Automotive press have largely ignored, or been ignorant of, this relatively little-on-the-outside, big-on-the-inside vehicle’s potential.

Since last winter, when the imported Ford Transit Connect small delivery van was proclaimed as the 2010 North American Truck of the Year, little has been heard about it as a mainstream product.

Yes, Ford announced Natural Gas and Electric versions of the TC, which got attention as part of the “Green movement.” Announcements of a TC taxicab version have, unfortunately, generated ho-hum, who cares media responses.

The American world and its automotive press have largely ignored, or been ignorant of, this relatively little-on-the-outside, big-on-the-inside vehicle’s potential to sweep the country as tomorrow’s commercial vehicle. In plain language, the TC is a city delivery van, a replacement for yesteryear’s panel delivery trucks and, eventually, today’s big box vans like the Ford Econoline and Chevy Express.

Ford and its dealers will reap a bonanza with the TC. None of the competition, domestic or import, appears to have anything like it up their sleeves for the near future, although Chrysler through its Fiat product pipeline could present a formidable challenge with the Fiat Fiorino Qubo. (See First Look: Renault Kangoo TomTom) Whether Fiat can out market Ford given its U.S. history is debatable, and for once Jeep, Dodge and/or Chrysler badges could help.

Furthermore, Ford marketing folks don’t think the TC will cut into sales anytime soon of the Ford Econoline E-150 vans, long the king of such vehicles on North American roads. E-series U.S. van sales so far this year (through May) totaled 32,376 plus another 13,140 E-series Club Wagons, compared to a combined total of Chevrolet Express and GMC Savana sales of 27,114.  Many E-series, mostly the higher capacity E-250 and E-350 versions, power airport shuttle buses and motor homes. Ford’s E-series have long been a big money-maker, though mostly ignored by the motor media.

With a laid back, step-by-step rollout, TC has accumulated sales in 2010 of 8,879.

With a laid back, step-by-step rollout, the TC has accumulated sales in 2010 of 8,879, including 2,315 in May.  May TC sales exceeded those of such vehicles as BMW 5-series; Mercedes Sprinter, S-, M-, G-, GL- or GLK-classes; any Lincoln model; Mercury Mountaineer; GM’s Buick Lucerne, Cadillac DTS or Escalade, Corvette or Avalanche; Honda Insight, Element or Ridgeline; Kia Sportage; Nissan Armada, Pathfinder or Xterra; all Porsche; any Scion models; Toyota FJ Cruiser or Sequoia, and any VW “truck” as well as the Passat or New Beetle.

Granted few of these are big sellers these days and most are in vastly different markets—but it shows the impact of the TC that will  be more obvious on America’s streets and highways as momentum builds.

What will the attraction of the TC be? Lower operating cost for a start. With its front-wheel-drive, 2.0-liter Spanish-made gasoline engine and U.S.-made four-speed automatic overdrive transmission, the 2010 Transit Connect has EPA fuel economy ratings of 22 city (!) and 25 highway–and city is what counts in light delivery. That is a 40% improvement over Econolines, which today are offered only with V8 gas or V8 diesel power.

You may argue that for a brand new entry on the U.S. market with 35+ mile-per-gallon federal fuel economy standards lurking even for commercial vehicles, 22/25 is not nearly good enough. However, Ford has many future options up its sleeve. In Europe, among the 19 countries worldwide where the Turkish-assembled Transit Connect is sold, the TC comes with a variety of high-pressure, common rail diesel engines coupled with manual transmissions – potentially 30-50 mpg in the real world.

The forthcoming Ford Fiesta for the U.S. will offer a new kind of automatic (to be sure, for a price) that gets better fuel mileage than a stick shift. Then there are the prospects of applying Ford’s four-cylinder EcoBoost engines, also just beginning to reach the market, or adapting a six-speed automatic transmission to the TC.

Thus the Transit Connect has a variety of options to help Ford meet America’s tougher future fuel standards—and that’s not even considering the plug-in electric TC version already announced and the credits it will generate with the Feds.

The timeline on Econoline

The original 1961 Ford half-ton Econoline was derived from the Falcon compact sedan, with the same powertrain of an 85-horsepower, 144-cid Six.  Compare those stats to the Transit Connect:  The TC’s 2.o-liter engine is the same volume but with two fewer cylinders while producing 136 horsepower. The TC three-quarter ton cargo load rating of 1,600 pounds is roughly 60% greater than the original E-line van.

