Hello, Allpar Forums member or visitor! If you were a member, you would not see this ad!
Register or log in at the top right of the page...
Discussion in 'Police, Taxis, Ambulances, etc' started by Fast Eddie, Nov 6, 2016.
These are the fastest police cars for 2017
MSP has preliminary numbers, plus a large number of prior years' results here:
MSP - Police Vehicle Test Results
A number of things to keep in mind:
First, Ford whined and cried that the tests were unfair, because their vehicles do not have an option for partial or full-off ESC/ETC. MSP caved in 2015, resulting in slower times for the Charger and Caprice. Still, the Taurus, which we will discuss later, could only manage a half-second advantage in the Vehicle Dynamics course over the AWD Charger. This is - at best - a nuance, which most certainly does not translate into consistency in the field.
Dodge now has a distinct advantage in purchase cost and operating costs. In mid - 2016, Dodge lowered the bid price of all Charger Pursuits. Fuel economy estimates are another area, with the Ford Ecobooms rated at 14/21, and the Hemi's at 16/25 RWD - 15/23 AWD. Further, with the north-south arrangement of the power and drivetrain of the Dodge, repairs are easier and cheaper.
The Chevy cars put up a decent fight, but are riding fast into the sunset. There are reports of the newer design Impala to be offered in Special Service trim in 2017, but the Tahoe will likely be the only Pursuit-Rated GM in the near future.
The larger question mark is placed upon the Taurus. While its performance far exceeds that of the overrated Crown Victoria, it hasn't caught on anywhere near as well as its sister car, the Exploder.
Much criticism is aimed at Chrysler for delaying updates to the Charger, but the Taurus could be in trouble: Ford has not revealed any plans beyond 2017 for the aging sedan, and the fleet version (if not all tramlines) may very well be discontinued after this model year.
I'd like to congratulate you on your clearly non-biased interpretation of the results.
FCA needs to get an SUV pursuit rated. Much as the idea of a high speed pursuit is laughable these days, police agencies tend to only buy pursuit-rated vehicles (Sherriff Andy wants to be able to catch that one Lambo in the state you know). Given the displayed preference for SUVs, the Charger, good as it is, is at a disadvantage compared to the Explorer and Tahoe (not to mention the Tahoe being old isn't necessarily a disadvantage: it means easily available parts and a tried and true design that they're familiar woth). FCA needs to get a police package and pursuit rating for the Durango.
The bias towards Mopar is fairly appropriate, as Allpar is a Mopar-oriented website.
The argument regarding high-speed chases ends at the point where a dire emergency situation begins, and extreme performance is absolutely necessary.
The Chevy Tahoe is a fine vehicle, and a reasonably good performer. It certainly has a place at the fleet table, but the AWD Charger and Exploder have been steadily eating away its market. Why? Price, and costs:
A new 2017 Tahoe PPV in RWD bids out for around $32,900. Add 4WD, and the tab runs up another $3800. Fuel estimates: 16/22.
A new 2017 AWD Charger bids out for around $23,500. Fuel is estimated at 15/23.
A new 2017 AWD Exploder bids out for around $26,600. Fuel is 14/21.
Cash-strapped agencies are definitely adding new Mopars to the ranks, and it is easy to note many of them are splitting the bid, either Exploder/Charger or Tahoe/Charger.
The local PDs in my area are buying Taurus, not Explorer. The NY State Troopers buy a rather wide mix, but they like the Tahoe because they can use the additional height to peer into cars and see if people are texting. Can't do that in a Charger, though they also have a bunch of Chargers. I've seen the odd Taurus in State Trooper livery but I don't remember seeing any Explorers.
Until they can match the competition, FCA is at a disadvantage. "Well, where's your Police Package SUV?" "Uhhh, can I interest you in an AWD Charger?" "Nope NEXT!" It's a product line gap, bottom line. And worse, they're giving ground to Generic Motors.
The Taurus is not a popular police sedan. The Charger has been #1 since 2012, and looks to be in that spot for many years to come. The Exploder holds the top SUV spot, and also looks to retain that position for some time.
The convenience of sitting up high in the Tahoe is overwhelmed by its higher center of gravity and weight vs the Charger or Exploder. When an agency can buy a somewhat better performing AWD Exploder for $9,000 less, or a much higher performing AWD Charger for $13,000 less, the choice becomes pretty simple.
Still, you pick the right tool for the job. In areas where snow is measured by the foot, the higher ground clearance of the Tahoe, Durango, and Expedition obviously make sense.
As noted elsewhere on Allpar, the most likely factor in all of this is manufacturing capacity. I would also imagine the significant profit margins of the Durango are hard for Chrysler to ignore, and how can you blame them? Plenty of agencies are ordering the AHV Durango's and Dodge Rams to handle the work noted above. The Charger certainly handles the rest !!!
Taurus: it's biggest competitor is the Explorer since both vehicles have the same 'footprint' if memory holds me correctly yet the latter's MUCH roomier as well as being easier to see out of.
Tahoe: BoF construction which makes sense for a fullsized SUV and a straight rear axle, far fewer parts to break vs an IRS. Too; being RWD or 4WD, the Chevy SUV is much easier to repair than any other current police package vehicle sold in the USA or Canada.
Regarding the Fords -
True, more room and much easier ingress/egress is why the Exploder does well, and the Taurus did not. The same is true of Charger over the Taurus.
The Tahoe is now an enigma: hideously expensive on bid-out, costs of operation, and residual value. But, it truly serves its purpose with higher ground clearance. BOF, on our other hand, remains a myth. Chrysler sold 100% of its Pursuit-Rated LEV's using unitbody construction from model year 1962. As far as ease and costs of repair, the Charger is laid out very nicely, and parts are reasonable. Compare our Pursuits to anything currently in the police market - you can access everything, with only a little farting around required at times. Even the V6 cars are simple, left-bank plugs excepted.
