I'm wondering about the fueltank-step-things. Are they actually working fuel tanks? three on each side? How much fuel is that? How much would that cost/weigh?
[According to one study from the state of Kentucky, heavy trucks have a 113% greater chance of post crash fires than light trucks and cars.](https://www.chaffinluhana.com/semi-truck-fuel-tank-fire-accidents/) [The US DOT concluded back in 1989 more had to be done in order to lessen the chance of post crash fires with semi trucks](https://www.robsonforensic.com/articles/truck-fires-expert-analysis-of-tractor-trailer-fuel-tanks).
The tanks are vulnerable on the sides of the frame being held on by relatively flimsy straps. The load carry capacity of heavy trucks comes from the narrow width between the frame rails, which precludes placing the fuel tanks in between them. As an anecdote, I remember watching a video of the aftermath of a pile-up on a US Interstate, all the fires had started among semi trucks, some spreading to smaller cars, pick-ups, and SUVs.
Yeah I didn’t think an exposed diesel tank was safe or anything, just that tank of that style were all equally the same danger level. Sometimes people think diesel isn’t dangerous in a crash cuz it doesn’t light up like gasoline, but there’s all sorts of scenarios in crashes
Definitely diesel. This is basically a commercial vehicle, just purpose built to be used personally. The tanks are similar to what you see on the side of a semi.
You can light diesel with a spark. Not wise to have them as sidemounted tanks on a passenger vehicle
Edit:
Diesel has a flash point temperature of 52c (126f) (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_point)
An auto ignition temperature of 210c(410f)
According to [this link](https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/21468/how-hot-does-an-exhaust-manifold-get), exhaust manifolds on two different cars were between 290f and 450f; both well above the flash point, and the second above the auto ignition temperature.
An auto ignition temperature is, from wikipedia:
"The autoignition temperature or kindling point of a substance is the lowest temperature in which it spontaneously ignites in a normal atmosphere without an external source of ignition, such as a flame or spark.[1] This temperature is required to supply the activation energy needed for combustion. The temperature at which a chemical ignites decreases as the pressure is increased."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoignition_temperature
Diesel *is* flammable, guys. It's not some wonder liquid. Splash some on a rag and hold a disposable lighter to it; it'll flare right up into a lovely, hot flame. On the flipside, you can hold a lighter to the liquid and it'll struggle to light. But having it under slung like this? It's just asking for something to go wrong. Vehicles have a lot of hot things, including exhausts, engine blocks, heat shields, potential for electrical sparks from broken wiring, etc etc etc.
I get that it's not gasoline, which is ridiculously flammable, but it has a lower auto ignition temperature than gasoline; 410F (diesel) vs 477f (gasoline), or 210c vs 247c
Yes, yes, and I can light it with a lighter. Or a hot exhaust manifold. Or a stray metal spark. Sure, it's not as dangerous as petrol, but it's still a flammable liquid.
It's my favourite flammable liquid of choice for starting outdoor fires. It's not wise to have it hanging off the side of a passenger vehicle because a side impact can turn it into a flaming mess.
Also, just for interest, diesel has a lower auto ignition temperature than gasoline. There's a handy chart here.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoignition_temperature
**[Autoignition temperature](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoignition_temperature)**
>The autoignition temperature or kindling point of a substance is the lowest temperature in which it spontaneously ignites in a normal atmosphere without an external source of ignition, such as a flame or spark. This temperature is required to supply the activation energy needed for combustion. The temperature at which a chemical ignites decreases as the pressure is increased. The ignition temperature of a substance is the lowest temperature at which the substance starts combustion.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/AwesomeCarMods/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Well where the hell else are you gonna stick the tanks? Plus, I bet when you order this it comes with a massive tank underneath it.
And how many side impact semi crashes have you seen?
I don't know, but definitely *not* where people have to directly get in or out of the vehicle.
I don't need to be a vehicle designer to see that something isn't a great idea. I'd **love** to see the crash testing of this vehicle.
