Dodge Sprinter?

E

exodus

Forum Deputy Chief
Messages
2,895
Reaction score
242
Points
63
Last edited by a moderator:
Some people like them some don't. The main reason people like them from what I have heard is alot more head room. The main reason people don't like then (again from what I have heard) is that they have a higher center of gravity which makes it less stable.
 
My company has two Mercedes sprinters, personal I'll take a box over a sprinter any day. They do have more head room, but most don't have a bench seat, just two more forward facing capt's chairs which fold flat if needed to transport a second pt. The two seats are at the head and feet of the stretcher and dont move(my biggest complaint about them) The storage compartments are set up kinda weird, like a vanbulance. They do drive nicely, and are some what top heavy. They are big, I fell like Im climbing into a pumper when getting into the drivers seat.
 
My company has one just like that, it is tiny inside once you pack all of the equipment plus a 200lbs+ patient. I'll keep my box thank you.
 
We've been switching alot of our fleet over to Sprinters from type 1s. Most of our medics like the Sprinters. Or at least more than a ford van. It's kinda narrow but the headroom is nice and if laid out properly functions well.

How do they feel tippy? To me they feel more stable than a ford van and they handle much better. No heavy fiberglass high top to add weight up high like a ford. Ours also have lay down main O2 storage to keep the weight down low.
 
I'd gladly take a Sprinter over the Medium Duty rigs we use here. The service I'm going to work for in NM starting soon uses Type II Fords IIRC and I'm ok working in those over the mediums too!
 
Hey guys!

Over here in Germany we use nothing but sprinters. I've been in EMS since Y2K and have never ridden or driven something other than sprinters.
If set up correctly and with a big engine they rock!
BTW. Sprinters over here are actually all MERCEDES B)
We use them for both box and van ambulances.

Check out the pics
 

Attachments

  • 1024_fraport1.jpg
    1024_fraport1.jpg
    98.7 KB · Views: 416
  • b03c1989e6610c2d070.jpg
    b03c1989e6610c2d070.jpg
    83.5 KB · Views: 437
  • Lob05602.jpg
    Lob05602.jpg
    72.3 KB · Views: 430
The main complaint I've heard about Sprinters is they're top heavy. Which can be countered by slowing down a bit. I've also heard complaints of the room, but, consider this. The 500 cu ft cabin volume of a Sprinter dwarfs that of the aircraft many medics put their "serious" patients into. The largest commonly used aircraft is the EC145 at just under 225 cu ft. Many HEMS aircraft have <125 cu ft of cabin space. So any arguments "there's not enough room to take care of people" in a Sprinter are suspect.

Personally I wish my service would move to something where I can sit down in a forward facing seat and reach everything.
 
I've heard the argument about HEMS cabins and Sprinters many times, and it's not a valid argument IMHO.

A large majority of the time, the HEMS crews pick up patients where all interventions have been done, and are in actual fact only there for rapid transport.

If there are any interventions still needing to be done, the HEMS crews typically do them in the back of the box that is on the ground, rather than in the bird.

They almost never do interventions in the air, so why use this argument to force ground EMS crews into similar circumstances?
 
Medic2409 said:
I've heard the argument about HEMS cabins and Sprinters many times, and it's not a valid argument IMHO.

A large majority of the time, the HEMS crews pick up patients where all interventions have been done, and are in actual fact only there for rapid transport.

If there are any interventions still needing to be done, the HEMS crews typically do them in the back of the box that is on the ground, rather than in the bird.

They almost never do interventions in the air, so why use this argument to force ground EMS crews into similar circumstances?
Click to expand...

Funny, I did a lot of 12 leads (yes, applied the leads), second lines, needled a chest in the air when I was flying and know crews who regularly do intubations, ect.

The reason to "force" ground EMS crews into "similar circumstances" is 1.)cost, 2.) stop having them F#@$%*&^ walking around the box during transport instead of seated and belted like they should be.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree wholeheatedly that we need to ditch the squad bench and totally rearrange the interiors of North American ambulances. We need captain's chairs with arms reach access to the monitor, laptop, O2, radio, lights and heat and most commonly used supplies.

