Ambulance Aero
Hello All.
Question: Do you think the larger cab on a medium duty ambulance will give better aero than a light duty ambulance? Below is Freightliner M2 106 next to a Ram 4500 with the same size box. I know box trucks and Class C RVs have horrible aerodynamic due to the large flat profile on the front of the box. The MD ambulances have much less of the box exposed and I'm thinking that might be why I'm seeing similar mileage claims for medium duty ambulances as for light duty ones. https://i.pinimg.com/originals/81/52...aaa82fd3a4.jpg The back-story: As some may know my wife and I are looking to travel full time in about 2 years. Our current campervan is too small and we are looking for something bigger. At first I was looking at high roof Transits or a box truck. Then I got turned on to ambulances which are basically a box truck with a MUCH better built box on them. All aluminum construction with lots of lockable storage already built in. The only down side is most are van based and after 2 decades of helping my father wrench on Econoline vans I have no desire to own a Type III ambulance built on a cutaway van chassis. There are Type I ambulances built on truck chassis. Those have some benefits like easy suspension upgrades and more room to work under the hood. (Although if a turbo goes out the cab has to come off!) The big downside is that Type I trucks built on a F250 - F450 chassis rarely have a walk-through to the cab. That is a must have for us Then I starting thinking about Medium Duty Ambulances. At first I though they would be WAY to big but the box is the same size. The major difference is the size of the cab.... |
Holding a straight edge up to the screen suggest that the hood height is the same but the box on the left is taller. Does it have a higher floor level? I'd guess the medium duty has the advantage aero-wise.
Not having a walk-through sounds like a solvable problem. |
The finnish way to build them:
https://www.profilevehicles.com/en/s...rez-ambulance/ |
Quote:
Top of the frame rails to the top of the cab: 47 inches - F450 58 inches - E450 68 inches - M2 106 I suspect this is why most pickup based ambulances do not have a walk-though. It would be more like a crawl through. Quote:
http://www.hatzalahchicago.org/wp-co...ruction-05.jpg Quote:
https://www.fedextrucksforsale.com/w...n-for-sale.jpg |
The walkthrough is a local option. Class C camper cabs have it. Why not just use a box truck? Them 16 ft Isuzu things get flogged to death and keep on trucking.
|
Quote:
Quote:
https://personalspaceministorage.com...12ft-truck.jpg A typical box truck has a flimsy wooden box on a flatbed covered with either fiberglass or aluminum. They are prone to leaks and rotting of the wooden core. I also doubt most would survive long if subjected to a steady diet of rough forest service roads. Most box trucks are also made to back up to shipping dock 48 inches off the ground so the box is too high. (Bad for Aero, bad for getting in and out of the box, bad for overhead clearance) Ambulance boxes must be crash tested and certified. They are made of welded aluminum tubing and some have the seams of the exterior aluminum welded. Most are insulated from the factor. They also come with a bunch of external storage compartments already made that are lockable and watertight. Ambulances have:
Then there is rust or lack of rust. A M2 ambulance has an aluminum cab with an aluminum box. Quote:
Back to aerodynamics. I would likely do an air deflector on the top of the cab (factory option so easier to find / install than some custom fabrication) Medium Duty side profile https://d2uhsaoc6ysewq.cloudfront.ne...6-17956970.jpg I would likely do an air deflector on the top of the cab (factory option so easier to find / install than some custom fabrication) Pickup side profile https://arrowambulances.com/media/IMG_6134-900x675.jpg |
What's the difference in rated fuel economy?
|
If the medium duty has a passthrough cab, then there's no comparison. They're both a wreck, aerodynamically, but a nicely curved deflector looks easier on the medium duty cab. Also less side overhang
Passthrough cab over all. |
I mean, it's the squared off rear-end that's the biggest problem; and probably not easily solvable while maintaining the ease of access.
|
Quote:
I’d be happy with 15 mpg at 60 to 65 mph. That is more for personal satisfaction than economics. At 20K miles a year and $3.50 a gallon the difference between 15 mpg and 10 mpg is $2333 per year or $195 a month. Quote:
https://www.kloompy.com/oc-content/u...128/188504.jpg Some friends of ours have an RV like this with the Ford V10 and get 6 mpg at 60 mph Quote:
https://base.imgix.net/files/base/eb...op&h=432&w=768 The back doors won’t be used to get in and out of the vehicle. Ambulances have a side access door on the right side. I plan to have a bed across the back of the vehicle with a “garage” storage below. I jumped in a M2 106 at lunch and the sightlines are night and day different compared to a full-size truck. Nice roomy cab too. That is another check in favor of a Medium Duty. |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:46 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com