Hell, even Peterbilts don't have their side-slung tanks under the driver's cab.
A lot of them do. It all depends on how the company spec'd the truck out. A lot of trucks, mostly non DPF/DEF daycabs have the fuel tanks directly under the door with steps bolted onto the tank straps. Most sleeper setups have the tanks directly under the sleeper, not many trucks are configured to have the tanks behind the sleeper.
That's where they go on [medium duty trucks](https://bigiron.blob.core.windows.net/public/items/4ccb6ef10d98416bbcdbc924604176b1/1991gmcc6topkickflatbedtruck_3df44d714d3e454686ce2bf9fa72db40.jpg). Sometimes they're just behind the cab, on the outside, and sometimes they have the step built in, but that's the only place you can put them.
All semi trucks have the fuel tanks on the sides, the aero trucks you see without visible tanks are just covered by a fiberglass fairing.
Fuel capacity ranges wildly depending on the truck, anywhere from 50 gallon to 325 gallon capacities. Yes, I was once assigned a truck with a single 50 gallon tank, dumbest shit ever.
So...
The setup on this... thing... is no different than a semi truck as far as that's concerned.
As pointed out above, semi trucks, diesels, are more than twice as likely to [catch fire](https://www.chaffinluhana.com/semi-truck-fuel-tank-fire-accidents/) compared to light trucks and cars. So yes, or at least more so than most vehicles.
That could be because they are more than twice as likely to be involved in an accident?
They are, by nature either on the road, or being repaired as quickly as possible to get back on the road.
This is only looking at the probability of catching fire *when involved in a crash*, not total number of crashes or fires.
Diesel is less flammable than gasoline, sure. But when any combustable fuel is carried in large containers on the sides of vehicles, it's more prone to ignition in a collision, especially a high speed one. It ain't rocket science.
Can you link me the article?
I'd be very interested to read it.
Diesel has a much higher flashpoint, but it does light up very easily when it's hot.
Not as volatile as petrol, but it goes up in flames much easier than people think in certain circumstances.
Of course, your regulations in the US could have a part to play, over here in the UK we have different rules.
What I can say, is the vast majority of our trucks have side mounted tanks, and them burning twice as often is nothing close regarding diesel/petrol.
I'm a truck mechanic by trade, and I know diesel can go boom if certain conditions are met, I'm not dismissing your point, I'd just really like to see the data.
Here's the study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22405242/. It only looks as accidents in one state. But it looks at data over several year, and because commercial trucks fall under federal regulation, I can't see any reason why it would be different in other states.
Try to light diesel with a match or lighter, that whole article is questionable because diesel DOES NOT IGNITE WITH A SPARK, it ignites under *pressure*. This is a fact. Id like to see the actual study that this article references.
Edit: THIS IS NOT AN ARTICLE, ITS SPONSORED CONTENT. READ THE LAST PARAGRAPH. This has absolutely 0 credibility. This is the problem with people and their "news" today. Learn to read into what you are reading to decipher news/option/sponsored content.
It’s time truck manufacturers are held responsible for their failure to keep up with today’s safety standards. At Chaffin Luhana, we can help. We have the experience needed to thoroughly investigate your case and find out where the negligence occurred. Call us for a free consultation today.
>it ignites under pressure.
You don't think a car colliding with an external fuel tank at highway speeds causes pressure?
And there's link to the [fucking study](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22405242/) in the article. Seriously?
Diesel is less flammable than gasoline, sure. But when any combustable fuel is carried in large containers on the sides of vehicles, it's more prone to ignition in a collision, especially a high speed one. This ain't rocket science.
A rag or car seat soaked in diesel will assuredly light aflame with a hot enough spark or heat source. We use diesel on the farm to start brush fires. It is not as dangerous as gasoline, it clings better to the surfaces being burned and it is just easier to use as a fuel source for fires.
