New engine for Roselle FPD « chicagoareafire.com

New engine for Roselle FPD

Found this in roselle meeting agenda for next week.

Tim

click to download

Tags: new engine for Roselle, Roselle Fire Protection District, Toyne fire engine proposal for the Roselle FPD

This entry was posted on March 12, 2022, 8:00 PM and is filed under Fire Department News, New Apparatus Order. You can follow any responses to this entry through RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

15 Comments

#1 by ttguy on March 16, 2022 - 4:31 PM

Following up on Drew Smith’s comments, I believe it may be fair to say that the formal bidding process may be going the way of the dinosaur. More and more municipalities are utilizing consortium purchasing options as a means to avoid the cumbersome and time consuming bidding process that often translates into a poor outcome for all involved. The consortium purchase options generally allow the agency to receive the product they desired in the first place and not one approved by someone sitting on a board that meets once or twice a month that will never operate said equipment. All too often board decisions are driven by price alone. Let’s face it – you shove a piece of equipment down the throats of a group of FFs who were not on board with the purchase and that particular unit will more than likely be problematic for most of its life. I’m sure many of you EVTs have experienced that first hand.
#2 by Jim on March 16, 2022 - 12:04 PM

Thanks Mike. It’s good to hear apparatus actually performing as intended. Will the new Seagrave engine have a lower hose bed or will it be the same as the past engines?
#3 by Mike on March 16, 2022 - 10:37 AM

Jim,

here is that link…

https://go.boarddocs.com/il/cowil/Board.nsf/files/BD2J2V4B183F/$file/Mid-Mount%20Telescoping%20Platform%20Aerialscope%20Truck%20Contract.pdf
#4 by Mike on March 16, 2022 - 10:36 AM

Jim,

I attached the link from the board action from the purchase of the Aerialscope on June 17th, 2019. The cost of the truck was $1.332 Million not including tools, extrication equipment, etc. The truck has a cascade system that had a few issues covered under warranty by the cascade manufacturer, a hydraulic hose for the main was pinched during UL testing and required replacement, and a few door handles failed requiring replacement. We also had an issue with a door sensor, and waterway drain linkage but were all simple repairs. All these items were repaired by our maintenance personnel and reimbursed by Seagrave. The rig has performed very well on our firegrounds including an apartment fire where two people were rescued with the tower. Maintenance has been minimal for the tower, and the chassis and drivetrain have been excellent. Overall, the truck has been outstanding for our department. We have also used the main, rated at 5,000 lbs lift capacity, to lift and maneuver vehicles. The operator stated the main hydraulics operated no different with thousands of pounds, proving just how beefy these apparatus truly are. For price and performance, there is no better product available.
#5 by Jim on March 15, 2022 - 9:23 PM

Mike,

What was the cost of the aerialscope? How has it worked out? Any maintenance issues?
#6 by Tim on March 15, 2022 - 4:15 PM

Drew you are absolutely right. All these points you bring up are also complicated by internal department issues. Many times a change in administration brings in a change of manufacturer preference. Then that chief tries to point the committee (if one is involved) towards 1 manufacturer or even a totally different design in what works for that dept. Changing design can knock out some builders because they can’t or won’t build what the new administration wants. Then of course you have guys that can’t read the bid, spec, or boiler plate.

Anyone involved in this process knows that no matter how often you design rigs there are always things that get missed.
#7 by Drew Smith on March 15, 2022 - 3:41 PM

I have solicited for proposals for several apparatus over the past 30 years. As stated by others, it is costly to develop a genuine proposal. One manufacturer told me they estimate about 40 hour’s labor to develop one. Just think about the time to create the CAD drawings.
A performance specification versus a construction specification makes it harder for bidders to know exactly what you want; may be you don’t know and don’t care – just give me an electronic siren, for example. Word of caution: If you write a construction specification do you really know what you’re asking for? Do you know what the details of the steel, aluminum, stainless or whatever you state really means? Can it be welded or fastened the way you state? Don’t try to beat a builder at the job he does every day.
Some manufacturers won’t submit a bid if they don’t think you want their brand. If you cut and paste someone else’s specification to make your own and it is essentially the spec of Brand X, then brands Y, Z, etc. see that and are less likely to bid. Pierce and E-One specs read a certain way. I am sure others do too.
Of the last three proposals we solicited, we received few bids. For our recent squad pumper Alexis and Marion bid. For our 2014 squad pumper Alexis and Marion bid while Pierce and E-One declined to bid. For our 2008 engine Alexis, Marion, Smeal, Rosenbauer, Crimson, and KME all bid. In all three cases the specifications and an invitation to bid were mailed more than a dozen manufacturers.
#8 by Mike C on March 15, 2022 - 10:02 AM

Might I add to ttguy’s post – many don’t realize how expensive it is to submit a bid. I haven’t seen Roselle’s spec, but what concerns me is that 15 bidders indicates the spec is very generic. I don’t believe in manipulating the bid process where your spec is a hard spec for a specific brand but providing a spec that anyone can bid on is impossible. Also, what kind of rig are you going to get when you have this many bidders? Just as ttguy said, are they all quoting apples to apples? Probably not. I truly believe in many cases, its the fire departments responsibility to do their diligence to determine what manufacturers have to offer. From there, select a few companies to submit a bid. I am curious to know what companies were contacted that didn’t submit a bid.

