Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Patrol vehicles, what do you get to drive?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SecTrainer
    replied
    Originally posted by Minneapolis Security View Post
    That dosen't make a lot of sense, why buy a new car and then throw it right in the shop to get "upgraded" to what the CVPI has as standard equipment?
    Umm, you're not upgrading it to everything that the CVPI has as standard equipment, right? (Look at the two packages, and you'll see.)

    Personally, I don't think the standard CV needs upgrading at all for security purposes other than perhaps the heavier-duty alternator and, depending on what gear will be used, a very inexpensive mod to the wiring harness and fuse panel. I have driven both - including a long trip in a standard CV around the back roads of western Canada (read, potholes, washouts, washboard roads, mud, etc.) and have driven the CVPI on patrol. The only time you would notice any difference in the suspension is on a very bad road or making a very sharp turn, etc. at very high speed. This takes me back to the statement that security vehicles are not used for pursuit.

    And, when you look at security patrol vehicle requirements from a dead start, knowing nothing about the fact that PDs use CVs (which I suspect is a lot of the attraction for security guards, frankly), you probably wouldn't wind up picking the CV at all - standard or otherwise. It's a toss-up whether you'd select any of the "American" brands at all. Honda, Volvo, Toyota and Mitsubishi would appear high on your list.

    It's interesting, but in my travels I've noticed that security companies all over the world tend to gravitate toward whatever cars are commonly used by the police in their countries, even though they have the same universe of possible vehicles available to them as those in other countries. This tendency suggests to me that it might not be cold hard evaluation of performance or cost measures that drive these decisions, but the universal desire of security companies to look as much like the police in their country as possible.
    Last edited by SecTrainer; 12-12-2007, 12:30 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • ddog
    replied
    Originally posted by Minneapolis Security View Post
    That dosen't make a lot of sense, why buy a new car and then throw it right in the shop to get "upgraded" to what the CVPI has as standard equipment?
    Exactly! I'm starting to think he inserts counter-logical posts to see if anyone is reading. Or as the father of Transactional Analysis, Eric Bernes, would say, a perpetual I'm-Not-OK self-aware person playing a Look-At-ME(!!) psychological game from the subject's Deviant-Child ego state.
    Last edited by ddog; 12-11-2007, 08:19 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Minneapolis Security
    replied
    Originally posted by SecTrainer View Post
    ...and good points they are. Fortunately, both electrics and the suspension on the standard CV can be beefed up (electric very easily), and since (I think) 2002, the suspension on the standard CV is no lightweight when it comes to potholes.
    That dosen't make a lot of sense, why buy a new car and then throw it right in the shop to get "upgraded" to what the CVPI has as standard equipment?

    Leave a comment:


  • Minneapolis Security
    replied
    Originally posted by tacscuba View Post
    I thought the CVPI engine was no different from the civi model??? Therefore, why would it be a pursuit vehicle?
    Same engine, different horsepower rating. CV=224, CVPI=250.

    There are other differences as well, such as improved suspension, upgraded electrical system and available fire supression system and ballistic front door panels. https://www.fleet.ford.com/downloads...ceIntercep.pdf

    Not really relevant anymore however, Ford dropped the regular CV from the 2008 line-up.

    Leave a comment:


  • tacscuba
    replied
    I thought the CVPI engine was no different from the civi model??? Therefore, why would it be a pursuit vehicle?

    Leave a comment:


  • Minneapolis Security
    replied
    Originally posted by SecTrainer View Post
    Unfortunately, neither you nor your article are comparing what we were comparing - i.e., the CV to the CVPI. At least, I can't remember recommending the Yugo instead of a CVPI. Please stick to the subject.

    If weight was the determinant of vehicle safety, one wonders why anyone does all that crash testing. It must cost a ton of money and trouble. Why don't these stupid safety engineers just weigh the vehicles and rank them according to weight!?!

    If you want to become educated on vehicle safety, visit the real source of safety statistics here and you'll see that there's no direct correlation whatsoever between vehicle weight and vehicle safety. (HINT: Some SUVs are the least safe and yet the heaviest, while quite a few of the "lighter" cars are rated the safest).

    I'd put the operational cost differential into defensive driving training for officers instead of the gas tank. Security companies simply do not need pursuit vehicles, however "sexy" the officers might think it would be to have them, or however much it might make them feel like cops.
    The CV vs. the CVPI operating costs are virtually identical. I should know, I have operated and maintained both. I think your getting hung up on the "I" in CVPI.

    The point of the "police package" isn't just for doing pursuits. Its specifically geared toward up-fitting with equipment that police or security may need for day to day operations. Check out the Ford Modifier's guide here https://www.fleet.ford.com/showroom/...Int-mguide.asp

    Its really not that hard of a decision to make, even between the CV and the CVPI.

    Leave a comment:


  • Black Caesar
    replied
    Originally posted by OccamsRazor View Post
    Gotcha beat- this is the pursuit vehicle of the future.