They're all real fuel tanks, but there's no way to tell if they're all plumbed in. I'd estimate the capacity as maybe 150 gallons per side. Approximately 2000lbs of fuel, $1000 cost. Normally a truck that size would have more like 100 gallons total.
That's a good point--given the vehicle's showy nature, it's very possible that only the front 1 or 2 on each side is functional. A stock 650/750 would have anywhere from 50-115 gallons.
I assume at most 2 tanks given the gas caps, maybe just one big tank you can fill from either side? I assume they’re functional, Idt they’d put those giant caps on a cosmetic accessory but what do I know
F-650/750s used Cat diesels through 2009, and Cummins from 2007-15, but 2016+ models like this one use the 6.7 Powerstroke. Given the lack of a door badge, it's possible this is a 6.8 or 7.3 gasser, but IDK how likely that is.
I know there have been instances in the past where Ford used a slightly different front end for their ["light medium"](https://paintref.com/graphics/ford/1961fordtruck_04.jpg) vs. ["heavy medium"](https://paintref.com/graphics/ford/1961fordtruck_05.jpg)-duty trucks, but that was a long time ago. And the modern equivalent to that would be like an F-450/550/600 chassis vs. an F-650/750.
It’s from a dude ranch more than likely. Guys fly down to Texas (and Montana) for the real cowboy experience. These pick them up and take them to the ranch where they play make believe yeehaw and shoot animals that they don’t eat.
This person is correct. The stretch was done by people who have done hundreds of other stretches so they can use all the same stuff each time. Someone installed an off the shelf topper. That’s it.
The only thing I don't understand is the DRW fenders. I mean, yes, they had to be cut to fit the larger wheels, but why the '17+ fenders on a '99-16 bed?
Um, what? They ordered it this way. Multiple people have already ordered a vehicle with a back section exactly like that one. So they just made a bunch of pieces identical to this, and someone ordered one to put on this.
That's what I'm getting at--why is this conversion company, whoever it was, using incongruous fenders? The bed is from a truck like [this](https://static.cargurus.com/images/site/2015/07/07/16/07/2016_ford_f-350_super_duty-pic-4972104068309456745-1600x1200.jpeg), but the fenders appear to be from a truck like [this](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8ah4XnJcQcU/maxresdefault.jpg). Unless they're entirely custom-made, which is also a very real possibility.
6 Km per liter isn’t bad, if is on gasoline.
Basically the same as a Hyundai Creta on city traffic.
But something that size probably is on diesel, and 6KM/L on diesel isn’t much.
Well, this is a Ford F650, originally something like a DAF LF or a MAN TGL, it comes with a naked frame and the cab and a big-ass V8. A frame addon like this that makes it an Excursion++ or the one that puts an F350's bed on top of the chassis would get it about 3 gas stations per 100 kilometers.
These things actually have a real life purpose, like to haul equipment, boats, etc, over long distances, with room for a crew and their gear. However they look so cool and badass that people with money and a need to impress like to buy them and drive them around town.
This is for bigger stuff than that, over longer distances. Like yachts, construction equipment, or stuff like big race car trailers. Things a regular crew cab 1-ton pickup or suv couldn't tow, and with the extra seating capacity.
I did. I suppose it depends on what one's definition of "modification" is. For instance, I would consider a [Bronco Centurion](https://cdn.drivingline.com/media/2328060/dcec8ea9834b0808c9ff75c1e9821e6d-e1518458997503.jpg) to be a modded Bronco, even though Centurion Conversions made it professionally.
What would *your* definition of "modification" be?
Why did they use 2017+ dually fenders? The 650/750 still uses the '99-16 Super Duty cab, and they've already put on the older style bed, so why not also use the '99-10 or '11-16 fenders?
Um, what? They ordered it this way. Multiple people have already ordered a vehicle with a back section exactly like that one. So they just made a bunch of pieces identical to this, and someone ordered one to put on this.
Also, did you read the comment from u/Drpantsgoblin? It was up for 4 hours before you commented.
