Why does everybody get so worked up about Ford refusing to use modern technology. They did the same thing when they discontinued the Crown Victora, and again when they announced IRS for the new Mustang. Get with the times Ford!

Not a Ford guy, but if I were to get a truck, SUV or van to use I much prefer a body on frame vehicle instead of unibody. Maybe I'm being ignorant, but I just can't wrap my head around a unibody being as tough as a full frame vehicle. Rather it's towing or hauling. To me there's a reason the "big 3" still use full frames for their full size trucks.

People get worked up 'cause a unibody vehicle can't handle that stress for extended periods of time.

The unibody can be as stiff, or in many cases is stiffer than body on frame construction. Using more of the car for structural support than a 6 inch thick area means the overall vehicle can be lighter and stiffer than a body on frame design, since the body provides little to no structural support on a body on frame vehicle. If I were to give a reason why most pickups use body on frame construction, it likely has to do with the number of options they have to account for. With a frame its easy to have a several different wheelbases, weight classes of trucks and 4wd and 2wd and use many of the same components elsewhere. Frames can easily be shortened or lengthened for needs and it is easy to add a flatbed or cargo area without really changing the overall design of the truck. Vans likely used body on frame for many of the same reasons and it also allowed them to share more components with their pickup counterparts.

Auh. I wanted to someday rent/own a black one with tinted windows and park outside houses until they call the cops.

Actually it's not about being rigid. It's also being able to handle a lateral stress (towing). Also I think it's good when a frame is able to flex just a little bit. Another thing is that with a full frame vehicle, if you get into a wreck, to me it seems like it's more of a chance that the frame won't be effected. While unibody I assume that if the hit is bad enough to the body it might get misaligned. I know that can happen to a full frame, but to me it seems like a unibody would get misaligned with less of an impact.

Did anyone else catch the fact that the article stated that the new Transit is FWD?? Really, what are you thinking Ford?!?

Didn't catch that, but not surprised. I'm not sure exactly what it will look like, but if it's the same as most transit vans it will be ugly. I also think it won't be able to haul and tow as much, but that's just an assumption.

I don't really see lateral stress as an issue with unibody. The subrames can account for most towing stresses you would add if properly addressed from a design standpoint. While a frame is easier to straighten after a wreck, most of the time if a car is in that severe of a wreck it is a total lose. I will agree that flex would be easier to manage when your structure comes from a frame than a uni-body, but I am on the fence whether it is always desirable. In the old low travel suspension trucks of the 80s and early 90s it was nice, especially when off roading, but I don't think it is as necessary in newer trucks. Actually, unibody has been used in trucks, a good example is the Comanche. For a compact mid size truck it had decent payload and didn't really give anything up to its competitors.

Pickup truck frames are made to flex. It's easy when the cab is separate from the box. I can't see much flex designed into a van however. If that frame flexes, the sheetmetal will show it. Although, I guess if the body is rubber mounted but still.

I went on the Ford site and saw what the Transit van looks like. It's ugly as hell to me. I can only assume Ford isn't going to make the Econoline anymore because it wasn't enough sells lately. But to think that Transit van would be more desirable is stupid. It might work over seas, but it won't sell in the US. Honestly the only time I've seen that kind of van in the US is on the show "American Pickers" and theirs is a Mercedes-Benz I believe.

Nooooo! Devastating!!

i've had a 77 Dodge van that was a unibody. I towed a very heavy trailer behind it and thought it towed better then most trucks nowadays. I've also had in evess of 6000 lbs in my 66 Econo (also a unibody) and it handeled the waight just fine. Ford tried a unibody truck in the 60's. They would bend in the middle if you put a heavy load in them. Then the doors wouldn't close anymore. the frame and the gap between the cab and box allows the flex to avoid this damage. the Jeep Comanches had a very similer problem as well.

I was on a Ford forum and ranted about this over there. I absolutely hate the new Transit van. It's a Euro styled piece of junk. I hate the 5 lug wheels. I hate the tall and narrow body. It's so fucking ugly it's ridiculous. This isn't Europe, we don't have narrow cobble streets that require a Sprinter style van. If people want a small delivery truck get the Transit Connect. It's perfect for small stuff. Leave the Econoline alone. Sure it's dated, but I have owned 4 of them now and I love them. The Econoline is rugged, heavy, comfortable, and spacious. I daily drove my extended 1-ton Clubwagon for a year and loved getting into it every day. Everything is big and heavy duty on the E-series (on the E250 and E350 anyway). I have towed hundred of miles with mine and it's the tow rig I have ever used. I think Ford has made a mistake with the new T-series. Build the Transit for Europe. Leave the real vans here in the US!

And the aricle says that the new T-series will get the eco-boost banger and a diesel. Why couldn't Ford have put those in the Econoline with the facelift back in '08? I think the FWD is a mistake as well. We'll have to see how it goes.

No one will be pulling their boat out of the ramps with a fwd van.