I’m guessing these builders have been contacted but just a speculated guess.
4 Guys
Seagrave
Custom Fire
KME
Ferrara
HME
Custom Fab and Body
#9 by ttguy on March 14, 2022 - 6:50 PM

One of the earlier posters commented about the (7) companies who didn’t “bother” to bid. That seemed kind of harsh. I think any credible sales rep. would agree that he/she has to determine where his/her resources may be the most productive and/or fruitful. It takes a considerable amount of time to RESPONSIBLY respond to a vehicle bid or RFP. If you simply don’t have the time to put a responsible bid packet together (and that could be for a variety of reasons), then you are generally better off not sticking your neck out. This industry, like many, has a tendency to make a judgement about a manufacturer simply by seeing a bid value, but not really knowing if the bids are as close to apples-to-apples or not. Sometimes simply taking better care of the actual customers you do have is more important and beneficial than the potential customers you might have. Many sales reps. are guilty of being on the hunt for the next sale and tend to forget the customers that supported them initially. Of course, those that do that too frequently are often forced to move on. You’ll probably see them working another booth at FDIC the following year. Another thought, probably not all of the (15) companies solicited have service capabilities in the Chicagoland area. Again, why try to put your product somewhere if you can’t properly support it after the sale. I personally think that is also a responsible approach. Not everybody can be YOUR customer.
#10 by Bill Post on March 13, 2022 - 6:54 PM

Thanks for the information Harry. Apparently the CFD is still getting some use from the 90s vintage Seagraves.
#11 by harry on March 13, 2022 - 2:43 PM

bill i personally saw one of the seagrave ladder from chicago last month it was either truck 53 57 58 or one in that area
#12 by Bill Post on March 13, 2022 - 1:46 PM

Thanks for posting that interesting information Mike. Waukegan seems to have been a Seagrave town for quite a while now and while not being exclusively a Seagrave town I could probably safely say that at least 80 to 90% of their heavy apparatus orders have been Seagrave for over 20 years at least.
It also goes to show that if you don’t order all of the “bells and whistles” and just stick to the basics you can still get a pretty decent price from Seagrave. Of course that Houston /Galveston area procurement council helped alot also I’m sure. Some time ago I had heard about the Houston Galvestion area apparatus council and if I recall correctly the Chicago fire department might have ordered some apparatus through them as well before the current contract.
It is shame how much market share that Seagrave has lost to other manufacturers over the last 20 to 30 years. As far as Chicago goes I know that the last Seagrave purchases were for 14 Seagrave Patriot Medium duty rear mounted Aerial Ladders on a single rear axle chassis during the mid 1990’s from 1993 through 1996. As far as Engines went the CFD had purchased 10 Seagrave Engines that were build on Ford Canopy cab chassis in 1979. Last but not least the CFD had purchased that Seagrave/Pierce 85 foot Snorkel with a built in pump on board. That rig was only sold off less then 2 years ago. As recently as the last 2 years the CFD was still using a few of the 1990s era Seagrave Trucks as spares however they may have been sold off by now as new Trucks have been delivered recently and some of the 2000 model E/Ones and 2000/2002 model Pierce Truck have become spare rigs. The 522 Collapse rig is using a Seagrave Chassis with the Aerial Ladder removed to transport shoring material.
#13 by Mike on March 13, 2022 - 9:15 AM

Below is the link for Waukegan City Council action taken on February 22nd for approval of Fire Engine purchase from Seagrave. This will be the 4th engine purchased from Seagrave in past 5-6 years. They are very utilitarian (manual windows, no generator, no bell / whistles, no foam systems, all stainless steel). They are 750 / 1500 GPM, and still have a booster line in rear. The quote was in line with the Houston Galveston Area Council Procurement Program which meets all of our city bidding requirements. Based on the quotes received by Roselle, I believe we received a very competitive price. Based on information here, is difficult to directly compare the two bids. Given the 520 day lead time from Seagrave, they are probably no responding to single apparatus orders unless they are solicited directly from existing customers.

https://go.boarddocs.com/il/cowil/Board.nsf/files/CBPRSQ6EFD0F/$file/Waukegan%20Illinois%20Direct%20Bid%20Engine%20Feb%202022.pdf
#14 by BIll Post on March 13, 2022 - 8:06 AM

Thank for putting up that interesting information about the bids for the new Engine for Roselle. I like the idea that they seem to have an open government or at least an open books policy of actually show who bid on the apparatus and how much each company offered.
It is also interesting that Request for Proposals were sent to 15 manufacturers which in and of itself was interesting and that fact that there were 8 bids was also interesting. I wonder how other local fire departments are when it comes to asking for bids and proposals such as do they send out letters to that many manufacturers or do they just send out their requests in a general publication or how do they do it. As it seems that many fire departments seem keep their request to just a couple of manufacturers or perhaps it only seems that way as most local fire departments seem to throw their business to just a few companies and then there are few newer companies that sometime’s get lucky.
I really am surprised that Rosenbauer was the high bidder. I can’t help but wonder who the 7 companies who didn’t bother to bid were and why they didn’t bid? Seagrave is a company that comes to mind which apparently didn’t submit a bid. And Eone out bid Pierce which was also interesting. I wonder if most other fire departments are as open about the bids on their new rigs?
#15 by Mike hellmuth on March 12, 2022 - 8:52 PM

Toyne is a manufacturer who you hear occasionally but seems to have loyal following it’s a small company that does a good job and has a repeat customer base they use a lot of Spartan chassis for their custom apparatus
looks like Rosenbauer gets the award for highest bid……..