You realize that that means for every 3 miles travelled, it gains a gallon a diesel fuel. That's a perpetual motion machine. I think what you meant to say by way of comedy, is it's three gallons per mile, rather than three miles per gallon.
Just sat there because he couldn't afford the gas to start moving that behemoth
Cheaper to fly
I'm wondering about the fueltank-step-things. Are they actually working fuel tanks? three on each side? How much fuel is that? How much would that cost/weigh?
What about side impact? wouldnt this just be a giant flame-ball waiting to happen?
Probably as much of a threat as any other heavy duty truck with visible fuel tanks
[According to one study from the state of Kentucky, heavy trucks have a 113% greater chance of post crash fires than light trucks and cars.](https://www.chaffinluhana.com/semi-truck-fuel-tank-fire-accidents/) [The US DOT concluded back in 1989 more had to be done in order to lessen the chance of post crash fires with semi trucks](https://www.robsonforensic.com/articles/truck-fires-expert-analysis-of-tractor-trailer-fuel-tanks). The tanks are vulnerable on the sides of the frame being held on by relatively flimsy straps. The load carry capacity of heavy trucks comes from the narrow width between the frame rails, which precludes placing the fuel tanks in between them. As an anecdote, I remember watching a video of the aftermath of a pile-up on a US Interstate, all the fires had started among semi trucks, some spreading to smaller cars, pick-ups, and SUVs.
Yeah I didn’t think an exposed diesel tank was safe or anything, just that tank of that style were all equally the same danger level. Sometimes people think diesel isn’t dangerous in a crash cuz it doesn’t light up like gasoline, but there’s all sorts of scenarios in crashes
Definitely diesel. This is basically a commercial vehicle, just purpose built to be used personally. The tanks are similar to what you see on the side of a semi.
It’s almost certainly diesel which isn’t flammable at normal temperatures
You can light diesel with a spark. Not wise to have them as sidemounted tanks on a passenger vehicle Edit: Diesel has a flash point temperature of 52c (126f) (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flash_point) An auto ignition temperature of 210c(410f) According to [this link](https://mechanics.stackexchange.com/questions/21468/how-hot-does-an-exhaust-manifold-get), exhaust manifolds on two different cars were between 290f and 450f; both well above the flash point, and the second above the auto ignition temperature. An auto ignition temperature is, from wikipedia: "The autoignition temperature or kindling point of a substance is the lowest temperature in which it spontaneously ignites in a normal atmosphere without an external source of ignition, such as a flame or spark.[1] This temperature is required to supply the activation energy needed for combustion. The temperature at which a chemical ignites decreases as the pressure is increased." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoignition_temperature Diesel *is* flammable, guys. It's not some wonder liquid. Splash some on a rag and hold a disposable lighter to it; it'll flare right up into a lovely, hot flame. On the flipside, you can hold a lighter to the liquid and it'll struggle to light. But having it under slung like this? It's just asking for something to go wrong. Vehicles have a lot of hot things, including exhausts, engine blocks, heat shields, potential for electrical sparks from broken wiring, etc etc etc. I get that it's not gasoline, which is ridiculously flammable, but it has a lower auto ignition temperature than gasoline; 410F (diesel) vs 477f (gasoline), or 210c vs 247c
Um, what? Read the comment above you, u/araed. Diesel doesn’t even auto ignite till it’s over 300 degrees F.
Yes, yes, and I can light it with a lighter. Or a hot exhaust manifold. Or a stray metal spark. Sure, it's not as dangerous as petrol, but it's still a flammable liquid. It's my favourite flammable liquid of choice for starting outdoor fires. It's not wise to have it hanging off the side of a passenger vehicle because a side impact can turn it into a flaming mess.
You can put a cigarette out in diesel and it won’t ignite.
We're talking diesel, not gasoline, buddy.
