# fisher 9 ft HD vs MC



## steveair (Feb 24, 2000)

hello,

Just a quick question on something I was curious about.

We bought a 99 chevy 350 dump with 6.5 turbo diesel and at first, went with the fisher 9 ft. MC.

When we got the truck back from the plow shop, we got real nervous. The plow was a monster, and the truck looked like it was about ready to tip head over heals when we raised it.

When we ordered the plow, the installer said himself that the plow was pushing our trucks limits, but that it would be able to handle it. He said that if we were to do a lot of road driving, from site to site with it raised, it would definitely cause a problem sooner or later. Since we only plow our airfield and complex road/lots ,the plow is basically dropped 95% of the time, so we thought it would work. As soon as we got the truck back and saw it, we shook our heads and took it right back.

We now have the 9 ft. HD, which made us much happier. The MC almost made the truck look like a dual use plow truck/milling machine.

My question is were we right in trading it back in? Having used the truck to plow the airfield, we kind of wish we had that heavier plow now. This one, especially when the snow get slushy, likes to skate across at higher speeds, which we have to maintain in order to keep formation with larger trucks in front and behind it.

Any comments greatly appreciated, as it is a subject that has been bothering me for sometime now.

steveair

PS - just for the record, I wanted a new ford 350 instead but our mechanics a chevy man along with the rest of our small trucks, so I kept my mouth shut. The ford looks like it could of handled it.


----------



## GeoffD (Dec 21, 1999)

Ok here is the deal on 9 ft MC. From what i hear it's for the F 450 and 550, untill Dodge and Chevy produce something to take the front end weight.

Just look at the weight 9' MC 925 LBS the 9MC 1690, and the 10 MC what i have on my F 650 is 1790. There is a big difference between the MC and the 9 HD.

If i buy another F 450 or 550, it will have the 9' MC plow. The MC incorporates the deeper curve of the 10' blade and is built tough. Yes, i know it's hard to believe but i will buy a Fisher that isn't a 10' blade or a V-plow.

I currently have a 550 with a standard 9' Diamond blade. The blade is fine the truck is fine. The only thing i don't like with the Diamond, is the 9' MC has a higher moldboard than the 9' Diamond. With a 450 and 550 i want the higher moldboard. The Diamond works fine, just the truck has the power to use a higher moldboard so why not use it?

Steve i think you made the right decision buy useing a 9 HD. Useing the 9' MC on a 1 ton ( any brand Ford, Chevy or Dodge) is too much weight on the truck. I know my 550 could take a 10' blade, but it isn't offered by fisher because it's too much. Don't forget i had an 88 GMC 1500 4X4 auto 4.3 V6 and a 9' fisher back in the day.

Geoff


----------



## steveair (Feb 24, 2000)

Hey Geoff,

I agree 100% with you on the moldboard height. We have the snow foil and rubber on the front or the HD and still get a tremedous amount of overspray, especially when doing those high speed, long runs. For most guys, i could see the HD being fine, but for deep or special aps like we have and you have, that moldboard height is real important.

The MC is one heavy duty plow, thats for sure. I remember seeing the I beams on the frame and they were like twice the size of the ones on the HD we have now.

If I could turn back time, I would definetly push for a 550 instead so we could run that plow. But, so be it I guess.

Wish I found this forum earlier

Thanks, 
steveair


----------



## GeoffD (Dec 21, 1999)

I don't know how much moldboard hight would help on overspray. I think it is more depends more on the curve of the blade. Our 9' diamond with rubber over the top, has almost no runs. Only our speed is never over 25 MPH and runs are not as long as an airport runway.

By the way, i hate snowfoils they don't help at all when stacking, they actually make stacking worse. In my mind, the best way to go with any plow, is an 12-18" peice or rubber bolted over the top.

Geoff


----------



## steveair (Feb 24, 2000)

Right back to you tonight,

The foil does make it difficult for stacking. I think we have to rebolt on the other two foils that we have on 2 other 8 ft fishers about twice a season, thats if they don'd need some welding first from getting cracked. A kind of stupid design, because the snow just pushes it up and off when stacking.

Maybe I should call fisher with my idea. I thought about some sort of spring system so that the foil would bouce up and then back down without either popping bolts or bending. Kind of like a trip edge for the foil. Also would need a rubber flap so that snow wouldn't go in and stop it from returning. Maybe just mounting the foil to a good strip of rubber and then to the plow would work too. As long as it would have play in it.