When introduced in 1960, the new Econoline was mounted on a 90-inch wheelbase with an overall length of 168.4 inches and width of 65, versus the 2010 TC’s 114-inch wheelbase, OAL of 180.6, and width of 70.7. What’s more, as can be seen in any TC, the new little guy in the truck market has a high roof (79.3 inches overall height) for cargo in the rear and an unusual netted stowage space over the windshield header for front occupants.  Importantly, the Econoline size has mushroomed over its nearly 50-year life: the 2010’s shortest wheelbase is 138 inches; OAL, 216.7; width, 79.4, and height, 82.1.

A smaller, more economical delivery van from Ford ought to be scooped up by many Econoline operators as well as by competitive-vehicle owners.

Now, so far in this report, we haven’t even raised the question of passenger versions. We’ve just been talking about the purely commercial, one- or two-occupant front seat TCs, which is Ford’s emphasis. There’s history here.

When Ford introduced the original Econoline, scant notice was paid by product planners to the “Station Bus” passenger version, which in later years came to be called the Club Wagon. All the expectations were for the pickup and van versions. The passenger Econoline was almost an afterthought in the quest to give fleet van users like Bell Telephone Company a new, economical, box-on-wheels type of practical vehicle, whether van or pickup.

(Personal note: as a new recruit to the Ford News Department in 1960, my first assignment on loan to Ford Division was to write the press packets for Ford’s 1961 model trucks, including Econoline.)

Almost immediately, the Econoline pickup version flopped while the passenger type soared. The van more than fulfilled Ford’s expectations, especially after arch-rival Chevrolet’s Corvair-based family of boxy trucks with air-cooled rear engines failed to compete. Chevy then cloned the Econoline with its 1964 G-series in cargo and passenger van versions.

Ford’s passenger van evolved into the popular Club Wagon in the 1970s, then the advent of minivans in the 1980s largely eclipsed big vans for families other than for camper conversions. (We had one or two Econoline Club Wagons in the family driveway from 1976 through 1983. Very useful for hauling teenagers, a golden retriever and assorted cargo to the summer cottage.)

As noted in a previous TDB column about forthcoming new taxi types (See Will Your Taxi Of The Future Be Yellow or Green? ), the TC is already making inroads across the country among forward-looking cab fleets. California Yellow Cab, which operates 220 taxis in Orange County, has ordered 25 natural-gas versions of the Transit Connect.

California Yellow Cab company president Tim Conlon told TDB he was attracted to the TC by five factors: driver comfort; passenger access; fuel savings, especially the ease of utilizing Ford’s CNG and LPG natural gas fueling systems; the knowledge that production of Ford Crown Victoria sedans — long-time universal cab fleet favorite—was going to end, and doubling of auction prices for used Crown Vic police cars, a regular source of taxi cabs everywhere, but New York City where used cars cannot be put in service.

Conlon believes the Transit Connect will be perfect for servicing passengers at Orange County’s John Wayne Airport, able to carry up to four passengers, with some squeezing, although typically there are only one or two airport customers — and offering more than enough luggage space behind the second-row seats with 135 cubic feet available.

I found in a brief, four-mile test-drive in a Ford dealer’s commercial van demo unit that the TC is surprisingly easy to get in an out of, has comfortably high chair-like seats in the front, and is a great pleasure to drive. It offers in one model or another all the usual Ford bells and whistles like SYNC.

In its development the cargo van version of the TC actually had its load floor extended over the footwells for rear passengers, so producing passenger-friendly rear seats was easy. The next step, for 2011 models if not sooner, will be replacing the steel panel upper rear quarters with regular window glass.

The Transit Connect demo drive was tight and smooth riding, though of course it could not absorb the potholes as readily as the venerable Crown Vic. Steering was quick and easy with power assist, and the 39-foot turning diameter is okay for parking maneuvers, U-turns and the like. The 2010 Econoline short-wheelbase version has a 48.6-ft curb-to curb turn while a Focus is 34.2 feet curb-to-curb.

I freely predict that the Transit Connect Wagon, as it is now being referred to – and it badly needs a more “marketable” name – will replace the minivan as the Soccer Mom favorite. Since Ford and GM have abandoned the minivan to Honda and Toyota, this is good news for Ford stockholders and dealers. Transit’s unusual and indeed unfamiliar appearance should not be a barrier—witness the success of ugly duckling Prius. (In Europe there are so many of these vehicles on the road since the 1990s  from  half a dozen or more makers, they look mainstream – editor)

Could the Turkish assembly plant keep up with such demand, leading eventually to North American, even U. S., production of a Transit Connect in the future? It is too early even to speculate.  This future rests in the hands of the Gods and the buying public.