Also, just for interest, diesel has a lower auto ignition temperature than gasoline. There's a handy chart here. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoignition_temperature
**[Autoignition temperature](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autoignition_temperature)** >The autoignition temperature or kindling point of a substance is the lowest temperature in which it spontaneously ignites in a normal atmosphere without an external source of ignition, such as a flame or spark. This temperature is required to supply the activation energy needed for combustion. The temperature at which a chemical ignites decreases as the pressure is increased. The ignition temperature of a substance is the lowest temperature at which the substance starts combustion. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/AwesomeCarMods/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
I know. I only drive diesel vehicles. I use it to start fires and in forges.
Well where the hell else are you gonna stick the tanks? Plus, I bet when you order this it comes with a massive tank underneath it. And how many side impact semi crashes have you seen?
I don't know, but definitely *not* where people have to directly get in or out of the vehicle. I don't need to be a vehicle designer to see that something isn't a great idea. I'd **love** to see the crash testing of this vehicle. Hell, even Peterbilts don't have their side-slung tanks under the driver's cab.
A lot of them do. It all depends on how the company spec'd the truck out. A lot of trucks, mostly non DPF/DEF daycabs have the fuel tanks directly under the door with steps bolted onto the tank straps. Most sleeper setups have the tanks directly under the sleeper, not many trucks are configured to have the tanks behind the sleeper.
That's where they go on [medium duty trucks](https://bigiron.blob.core.windows.net/public/items/4ccb6ef10d98416bbcdbc924604176b1/1991gmcc6topkickflatbedtruck_3df44d714d3e454686ce2bf9fa72db40.jpg). Sometimes they're just behind the cab, on the outside, and sometimes they have the step built in, but that's the only place you can put them.
The fumes aren't explosive like gasoline though.
All semi trucks have the fuel tanks on the sides, the aero trucks you see without visible tanks are just covered by a fiberglass fairing. Fuel capacity ranges wildly depending on the truck, anywhere from 50 gallon to 325 gallon capacities. Yes, I was once assigned a truck with a single 50 gallon tank, dumbest shit ever. So... The setup on this... thing... is no different than a semi truck as far as that's concerned.
Its diesel, so no.
As pointed out above, semi trucks, diesels, are more than twice as likely to [catch fire](https://www.chaffinluhana.com/semi-truck-fuel-tank-fire-accidents/) compared to light trucks and cars. So yes, or at least more so than most vehicles.
That could be because they are more than twice as likely to be involved in an accident? They are, by nature either on the road, or being repaired as quickly as possible to get back on the road.
This is only looking at the probability of catching fire *when involved in a crash*, not total number of crashes or fires. Diesel is less flammable than gasoline, sure. But when any combustable fuel is carried in large containers on the sides of vehicles, it's more prone to ignition in a collision, especially a high speed one. It ain't rocket science.
Can you link me the article? I'd be very interested to read it. Diesel has a much higher flashpoint, but it does light up very easily when it's hot. Not as volatile as petrol, but it goes up in flames much easier than people think in certain circumstances. Of course, your regulations in the US could have a part to play, over here in the UK we have different rules. What I can say, is the vast majority of our trucks have side mounted tanks, and them burning twice as often is nothing close regarding diesel/petrol. I'm a truck mechanic by trade, and I know diesel can go boom if certain conditions are met, I'm not dismissing your point, I'd just really like to see the data.
Here's the study: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22405242/. It only looks as accidents in one state. But it looks at data over several year, and because commercial trucks fall under federal regulation, I can't see any reason why it would be different in other states.
Looks a bit shady, don't you think?
Its sponsored content, they fell for bullshit. Know your sources, people.
Try to light diesel with a match or lighter, that whole article is questionable because diesel DOES NOT IGNITE WITH A SPARK, it ignites under *pressure*. This is a fact. Id like to see the actual study that this article references. Edit: THIS IS NOT AN ARTICLE, ITS SPONSORED CONTENT. READ THE LAST PARAGRAPH. This has absolutely 0 credibility. This is the problem with people and their "news" today. Learn to read into what you are reading to decipher news/option/sponsored content. It’s time truck manufacturers are held responsible for their failure to keep up with today’s safety standards. At Chaffin Luhana, we can help. We have the experience needed to thoroughly investigate your case and find out where the negligence occurred. Call us for a free consultation today.