Say, I just thought of another question on a matter that hasn't made much sense. When we bought the fisher, our dealer said to run the plow with out a cutting edge to "wear it in". Is this true? We did this for about 3 storms, but I myself can't make head or tails as to why. I've read in past discussions that you have to be careful wearing edges to far down because you could ruin the trip mechanism, which is obvious when looking at it. If this is the case, why would they want us to do this?

steveair


----------



## GeoffD (Dec 21, 1999)

I would never run a plow with out a cutting edge, when i buy a plow it doesn't come home with out one. How would wearing out the trip edge be any good for the plow? Ask the fisher dealer why you would want to wear it in.

Ok i know people aren't going to like what i say. Steve maybe try a Diamond for the next plow, or at look at one. This way you won't need a foil, just a rubber deflector. This way you can keep your speed up, and still stack snow. I used to have some fisher snow foils, they break or loosen up all the time, and the biggest problem i had is you can't get any tall snow piles. Also one drive told me that as the snow built up between the foil and the trip edge, the trip edge would trip on it's own, but i think he was too tired, but he kept saying it happened. Buy the way Diamond is rated to plow at 20 MPH.

Geoff


----------



## tru cut (Jan 11, 2000)

When i went to concord last week a company called henderson manufacturing had a ford 550 4wd all set up w/their 9 ft mid size plow looks like a real nice set up on the back thay had thier muni dump with bilt in convayer front and rear spinners.the plow has a 34"hight add.ange of attack,add.trip spings,add lots of other goodies.my dream truck!!on idea what it would cost??check out the web site www.henderson-mfg.com

ps thay dont shhow or list the 9ft and the hight of all the mids is34"

----------
Todd


----------



## plowking35 (Dec 21, 1999)

Ok here is some answers for you. 
First the fisher dealer never should have sold you the MC plow to begin with. You definatly did the right thing going to the HD instead. Next for the spray over you can attach a rubber flap to the foil, or get rid of it and just run the flap. I have used conveyor rubber for flaps and it works great.
Next the fisher is lousy at slushing because of the forward slant of the trip edge/cutting edge. See related thread for this reason. Next try a urethane edge to help alleviate that problem.
Also fisher reasoning is that you need to wear the edge up about 2" then bolt on a wear bar edge. They want you to do that because with the trip edge worn up,this allows the replaceable edge to hang below the trip edge, giving it some bite. I have plowed with fisher and they slush terrible, thus that is why I now use a plow with less of a cutting edge angle(ie meyer and western).
Dino

----------
Professional Ice and Snow Management 
Products:Services:Equipment www.sima.org


----------



## steveair (Feb 24, 2000)

Thanks plow

I read the previous post about slushing right after I posted my initial one.... should of looked I guess, thanks for re-informing me.

As for that wearing down of the edge, that makes complete sense. My only question is why do they sell them like that if they have to be worn down. Typical I guess.

2 inches? Is that right. Sounds like a lot of wearing down, but I'll take your word for it if its right. I don't think were even at a inch yet, so i guess we have a way to go. I'll have to look tomorrow to make sure. If its two inches, it seems like we could go another 3 or more storms at least.

The rubbler flap idea sounds good. I think the main problem we have is with speed. Most our plows are a min. 3 ft heigt on the big trucks, so at the high speeds we run, probably nothing will really help that smaller plow.

Scrapping those foils and going with larger flaps on the plows sounds like a good way to go. Would save us the work of fixing them foils all the time.

As for the urethane, looking into it. Still have some issues with wear, but I'm open to trying anything that would improve on what we have. Nothing lost in trying it once.

Thanks again
steveair


----------



## steveair (Feb 24, 2000)

Looked at the plow today and compared to some of our older ones. Looks like we could wear it down at least another inch.

One thing I that concerns me about this though is running the plow with no edge. 
We have one manhole on the airfield and a few more on the roads that always sneak up on people, or frost heve more every year. The new fisher already has a good bite out of the center of it on the trip edge with no blade, so this concerns me. Looks like we could bend, bang up that edge bad and not be able to get a blade on there if we were not careful. Maybe we won't wear it down quite that much to prevent any future problems.