The Exploder and Tahoe compete directly against each other, for sure, as SUV's. The Exploder also competes with the Charger in the AWD police market. I agree a good case could be made that it also competes with its sister car, the AWD Taurus. Just like the Dodge vs Plymouth scenarios, the Ford infighting could be a reason for the Taurus's impending demise.
have seen may rams in duty lately,got pulled over by a deputy last year in a ram.hope they keep using them over gm and ford vehicles
They sold BOF LEVs in 1960-61? I'd thought the only cars left behind were Imperial and wagons. (Pls forgive me if I am for being pedantic.)
BoF: I was referring to fullsized SUV type vehicles, not sedans. Too; there's no place IMHO for IRS on any big SUV, just lots more parts to break/wear out vs a simple straight rear axle.
Either a typo there or an honest mistake.
Context is a pain, I suppose.
To the best of my recollection, none of the Mopar wagons (nor any Furd or Chevy wagon) were ever granted a Pursuit-Rated certification. That changed with the 2005 Magnum, of horse, but my point certainly stands - the LX Magnum was certainly unit-body.
Considering what the Exploder and AWD Pursuit weigh, I dunno ... They've got the Charger's drivetrain bits n pieces beefed to the nuts (finally, and as they Should be), and it's been quite some time since I've heard of any unit losing a halfshaft or CV joint.
Considering the off-road capabilities of the Tahoe, I'd have to agree 200%. Solid axles and higher ground clearances give the Tahoe certain advantages in those extreme conditions. Exploders are not an off-road vehicle, which many agencies learned the hard way.
Regarding ease of repair, that's simple enough - I've owned a couple of Clown Dic's, and my Charger is every bit as easy to access and maintain. In fact, many things are easier: plugs, fuse/relay access, filters, throttle body, and so on. When I compare access to a Ram, it's a laugh - my plugs are *right there*. The pickups? Not so much.
They did a pretty good job with the LD Chargers.
Exactly my point. The only body on frame Mopars in 1960-62 were wagons and Imperials. Hence I don't see how there could be body on frame Mopar squads in those years.
Can you go back to my post and see if your rudeness was justified?
I was being facetious, my apologies. No ill will intended.
I could add that "Pursuit-Rated" certs didn't actually exist back in the day. That's more of a testing requirement/specification used by MSP and LASD in their annual tests. My understanding is that it was largely "run what ya brung" back in the day. Sure, the 69 Mopes were quick, and topped out in the mid 140's, But, with their short gears, lousy fuel economy, and little bias-ply tires, those cars never would've seen the consistent high speeds we started seeing from Mother beginning in '05.
I guess to summarize where I was going with the BOF vs unit-body discussion is that most Ford fans point at the Panther's BOF construction as superior to unitized, and that just isn't the case (which we all know here). The frame on a Panther is a space frame, not a ladder frame like we see on a truck. Panthers had a nasty tendency to fold up in bad wrecks, especially from the rear. LX and LD's do very well in comparison. Ease of repair is also a myth. I'd argue an LD is easier under nearly every scenario.
Chrysler takes a lotta hits for the design of the LD's, but they're very, very good cars. We should be thankful we still have RWD and V8 engines.
I think that once the "shift" is complete, and lots of models, mostly SUV/CUV, are much less capacity constrained, that FCA will go after more law enforcement/fleet sales with their SUV/CUV pruloducts.
There are a number of great choices now, and in the pipeline, that are already much better than the competition (All of the Jeeps, Dodge Durango). However, looking at things from a top down perspective, why would you want to sacrifice part of your production capacity for lower margins (fleet) sales, when your capacity is already sold out using higher margin retail sales?
What do y'all think?
The SRT Durango would seem like a real natural for pursuit conversion? So would just about all of the Jeeps. Imagine a JLU pursuit/police version? Its (as yet to be fully determined) new roof structure could make it much more appealing to certain law enforcement communities.
The Ram and Durango SSV's (sales code AHV) have been on the market since 2011. Capacity is the limiting factor, as discussed in other threads. I don't think there's any question that a Pursuit-Rated Durango would take out the Exploder, especially if they can get it priced right.
They key thing to consider about LEV's, regardless of make, is that these vehicles are built and marketed for very specific purposes, and only to those customers:
A Charger Pursuit is (now) North America's ultra-high performance LEV.
The Exploder is a high performance SUV. It offers extra storage, at the expense of speed, handling, and braking.
The Tahoe, Expedition, and pickups are higher performance vehicles that offer off-road capabilities.
So unlike 20, or even 10 years ago, today's LEV's have defined missions.
If discussing the Explorer Utility; the Durango would trump it, even if discussing repairs if nothing else.
I've heard horror stories about the trannys letting loose in the Utility.
Transfer cases, as well.
What is interesting about the Ram/Durango AHV's is the use of the 845RE or 8HP90. Is the 8-spd TF coming to the Charger Pursuit anytime soon? The A580 is certainly very tough, and that's probably why it's still being used ... but it's either a cost issue or just plain stubbornness (on the part of fleet managers) that the equally durable 8-spds aren't used in the cars. Heck, even if they only averaged a half-mile per gallon better than the 5-spd, that's quite a bit of fuel saved, along with increased performance.
To be fair, the squads are truly a very different animal, and I can understand the overwhelming desire not to mess with what works. I will say it's great that they have been making continuous improvements. That wasn't the case 25 or 30 years ago, for example, with the M-Bodies.