    You could use that to catch this dangerous pint sized felon!!!!!


    Leave a comment:


  • SecTrainer
    replied
    Originally posted by Charger View Post
    While I agree with you on the point that security companies do not need PURSUIT vehicles, you're forgetting that there are some other advantages to the police package vehicles. They tend to have better electrical systems, (stronger alternators), and a beefier suspension that can handle the rigors of everyday beatings. While security may not engage in pursuits, the vehicles used by us DO take quite a beating.. Driving on gravel paths full of potholes, through huge mudpits, etc. At the very least if I were purchasing regular (civilian) versions of the CV, I would opt to get the better suspension installed asap to help keep problems from happening later.

    Just some food for thought...
    ...and good points they are. Fortunately, both electrics and the suspension on the standard CV can be beefed up (electric very easily), and since (I think) 2002, the suspension on the standard CV is no lightweight when it comes to potholes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Charger
    replied
    Originally posted by SecTrainer View Post
    ...Security companies simply do not need pursuit vehicles, however "sexy" the officers might think it would be to have them, or however much it might make them feel like cops.
    While I agree with you on the point that security companies do not need PURSUIT vehicles, you're forgetting that there are some other advantages to the police package vehicles. They tend to have better electrical systems, (stronger alternators), and a beefier suspension that can handle the rigors of everyday beatings. While security may not engage in pursuits, the vehicles used by us DO take quite a beating.. Driving on gravel paths full of potholes, through huge mudpits, etc. At the very least if I were purchasing regular (civilian) versions of the CV, I would opt to get the better suspension installed asap to help keep problems from happening later.

    Just some food for thought...

    Leave a comment:


  • SecTrainer
    replied
    Originally posted by Minneapolis Security View Post
    Fuel efficiency is gained by making cars lighter, you are more likely to die in a small (light) vehicle. Statistics don't lie.

    Americans who buy the smallest cars on the market are twice as likely to have fatal accidents as drivers of midsize and larger vehicles, according to a report being released today by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

    http://www.boston.com/cars/news/arti...in_small_cars/
    Unfortunately, neither you nor your article are comparing what we were comparing - i.e., the CV to the CVPI. At least, I can't remember recommending the Yugo instead of a CVPI. Please stick to the subject.

    If weight was the determinant of vehicle safety, one wonders why anyone does all that crash testing. It must cost a ton of money and trouble. Why don't these stupid safety engineers just weigh the vehicles and rank them according to weight!?!

    If you want to become educated on vehicle safety, visit the real source of safety statistics here and you'll see that there's no direct correlation whatsoever between vehicle weight and vehicle safety. (HINT: Some SUVs are the least safe and yet the heaviest, while quite a few of the "lighter" cars are rated the safest).

    I'd put the operational cost differential into defensive driving training for officers instead of the gas tank. Security companies simply do not need pursuit vehicles, however "sexy" the officers might think it would be to have them, or however much it might make them feel like cops.
    Last edited by SecTrainer; 12-10-2007, 04:13 AM. Reason: Correct misspelling

    Leave a comment:


  • Minneapolis Security
    replied
    Originally posted by SecTrainer View Post
    Huh?!?! I don't think that's an assertion you can support at all.
    Fuel efficiency is gained by making cars lighter, you are more likely to die in a small (light) vehicle. Statistics don't lie.

    Americans who buy the smallest cars on the market are twice as likely to have fatal accidents as drivers of midsize and larger vehicles, according to a report being released today by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.

    http://www.boston.com/cars/news/arti...in_small_cars/

    Leave a comment:


  • SecTrainer
    replied
    Originally posted by Minneapolis Security View Post
    How does the equation work? The more fuel efficient your car is, the more likely you are to die in it... I can justify a CVPI just fine!
    Huh?!?! I don't think that's an assertion you can support at all, and if it were, the CVPI wouldn't come out at the top of a list of cars chosen by that criterion by a long shot. Operationally, the CVPI is neither necessary nor a good choice for security companies, with the possible exception of those that are purchased used from public safety agencies at sufficiently deep discounts to offset their operational cost disadvantages.
    Last edited by SecTrainer; 12-10-2007, 03:53 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • flashlightcop509
    replied
    One of these days soon...

    Makeshift MS paint for the graphics, but...

    The door badge and all text will be removable magnetic panels, since I'm looking at a CVPI for my new personal vehicle; The bar light won't be there, but I'm thinking visor mounted grn/wht/abr LED strobes, and abr/grn Par 36 strobes on the rear deck with an Arrowstick or traffic advisor at the top of the rear windshield...

    Leave a comment:


  • sgtnewby
    replied
    Too many pages to go through and I can't remember if I already have, so I'll just post the pics...
    Attached Files

    Leave a comment:


  • EMTGuard
    replied
    This thread needs more photos.

    Leave a comment:

Leaderboard

Collapse
Working...
X