Advantages of Fuso 4X4?

[GumbyMan]

Hi there-
I am in the dreaming/planing stages of building an Expedition vehicle... I have been lurking on this forum for a while now and there are lots of great looking vehicles out there! I am leaning towards the Mitsubishi platform, I am just wondering if you guys can give me the comparisons and/or advantages of it over a NA built truck like the F350-550 or similar.
I'm in Canada and would be looking at primarily traveling in North & South america... hopefully further eventually but that will take a while though.

Thank for your thoughts and wisdom.
Cheers

 

[Lynn]

Welcome to the forum!

While I don't yet own either type of platform, I have been weighing this issue, so I'd like to get this started off: (I'm going to be lazy and use CO for Cab-Over truck and CC for Conventional Cab truck)

1. For a given wheelbase, the CO will allow a bigger cabin (living space) due to its shorter cab
2. For a given wheelbase, the CO will typically have a smaller turning radius
3. A CC lends itself more to a full-size pass-thru from cab to cabin
4. Putting an over-the-cab bed on a CO is an issue, since the cab must tilt to access the engine
5. A CO requires more effort to make comfortable for haul trips
6. A CC has more, and cheaper, upgrade options, aftermarket support, junkyard scavenging, etc.
7. A CO has a higher seating position, allowing more visibility, either seeing the sites off road or getting around in traffic
8 A CO has no hood sticking out front, allowing for better visibility of the trail immediately in front of you
9. A CC is more recognized in NA as an RV when it comes to insurance, weigh stations, border crossings, etc.
10 A CC gives more protection in the event of a head-on collision


How's that for a start?

 

[westyss]

Welcome to the forum!

While I don't yet own either type of platform, I have been weighing this issue, so I'd like to get this started off: (I'm going to be lazy and use CO for Cab-Over truck and CC for Conventional Cab truck)

1. For a given wheelbase, the CO will allow a bigger cabin (living space) due to its shorter cab
2. For a given wheelbase, the CO will typically have a smaller turning radius
3. A CC lends itself more to a full-size pass-thru from cab to cabin
4. Putting an over-the-cab bed on a CO is an issue, since the cab must tilt to access the engine
5. A CO requires more effort to make comfortable for haul trips
6. A CC has more, and cheaper, upgrade options, aftermarket support, junkyard scavenging, etc.
7. A CO has a higher seating position, allowing more visibility, either seeing the sites off road or getting around in traffic
8 A CO has no hood sticking out front, allowing for better visibility of the trail immediately in front of you
9. A CC is more recognized in NA as an RV when it comes to insurance, weigh stations, border crossings, etc.
10 A CC gives more protection in the event of a head-on collision


How's that for a start?

Thats a darn good start, to add a few;

1. CO, or more so the FG needs a suspension refit, so be prepared for that.

2. Power! CC has way more power, so if warp speed on freeways is your thing, well than go with a CC.

 

[haven]

One reason that we spend so much time talking about the Fuso FG is it's the only cab forward 4x4 medium truck widely available in North America. Isuzu, Hino, Nissan, MAN, Mercedes, Iveco, Renault, Volvo and lots of other companies make cab forward 4x4s, but don't sell them here.

(Bremach USA is new to North America. They offer an intriguing, but expensive, cab-forward alternative.)

A second reason is that the Fuso FG 4x4 is a platform used by several international travelers whose stories are described on ExPo. Examples include Kim and Don Greene, Carl Hunter, Michel Szulc Krzyzanowski, Doug Hackney, and Kym and Lyn Bolton. In most cases, the FG performed well. In two cases (Krzyzanowski and Hackney), problems were experienced with the way the camper was mounted to the truck, and solutions were found.

Third, ExPo has a group of participants from USA and Australia who have a wealth of experience building and operating Fuso FG campers. Chief among these is John Marano, who posts as "whatcharterboat." John works for All Terrain Warriors, one of Australia's most experienced builders of off-road 4x4 vehicles. Several ExPo members have built their own campers.

 

[westyss]

3. CC is more luxurious, comfortable, CO is a work truck.

4. Cost, CO will be less than CC, from what I have seen, almost half the cost, maybe that explains the luxury factor.

I am not so sure about the extra protection, depends on what you hit, but I sit above the hit zone for most vehicles other than semi's, which at that point your done in either truck, so thats debatable to me.