Another quesion is with what controls you use with the fisher's. We had the joystick box, but now have the hand held that looks like a F-15 fighter joystick or something. 
We love it. On the chevy automatics, we mounted it right above the cargo lamp switch on the dash in that empty spot and works great. You can keep your right hand on the shifter and push the buttons all at one time (most at least). The shifter also makes a nice armrest for controlling the plow on longer runs (I will say I have downshifted a couple times by accident this way though)

Its also great with the stick in the 99 350 because you can hold it and the shifter in one hand. We thought about cutting it up and mounting it right on top of the Shifter knob, but felt bad about hacking into that nice new contoller.

Anyone else out there have any other unique control setups that they use with the fishers. I think the idea of integrating it into the shifter is a great idea. Maybe they'll come out with something like that soon (if they haven't already?)


----------



## plowking35 (Dec 21, 1999)

I have the cab commander from western(aka fishstick from fisher) and it works great. I know alot of people with the touch pad from meyers and they hate them.
With the standard, my buddy has a bracket mounted to the shifter, that holds the joy stick box, and his spreader controls, it works awesome. His shifter knob is threaded so he justs unthreads his knob, slips the bracket over the stud on the top of the shifter, and uses the knob to hold it in place. Looks like a splitter for a 2x rearend. 
Here is what we have done to other trucks, on a ranger with a 5 speed, the knob was splined, so we used u bolts to clamp a piece of angle iron to the shifter then mounted to control box to that. In the ranger with the auto, we bought the snake like adjustable holder availble from fisher/western and that also works great.
As far as manholes go, any STEEL will make a racket and put a hurting on the truck and plow. That is one reason why we changed to the urethane edges, even if they didnt wear so great will would still run them to save the plows and trucks. 
Dino

----------
Professional Ice and Snow Management 
Products:Services:Equipment www.sima.org


----------



## GeoffD (Dec 21, 1999)

I didn't know ya owned 2 rangers, do they both have meyer blades? How come you not useing an S-10? Just a little ford humor, ok ya have run with Ford's little boy trucks, why not move up to the man's truck? The F 350.

Just had to put a Ford Joke in once and a while.

Geoff


----------



## Alan (Mar 2, 2000)

Yeah, but he's not running 8' blades on his Ranger. I do it all the time with my S-10s. And you can keep your 1 ton tank, for residential plowing I'll put the S up against anything for getting in and out fast. All the shove in the world is no good if you can't maneuver


----------



## GeoffD (Dec 21, 1999)

Alan you are 100% correct about a 1 ton in a residental drive. I have very few residental accounts compares to the roads, lots, and condos i plow. I buy 1-tons because i need them for my summer work, the S10's bed would be too small, and too light of a payload. A S10 would out turn a 1-ton any day of the week, plus any chevy will out turn a ford.

Geoff


----------



## plowking35 (Dec 21, 1999)

No way Geoff, my buddy just bought a 96 F-350 powerjoke with an auto. Nice to look at but I bet after a few storms that auto will be ready for the scrap yard.
Actually the first ranger that Brian(my web designer)bought had the 5 speed, he liked my buddies shifter/plow holder, and decided to make the ranger the same way,only to find out that the Ranger had a splined shifter not threaded. So after buying a new knob, we used the u bolts and angle instead.
Now, we went to trade that in on a s-10 but the chevy dealer was trying to leave him upside down in the 95 ranger, so we went to the ford dealer instead, and they were willing to deal, so he bought another ranger.
The frames were litle different so I fabbed new mounts for the Min Mount fisher, then this season fabbed the meyer blade to the fisher min mount. Now keep in mind the blade that is on the ranger is not the light duty meyer blade but the standard meyer blade, cut down to 7'.
Also when you buy a ford ranger or 150, and look at the front suspension it might as well be a GM, ford copied the suspension so well, I think the parts cross reference to GM numbers.
Any way if you are buying new trucks you cannot beat a GM on price when it comes to pick ups with gas engines. I see K-2500 8600 gvw, auto, 350 gas,ac and appearance up grade package with limited slip and plow prep for 21500, and the same options in a K-3500 for 22,500.
Real good prices for a real work truck.
Dino

----------
Professional Ice and Snow Management 
Products:Services:Equipment www.sima.org


----------



## GeoffD (Dec 21, 1999)

Dino,

You are completely right about your friends 96. Ford says not to plow with a disel, and even some plow companies say don't plow with a disel. Now on the new 99 SD you can plow with a disel as much as you want. Thats why all my trucks that were the old style fords are all gas.