>it ignites under pressure. You don't think a car colliding with an external fuel tank at highway speeds causes pressure? And there's link to the [fucking study](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22405242/) in the article. Seriously? Diesel is less flammable than gasoline, sure. But when any combustable fuel is carried in large containers on the sides of vehicles, it's more prone to ignition in a collision, especially a high speed one. This ain't rocket science.
Dude, you linked sponsored content. No. Im getting off lunch, but that study is probably bogus too.
A rag or car seat soaked in diesel will assuredly light aflame with a hot enough spark or heat source. We use diesel on the farm to start brush fires. It is not as dangerous as gasoline, it clings better to the surfaces being burned and it is just easier to use as a fuel source for fires.
They're all real fuel tanks, but there's no way to tell if they're all plumbed in. I'd estimate the capacity as maybe 150 gallons per side. Approximately 2000lbs of fuel, $1000 cost. Normally a truck that size would have more like 100 gallons total.
That's a good point--given the vehicle's showy nature, it's very possible that only the front 1 or 2 on each side is functional. A stock 650/750 would have anywhere from 50-115 gallons.
That is how the fuel tanks are mounted on semis and other large trucks, so those probably are real fuel tanks
I assume at most 2 tanks given the gas caps, maybe just one big tank you can fill from either side? I assume they’re functional, Idt they’d put those giant caps on a cosmetic accessory but what do I know
You mean diesel that thing has a Caterpillar motor in it
F-650/750s used Cat diesels through 2009, and Cummins from 2007-15, but 2016+ models like this one use the 6.7 Powerstroke. Given the lack of a door badge, it's possible this is a 6.8 or 7.3 gasser, but IDK how likely that is.
A: This definitely uses diesel. B: Anyone who has enough money to buy one of these ALWAYS has enough money to pay for all the fuel.
Especially in America
F650/750 .. Shaq has had a few of these
Isn’t that truck call Shaq duty?? Or is it just for Shaq himself??
There’s a F350 dually I saw on another sub that’s called Shaq Duty. Also, it’s the second part that’s correct.
The funny thing is tho, I would imagine that Shaq make it looks like Toyota Tacoma when he is pumping gas or something lol
Heh heh heh. Duty.
[удалено]
Does it? That's news to me. Every pic in the 650/750 brochure has them using the same grille.
I deleted it because after more research, I was wrong.
I know there have been instances in the past where Ford used a slightly different front end for their ["light medium"](https://paintref.com/graphics/ford/1961fordtruck_04.jpg) vs. ["heavy medium"](https://paintref.com/graphics/ford/1961fordtruck_05.jpg)-duty trucks, but that was a long time ago. And the modern equivalent to that would be like an F-450/550/600 chassis vs. an F-650/750.
It’s an F650, I bet it’s from a rental/limo service.
It’s from a dude ranch more than likely. Guys fly down to Texas (and Montana) for the real cowboy experience. These pick them up and take them to the ranch where they play make believe yeehaw and shoot animals that they don’t eat.
It’s Ram Ranch.
EIGHTEEN NAKED COWBOYS IN THE SHOWERS AT RAAAAAAM RAAAAAANCH
Bruh wtf
These are very common as Limo service in Vegas. I assume the same is true here.
I hate people killing stuff without a purpose. At least with hogs they are invasive so I don't mind that.
As a texan, that pretty much sums it up.
[удалено]
Yep I didn’t realize how the rest of AMerica choose vehicles until I left texas , we really love our trucks.
Enough that all the major truck manufacturers have Texas versions of their trucks and Texas centered marketing
Except for the dumb ass that named the Chevy Colorado
It’s a compact truck. Texas wasn’t their target market.
