Ford offers a less efficient, naturally aspirated engine in the Transit Connect. Turbochargers make engines more efficient, but if a turbocharger goes south that more than wipes out all the fuel cost savings. Turbocharged engines also need premium gas. A lot of commercial and government fleets have their own gas pump (which dispenses regular gas), so they don't want to add any turbocharged vehicles to their fleets. Those new Mercedes-Benz postal vans need 91 AKI gasoline. So, maybe USPS will accept the added cost of 91 AKI for better fuel economy.

the Ford thing makes sense - I dont think that Oshkosh makes their own engines.

The new postal truck looks a bit small for the base ford 4 cyl, but I agree that if they were smart - thats what they'd do. small, simple, lots of room in the engine bay, mature engine platform (do they have a NA 4cyl newer than teh "Duratec" ?

If they were not smart, they'd use a current 5 or 6 cyl Diesel that Ford markets. We'll see.

-John

__________________
2009 Kia Sedona
2009 Honda Odyssey EX-L
12006 Jetta Pumpe Duse
(insert Mercedes here)

Husband, Father, sometimes friend =)

Why not use a true hybrid. A small diesel that charges the batteries when needed, even when not in use. Fixed at the most efficient RPM. Seems logical.

a hybrid would be a great idea. Does Ford have a current hybrid powertrain in the 150 -300 ftlbf arena ? (I dont know)
I have no problem with any of the above solutions. I dont work for the USPS, but I do get mail from them so I'd like their fleet to be as efficient as possible, and Id happily trade some efficiency for ease of maintenance or relaibility (the old mail truck, LLV, had a GM-sourced 4 cylinder that had already been in production for a number of years.

I'm just mostly surprised that this much decision-making was made without such a detail already locked down. the USPS chose its truck, but the submission didnt state (or know) what kind of engine it'll run. Thats not a dealbreaker for a fleet the size and scale of the USPS, but I would think that its a big one. What if Oshkosh started shipping this trucks with Ford 5.4 V8s in them ? or the 6.0 powerstroke Diesel ? or anything designed and build by Chrysler the mail would never get here

Thats an exaggeration and a joke, and again, this decision doesn't affect me really at all, but as a car guy, I'm curious what engine we are going to get *thousands* more copies of.
(UPS trucks are mostly proprietary, and other shipping companies are flooding the Used market with Sprinters, Metris', Caravans, NV200s, Promasters and Transits.)

__________________
2009 Kia Sedona
2009 Honda Odyssey EX-L
12006 Jetta Pumpe Duse
(insert Mercedes here)

Husband, Father, sometimes friend =)

I'd think it depends on the end use of the truck ~ in urban environments you'd never need to exceed 50 MPH so a tiny fuel sipping 4 banger with short gearing would be perfect .

In the outlying areas and rural routes you'd need a truck that will hauls 2 tons of mail at least 65 MPH....

Maybe that's why they didn't nail down a specific engine .

I remember in the late 1960's and early 1970's the inner city Jeeps often had a tiny 4 banger, maybe this too was the GM "Iron Duke" engine that's hated by anyone who likes to speed yet beloved by boat owners, Ag. users and gen set builders because it works perfectly and lasts forever in the correct application .

Chevy Vega Sedan Deliveries were used as mail rigs and rarely had engine failures because they were surface street only .

Interesting thread, I wait to see what the end result is .

__________________
-Nate
1982 240D 408,XXX miles
Ignorance is the mother of suspicion and fear is the father

I did then what I knew how to do ~ now that I know better I do better

Diesels in anything other than large trucks are done in the U.S., and almost done in Europe.

Hybrids need to be driven "hybridly" to work right. That means slow acceleration and coasting to stops, or limiting braking to just enough to be done by the generator load. It's hard to get employees to do that, especially if it slows down their work.

I drove Frau Putzer's X3 30i into town a few nights ago, with two stops: Sam's Club and Cracker Barrel. Coming home, no stops, 10 p.m. light traffic, I got 41.4 MPG, and I'd just adjusted the MPG display for accuracy. With the stop at Sam's Club, I was at about 35 MPG as I got to Cracker Barrel.

The original Vega engines had all their problems at cold start-up. A classmate of mine in college was a lab technician at GM before going to college. He said that one of the tests they did was a continuous running durability test. He said that when he left GM, the record holder for that test was still the original Vega engine.

My Chevy Cobalt's aluminum block, timing chained, variable valve timing, 2.4-liter EcoTech engine is running like new at 125k miles, using about 3/4's of a quart of synthetic oil in between 8k mile oil changes. It has iron cylinder liners, though.