Where I run into the type II (whether sprinter or hi-top) is the storage needed for equipment. Even if we start stripping out the redundancy in the cabinets (guaze, umpteenth NRB's and NC's) some of the equipment being added to our vehicles and some of the important but rarely used gear takes up a huge amount of space. CPAP, LUCAS, transport vents, thrombolysis kits (for us a separate kit), sager, KED, pedimate, burn kit, peds supplies, OBS kit, PPE do not need to be in arms reach when the vehicles moving, but will rapidly eat up cubage in a vehicle; and to be safely and ergonomically secured I wonder how workable the type II's will be. I also wonder how much expansion room they'd have for additional equipment.

When they added the in truck chargers for the LP15 batteries to our trucks (large type III's), they had a heck of a time figuring out where to put it and it became a tight squeeze. When they added the LUCAS 2 we thankfully had a large exterior compartment meant for a spare tire that wasn't being used and had a plug for the charger. Health and Safety requires everything to be able to be secured in the vehicle and for our PPE, helmets, vests, and lunches have ended up with their own compartments.

Finally, I'm waiting with baited breath for the Stryker Powerload and similar systems to start hitting their stride in the North American market to see if these systems will work on all types of Ambulances. Injuries related to lifting are still our number one career ender and if the Sprinter won't take the power load system then that's the biggest strike against it for me.

Personally I feel the best option is to take the safety offered by redesigning the interior while keeping the room for expansion and adaptability offered by the larger Type III's. Demers has a good layout for this. Not perfect, but a step in the right direction. Crestline also has one apparently, but I can't find any good photos.

http://www.demers-ambulances.com/products/mystere-mx-170-s/features

If you look under features you'll see their mobility track system.
 
I knew I hadn't pulled that concern about the Type II's and power load totally out of my butt. Admittedly info on this system is hard to come by, but a Google search found these:

An official brochure.
www.tscbenelux.com/uploads/file/brochure-stryker-power-load-english.pdf

An article about the device. If you read through you'll find the mention on the Type II's.

http://www.fireapparatusmagazine.com/index/display/article-display/0004141747/articles/fire-apparatus/volume-15/08/features/stryker_declares_cot-loading.html
 
Mercedes make Sprinters not Dodge.

We use them here in Kiwi and they are very nice, we have the box variety and the van variety - Brown likes the box better
 
MrBrown said:
Mercedes make Sprinters not Dodge.

We use them here in Kiwi and they are very nice, we have the box variety and the van variety - Brown likes the box better
Click to expand...

everyone calls them sprinters here and they have the Dodge emblem on the front of it
 
I second that. Our Red Cross chapter has one and it is a Dodge.
 
MrBrown said:
Mercedes make Sprinters not Dodge.

We use them here in Kiwi and they are very nice, we have the box variety and the van variety - Brown likes the box better
Click to expand...

When Daimler still owned Chrysler, the Sprinters were marketed here through Dodge and Freightliner (a major heavy duty truck manufacturer) dealerships. Mercedes has a much more upmarket image in the States, as opposed to in other countries where they produce vehicles in many more segments, including the commercial segment. As a result, Daimler felt they'd have better luck selling them out of Dodge dealers. Now that Daimler and Chrysler have split up, the Sprinters are being sold here with the Mercedes logo on the front.

I haven't had the opportunity to work in a Sprinter, but would like to based on two factors:
1) The factory high roof eliminate the need for the upfitter hack job utilized on Ford and Chevy Type IIs, thereby increasing crashworthiness.
2) The sidewalls appear to be much more vertical than those of the Ford or Chevy, which would make it much more comfortable to sit on the squad bench than in the Fords, which are slowly turning me into a hunchback due to the curvature of the walls.
 