As for chevy, well i said it before and i will say it again. I use what i trust, which is Ford, i owned a GMC 1500 once. Anyways I can't fit in the cab of the chevy trucks, so i won't buy them, I never pay MSRP on the a Ford anyways.

Geoff


----------



## steveair (Feb 24, 2000)

[No message]


----------



## steveair (Feb 24, 2000)

One quick question, no harm meant.

Didn't chevy do away with the 350 this year? I thought its like a 5.3 liter or a 6.0 liter.

I looked at a used K2500 with a 6.0 liter, 4x4, ac, appearance package, etc. etc. It had 13,000 and they still wanted close to 25K for it. If I could find prices like the ones mentioned by me, I'd sell my 90 dodge 350 tomorrow and be driving to my next job in a brand new chevy.

I may be completely wrong, but I just think theres nothing worth buying for less that 25K in a 3/4 ton these days, at least not new. Truck prices have just gone nuts. All these dam yuppies who buy suburbans and 4 door full size trucks are killing our market and driving our prices way up. I wish the days when only people who worked for a living bought trucks would come back soon.

steveair


----------



## Alan (Mar 2, 2000)

The 350 is still available in the HD 2500 and 3500 models in the &quot;old&quot; 88-98 cab style. There appears to me to be a LOT of 99-00 models getting traded in with low miles. They made some substantial changes in the 99 and later models and I tend to wonder if maybe some of them aren't working out too well. I'll hold off a few years and let them de-bug the new versions before I belly up to the bar for one


----------



## GeoffD (Dec 21, 1999)

One thing i wonder, and again no harm ment.

Dino when i bought trucks in 97, i was buying the old Ford body style. Only the F 150 and Light duty 250 were in full production. They were selling the old body style trucks dirt cheap, just like Chevy is doing now. I bought my sons truck a 97 F250 HD with the same options and about the same price as the chevy you mentioned. In fact you could buy that F 250 HD for less money than a F 150, i think Chevy's current pricing is the same. Am I correct the old body style HD 3/4 ton, for less money than a 1/2 ton? It will be interesting to see what happens when chevy's new truck is released, and how the prices will change. I bet you will see a pricing structure that is more logical. Only we are trying to predict what a major auto maker is going to change for a new truck design, i think thats about as hard as predicting the weather. 

Geoff


----------



## steveair (Feb 24, 2000)

As you can tell, I don't know a hole lot about trucks like you guys do, but I will say this.

This whole truck thing these days confuses the hell out me!!!

So many differen't bodies and weight category options. It's hard to make sense of it all.

I mean, first you have ford. They have the 150 style, but then ran a light duty 250 with the same styling. Next, they had 250, old style, but then came out with a 250 HD. Wouldn't that just make it a 350 then? Now, they are switching all there 250 and 350 to the newer heavy duty style, but the 150's still have the old/new 150 styling. What the hell is going on. Same with chevy too. Are they still making the old style 2500 and 3500 with the 88-98 body and 350 engines? Or are they swithing it over to the new style completely like the new 1500 and are going to scrap the 350 motor.

The only one who hasn't done this yet is dodge. Are they still just selling the 3 different categories? I don't even know anymore.

I can't make head or tails out of any of this anymore. What ever happened to half ton, three quarter ton, 1 ton, etc.... It seemed so much easier then.


----------



## GeoffD (Dec 21, 1999)

Steve: The reason Ford had a F 250 HD the old body style and the F 250 LD was simple. The F 250 HD was the 250 with a GVW of 8600, that would be replaced by the F 250 Super duty. Only the super duty wasn't in production yet, so to keep the heavy duty truck in the market they ran the old body style for another year and half. The F 150 and Light duty 250 were to replace the trucks under 8600 gvw.

Here is where it gets funny.

When the new F 150 body style was released, you could still buy the old body style for like 6 to 8 months. Oh yea they don't make a Ligh duty F 250 anymore, now they have a regular F 150 and a heavy duty F 150 with a GVW of 7700.

Ford has always produce a truck that was heavier than the 150 but lighter than the F 250 HD. The problem with it was that it wasn't well know, and the price was so close to the 250 HD people just bought the HD.