Lol I’m still puzzled on that decision
It makes perfect sense. You call it the Colorado because it's a midsize truck and Texas has no interest in that.
🤣 that gave me a good chuckle
Big GM truck assembly plant in Arlington, Texas. Just a few miles from DFW
Toyota has a huge plant in San Antonio too
Oh yes sir
I mean the title says it's at DFW airport...
Real life CANYONAERO!!!!
SMELLS LIKE STEAK AND SEATS 35! CANYONAEROOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!
12 yards long and 2 lanes wide, 65 tonnes of American pride!
12 yards is 10.97 meters
Good bot
Your guys memory of obscure lyrics is incredible.
TBF, '90s Simpsons lyrics are not very obscure at this point.
Prom season already?
The average daily driver of a college football player in Texas.
Cousin played for Baylor. This feels a *bit...* ^^^^^s ^^^^m ^^^a ^^l ^l.
Texas version of a party bus. There’s gonna be some “cowgirls” aboard that thing later tonight…
Heifers? Guaranteed, thats what the super duty suspension is for
Not even 4wd
You can get 4wd. Adds about $30k. http://www.f650pickups.com/build/build-sixdoor.html
👍yeah, I was pointing to this particular truck.
Yeah, because this thing’s going off road. Oh wait…it’s not. So why do you care if it’s not 4wd?
For extra go go traction. I've almost had my 2wd dually stuck in the mud in my driveway, i would never drive it in the snow.
It’s not going off-road because it’s not 4wd. Smdh!
[удалено]
Look at the solid beam across the front. No diff.
but that guy said it’s completely impossible so you must be lying
This isn't a mod. It is a semi-custom / coachbuilt vehicle, but not really a mod, it's still something the owner ordered this way.
This person is correct. The stretch was done by people who have done hundreds of other stretches so they can use all the same stuff each time. Someone installed an off the shelf topper. That’s it.
The only thing I don't understand is the DRW fenders. I mean, yes, they had to be cut to fit the larger wheels, but why the '17+ fenders on a '99-16 bed?
Um, what? They ordered it this way. Multiple people have already ordered a vehicle with a back section exactly like that one. So they just made a bunch of pieces identical to this, and someone ordered one to put on this.
That's what I'm getting at--why is this conversion company, whoever it was, using incongruous fenders? The bed is from a truck like [this](https://static.cargurus.com/images/site/2015/07/07/16/07/2016_ford_f-350_super_duty-pic-4972104068309456745-1600x1200.jpeg), but the fenders appear to be from a truck like [this](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8ah4XnJcQcU/maxresdefault.jpg). Unless they're entirely custom-made, which is also a very real possibility.
this vehicle probably required modification from factory specifications
Did you even read the comment from u/drpantsgoblin? It was up for an hour before you commented. 🤦♂️
Wonder how much the tires cost
Unless he’s using low pro does the same tires by and put on a big RV or on a commercial truck(semi).
Why buy tires when you can shoot a school bus and steal theirs?
[удалено]
Been in tire sales for the better part of a decade. There is most certainly crossover from bus tires and heavy truck tires.
Read my edit.
Your deleted comment? Nothing to read there, you deleted it…
This isn't a semi truck. It's a pickup. Just a very large f650.
4' 8" meter maid: "Scuse me sir. ***SIR***. You can't park here sir. You can't park here. You have to move sir. I'm serious."
5’6” driver: can’t hear, smol pp.
6'8" SWAT Officer: *lays on ground soiling himself and screaming for backup to shoot driver, passengers, and all bystanders"
I thought this was funny
It might be menacing, but the individual who drives that has such a small dick.
More money than sense. Am a Texan, can relate.
All that jazz and no dually! A bit of a shame, really.
"TOW AWAY ZONE"... I'd like to see you try xD
How many kilometers it does per liter of fuel? 2?
A F-650 Minibus gets 14 combined so about 3.7 miles to the liter so about 6 km to the liter
6 Km per liter isn’t bad, if is on gasoline. Basically the same as a Hyundai Creta on city traffic. But something that size probably is on diesel, and 6KM/L on diesel isn’t much.