Trust me, Sprinters are a few steps below Vanbulance's, which I really don't care for either. And no, I'm not some spring chicken newbie.

A local CEO of a well known company has bought, hook line and sinker, the lie that Sprinters are so much safer than Boxes. I say Bull. A wider chassis with dual tires on the rear end is obviously going to be much more stable.

I tried to do some research on the safety aspects of the Sprinters being hoisted onto an unsuspecting profession being sold a pack of doggerel. Do you know that I was unable to find, at the time, any safety ratings on the Sprinters, except for one? These death traps have a >67% chance of rolling over in a SINGLE VEHICLE accident. I have personally seen pictures of one that was merely tapped in a broadside MVC, and went over.

No, I don't like them. And I don't care how many people try to denigrate my stance. Yes, improvements need to be made in how we as an industry transport patients, but the POSprinter is not the answer, IMHO.:glare::glare::glare:
 
Medic2409 said:
Trust me, Sprinters are a few steps below Vanbulance's, which I really don't care for either. And no, I'm not some spring chicken newbie.

A local CEO of a well known company has bought, hook line and sinker, the lie that Sprinters are so much safer than Boxes. I say Bull. A wider chassis with dual tires on the rear end is obviously going to be much more stable.

I tried to do some research on the safety aspects of the Sprinters being hoisted onto an unsuspecting profession being sold a pack of doggerel. Do you know that I was unable to find, at the time, any safety ratings on the Sprinters, except for one? These death traps have a >67% chance of rolling over in a SINGLE VEHICLE accident. I have personally seen pictures of one that was merely tapped in a broadside MVC, and went over.

No, I don't like them. And I don't care how many people try to denigrate my stance. Yes, improvements need to be made in how we as an industry transport patients, but the POSprinter is not the answer, IMHO.:glare::glare::glare:
Click to expand...

So the Sprinter is able to meet:
AS/NZS 4535 (Australia's ambulance safety standard, which has significant focus on occupant safety)
CEN 1798 (Europe's ambulance safety standard, which also has significant focus on occupant safety)
KKK Standards (The US standard, which has almost NO focus on occupant safety)

The rest of the western world uses Sprinters, and yet has far lower fatality ambulance accident rates. Quite simply, the CEO of the company your speaking of (if it's the metroplex, I think I know the one) didn't buy into a lie, he realized killing employees by clinging to outdated vehicles isn't worth it.

I would say they are far less of a death trap than the current plywood and sheetmetal boxes that have no crash-worthiness standards. The anecdotal "wider chassis and dual rear tires" argument holds no water when you consider a normal ambulance box is very likely to literally fall apart in an accident.

Rollovers? Again, SLOW DOWN! Speed is THE factor in most single vehicle accidents. As for the one that was "tapped" and went over, were the occupants safe?

"Spring chicken newbies" and people who have been involved in or seen the aftermath of serious ambulance accidents are likely the only ones who will be accepting of new style units. I expect the old dogs will cling to wanting "room to work" and being able to walk around (i.e. become a projectile) during transport. Your more than welcome to hate a small unit that keeps you in one place during transport. However the same unit is likely to keep you alive when struck.
 
Hey, maybe it meets all of those safety standards, but I do know that the site I researched was the US Gov'ts. own site. The vehicle that was tapped? Going through an intersection, struck in the side, low speed impact, thankfully there was no patient, and both occupants in the front were wearing seat belts.

From what I have heard, and maybe this is incorrect, I don't know for certain, is that in order for Dodge to market the vehicles in the US, the suspension was modified. From what I was told these modifications have made the Sprinters marketed here less safe. IF this is true, then these are unsafe vehicles. Perhaps others have heard or are aware of this?

As I have said, however, and will continue to state:

Yes, improvements need to be made in how we as an industry transport patients, but the POSprinter is not the answer, IMHO.
Click to expand...

These improvements should be across the board, and definitely should involve properly designed, safe, and, dare I say it, roomy ambulances. I repeat, however, that the POSprinter, is not the answer, IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top