Geoff


----------



## plowking35 (Dec 21, 1999)

Here is why the makers do this.They sell most trucks to the generall public, most of them need a light truck(1/2 ton).
So the makers run them first, and as time goes on they eventually change over the rest of the line.
GM wont have the new 8600gvw and above trucks available in the new style till this fall. So there is a ton of 2000 old style trucks still available, and I am sure GM is discounting them to move them out.
Geoff be glad ford waited a few years to release the Super Duties, or they may all look like the 150
Dino

----------
Professional Ice and Snow Management 
Products:Services:Equipment www.sima.org


----------



## GeoffD (Dec 21, 1999)

Dino from what i heard for started designing the SD series in 93. It from 93 on it was determined that the 250 8600 GVw would look different than the under 8600 gvw. 2 winter with a 7.3 and an auto, no bad tranny yet.

Geoff


----------



## plowking35 (Dec 21, 1999)

I know what you will say Geoff, that the design is based on the 650/750 and even the econoline series that Sterling now make, that ford used to. But it seems like ford did try to rip off the dodge with its design. What I say is that they just tried to capiltilize on the dodge design and didnt use any imagination of their own.


----------



## GeoffD (Dec 21, 1999)

Dino, no question about ford trying to borrow from dodge. They started working on the super duties in 93, when did dodge come out with there new body style? Was it 94? I bet they didn't start working on the body style to 94. I am not saying ford it the perfect auto maker, but they produce some tuff products.

Geoff


----------



## thelawnguy (May 20, 2001)

The new Dodge body style was available in showrooms July 93, I remember seeing a spy shot of the new style Dodge in Automotive News(a trade publication) sometime in 1991, thats when I worked at the dealer where they made the mag available to the employees.

I heard a story, back when they first split the HD and LD ford line, that the reason they did it was the V10 wouldnt fit under the hood of the new style (current LD fords). Cant believe someone actually screwed up, my guess is it was done for a reason.

Bill


----------



## plowking35 (Dec 21, 1999)

I had heard that they redesigned the SD fords because alot of people disliked the 150 when it was released.


----------



## GeoffD (Dec 21, 1999)

The split was designed years before either model was released. Ford chose to seperate the Heavy Duty trucks from the Light Duty. I have a relative that works as a Ford engineer, he did some design work on the 99 F 350 crew cab in 93 or 94.

Geoff


----------



## Lazer (Jan 1, 2000)

If you earn money with your truck (Plowing, towing, hauling, etc.) you want a Ford SD. If it's for recreation (hunting, fishing, towing your boat) a Chev or Dodge will do.

My local truck outfitters set up almost all Ford SD. Even the diehard Chev guys and Dodge guys (like myself) concede that Ford makes the best work truck right now.


----------



## plowking35 (Dec 21, 1999)

I agree with that statement if you need gvw and tow ratings above 15000, and 20000 respectively. But for 12000 and lower gvw and pick ups I know the chevy and dodges will run as well as the others. All pick ups are on par with each other. To say one is better than the other when it comes to pick ups is to either express your opinion or that of a person you heard it from.If your supplier is outfitting one brand of truck over another, I bet its because of $$$ not brand loyalty.


----------



## GeoffD (Dec 21, 1999)

Well Dino, i am not sure if the truck supplier is upfitting mostly ford for the $$$. It might be for the reason that, the ford dealer(s) in the area have that supplier do all of his upfits. Or i could be that he does a lot of upfits on guys that buy the trucks cab and chassis, and maybe most guys that do buy that way are buying fords. I can see a cash bonus from the dealer, but why doesn't the chevy or dodge dealer get in on the act? I see no extra cash from John Doe with a 2000 F 350, that wants a body and plow.

One thing to remember at least in maine, if your registration cost is based on the trucks window sticker. So if you add the body and plow and v-box, after you buy the truck the registration will be less.

Geoff


----------



## plowking35 (Dec 21, 1999)

In Ct the reg is based on GVW, so whether you add them first or last doesnt matter. ALso most people will add the plow here and body before hand, since they can finance the entire note that way. I also may have to assume that since most cab chassis sold these days are 450/550 's that also may play into the picture.

----------
Professional Ice and Snow Management 
Products:Services:Equipment www.sima.org


----------

