most likely, by engineers from both companies? Was the frame adapted from a Dodge or Freightliner design, borrowed from some other DCX company, or built fresh for this purpose? (The latter seems unlikely but one never knows.) In short, how much Ram is in this new Ram?

These trucks are due to be debuted tomorrow, but as usual we have advance information, this time at http://www.allpar.com/model/ram/medium-duty.html … this is a 140,000 vehicle/year market that Dodge currently has no presence in, with 93% of the sales going to GM and Ford. Getting into the commercial truck market will both benefit Dodge directly with added sales, and by implication make Dodge’s pickups seem more, well, Ram-tough. The name on the utility company rig, tow truck, motor home, or cube truck can become the name in your driveway, just like with GMC, Chevrolet, and Ford trucks. It adds a certain amount of credibility and macho flavor.

It seems like a sensible decision; we just have to wonder, why did it take ten years? Like a turbocharged Neon, some ideas just seemed to make more sense in 1993-1996, but are still welcome even if just a tad late.