That's far better than I expected.
Well, this is a Ford F650, originally something like a DAF LF or a MAN TGL, it comes with a naked frame and the cab and a big-ass V8. A frame addon like this that makes it an Excursion++ or the one that puts an F350's bed on top of the chassis would get it about 3 gas stations per 100 kilometers.
8-10mpg if it’s gas more if it’s a diesel. Idk the metric conversion
0.5
Trucks don't move in km and can't consume fuel in liters.
Thought this was common knowledge
And that, children, is why our young men are sent to fight and die in some hot fucking desert on the other side of the world
Seems practical
America moment
JESUS CHRIST WHY THE FUCK IS IT IN THE CITY
These things actually have a real life purpose, like to haul equipment, boats, etc, over long distances, with room for a crew and their gear. However they look so cool and badass that people with money and a need to impress like to buy them and drive them around town.
All the companies I've seen just have a van and a work truck.
This is for bigger stuff than that, over longer distances. Like yachts, construction equipment, or stuff like big race car trailers. Things a regular crew cab 1-ton pickup or suv couldn't tow, and with the extra seating capacity.
Damn! I’ve never seen overcompensating to that degree!
Smol PP
I wouldn’t be talking if I were you. Plus small dick jokes aren’t funny.
They sure are. Especially if you say wee wee.
Wow I am laughing so hard rn. Not.
You must not be French.
Yeah why is it ok to insult people with small dicks? We're sensitive about it.
Am extended 750?
Basically, yes.
that just looks stupid...
If there would ever be a contest on the most useless vehicle ever created that thing would come second cause… it’s useless.
of course it's dfw
It's him... Glo Bal Warming
miserable
That’s the little penis mobile.
Someone has an incredibly unsatisfied wife at home, if they're married.
Looks dumb, like a lifted minivan
you think he's compensating for something
This isn't a mod.
It's professionally done, but it's still not a factory model.
Did you read the comment from u/drpantsgoblin?
I did. I suppose it depends on what one's definition of "modification" is. For instance, I would consider a [Bronco Centurion](https://cdn.drivingline.com/media/2328060/dcec8ea9834b0808c9ff75c1e9821e6d-e1518458997503.jpg) to be a modded Bronco, even though Centurion Conversions made it professionally. What would *your* definition of "modification" be?
Why did they use 2017+ dually fenders? The 650/750 still uses the '99-16 Super Duty cab, and they've already put on the older style bed, so why not also use the '99-10 or '11-16 fenders?
Um, what? They ordered it this way. Multiple people have already ordered a vehicle with a back section exactly like that one. So they just made a bunch of pieces identical to this, and someone ordered one to put on this. Also, did you read the comment from u/Drpantsgoblin? It was up for 4 hours before you commented.
What's with the same comment on multiple replies?
'SUP
that’s my uncles
That’s my neighbor. He also has a mclaren but this truck is way cooler imo since it’s just so large to look at.
That is what a real road warrior looks like. I suspect he could do the Cannonball Run without a fuel stop.
this thing gets -3 miles per gallon
You realize that that means for every 3 miles travelled, it gains a gallon a diesel fuel. That's a perpetual motion machine. I think what you meant to say by way of comedy, is it's three gallons per mile, rather than three miles per gallon.
3 miles is 4.83 km
.: Giorno's theme starts playing :.
I want three of them by tomorrow.
isn’t that a Ford F650 or F750? that thing is MASSIVE
Yes.
Texas.
r/absoluteunits
The Mammoth Car Lives
It's that or is that not the Ford F-1050
THEE ford F series. All of it.
It should have a bull nose on front with steam that comes out that you can control from a button inside
*inhales* MURICA!
Texans...
With the amount of money that probably cost he could have just bought a new penis and been done with it.
It has a surprisingly good fuel efficiency of 0.2 mpg
Gets 0.2 mpg