5. I believe fuel economy will be better in a fully loaded CO than a CC.

 

[westyss]

Lastly, as has been stated many times on expo, the vehicle choice is a very personnal one that has to take many factors into consideration for one specific person (you), the choice will be made with what suits your specific needs and wants with many compromises along the way.

 

[FusoFG]

The cab over FG has a greater payload than the F350 for less money.

The cab over FG has a comparable payload to the F450 for less money.

The F550, F650, etc has a greater payload than the FG for more money.

The shorter wheelbase is very maneuverable, especially the short wheelbase version

The tilt cab and open chassis of the FG allows for easy owner maintenance and repair. Fan belts, filter changes, etc.

Every FG dealer we have ever stopped at in north america for routine service has had a service department open 24 hours a day and treated us a commercial customer or better and helped to get us back on the road as soon as possible.

It seems most of the people on this board who need a daily driver / work vehicle / pickup / family car that is used occassionally for camping lean toward the comfort / speed / interior capacity of a CC truck.

And some / most of the people who want a single purpose expedition vehicle for longer journeys with 2 people are willing to accept the compromise in speed and luxury to get the increased payload and small overall size of the CO.

As a personal opinion, I don't think the FG needs a suspension upgrade if you don't drive on expressways, especially the concrete versions in and around a large city.

But I would recommend a spring or air suspension seat upgrade. Especially the passenger seat.

 

[Herbie]

And some / most of the people who want a single purpose expedition vehicle for longer journeys with 2 people are willing to accept the compromise in speed and luxury to get the increased payload and small overall size of the CO.

Coming at this as an interested observer and not someone with much experience with either vehicle, I think we've hit on another criterion worth examining: Crew Capacity.

I know some single-cab CO trucks can seat 3 with a driver's seat and a mini 2-person bench, I assume the FG is among these. A crew-cab 4x4 CO isn't available in North America, as far as I know.

Comparing this to a CC truck where I believe there are crew-cab options.

As the patriarch of a family of three with an option for a fourth to be named later, I have to say that while I love the compact nature of the CO trucks, the seating capacity has always worried me - but then that goes for a lot of the more popular Expo rig "archetypes" out there. Seems to be a lot of popular combinations of vehicle and sleeping apparatus that work great for two, but become a stretch for 3+.

 

[kerry]

We did 8000 miles with 3 of us in the FG last summer. Myself, wife and 15 yr old daughter. It's doable but not ideal.

 

[GumbyMan]

All Great information! Thanks

I was initially looking at the CO Fuso as it seemed to be much more fuel efficient, however, the real world-loaded down MPG that I have read about here aren't a lot better than the CC trucks (better, but not that much for size engine difference, however I realize it only makes sense... it takes a certain amount of energy to move something)

So that got me questioning it, still like the style & Price of the Fuso.

The mention of the Fuso being slow, It still is ok at Highway speeds? The suspension upgrades aren't anything too major are they? New shocks? and fine tuning, or are we talking major upgrades? No, Im not expecting to do 80 Miles and hour up a mountain, and then feeling like I'm ridding on air as I rocket over potholes and ditches... but some comfort & Speed is good.

Oh and the mention of the T-Rex From Bremach is very interesting!! a gas/electric Hybrid expedition vehicle would be awesome!!

 

[DEFENDERBEAM]

the chassis is not particularly beefy, and it lends itself to rust.

New leafs and shocks with labor could add in the range of $3,000 in cost.

with larger OD wheels you can get up to 70mph (maybe 75 downhill?), but cruising is better at 65mph or slower.

 

[DEFENDERBEAM]

based on my experience with a 2006 FG84 SWB model.

 

[kerry]

It'll hold 65mph on the interstate usually. Top speed is less than 70mph on OE tires and wheels. This applies to my 99FG.

 

[sarconcepts]

hang on Kerry.. ..
did you say you traveled 8000 miles with your 15 year old daughter?!
man.. .. you really ARE an expedition leader!

 

[Captain K-man]

I am not so sure about the extra protection, depends on what you hit, but I sit above the hit zone for most vehicles other than semi's, which at that point your done in either truck, so thats debatable to me.

This is a CO accident that I had to extricate the driver from. He rear ended a TT unit. The outcome would have been the same if he was in a CC, the only difference is the occupant compartment ended up being about 2' in the CO and if he was in a CC the occupant compartment would have been about 2 1/2'. Like the above poster said "your done in either truck"