[quote name='drfeelgood' date='22 February 2010 - 09:20 PM' timestamp='1266894032' post='365752']
Ok not that I am saying Pierce is better than anyone else but you cant take a "Medium Duty" ladder and compare it to a "Heavy Duty" ladder and call it a fair fight. All of the ladders that Chicago purchased from Pierce were "Meduim Duty"(except the Towers) just like the E\-One (below 40 degress or flowing water) and Seagrave ladder proir to the Pierces. Crimson only offers a "Heavy Duty" ladder. Info from thier websites are below
100' Medium Duty Pierce
http://www.piercemfg.com/Specification.h...6f5ba3de8b
105' Heavy Duty Pierce
http://www.piercemfg.com/Specification.h...aba538323c
Crimson
http://www.crimson-fire.com/content.aspx?id=1324
[/quote]
Yes that is a good point Dr Feel Good and I really don't know if Pierce had bid on the fourth round as this was the fourth set of bids on the Truck's as when they "almost" awarded the contract to E/One last spring it had been the third round of bids.
I do know that on the third round of bids (about a year ago) E/One,Pierce, Crimson and Ferrara had all submitted bids and supposedly Pierce was reported to be the 2nd lowest bidder after E/One.I myself wonder if "Heavy Duty Aerial" had been written into the specs by the City of Chicago or if the type of Aerial Ladder that they wanted was unspecified and Crimson was just lucky enough to win the latest bid. Anyway if Chicago could get Heavy Duty Aerials for the price of Medium Duty Aerials, why not.
This is only speculation on my part, but I really wonder (just like many of you) what was going on that made the City reject the "best offer" on three rounds of bids? I wonder if it was because the Department of Fleet Management now handles the heavy apparatus and they didn't know what they were doing or whether if it was for other reasons that they had to keep repeating "request's for bids" over the last almost 2 years?
Ok not that I am saying Pierce is better than anyone else but you cant take a "Medium Duty" ladder and compare it to a "Heavy Duty" ladder and call it a fair fight. All of the ladders that Chicago purchased from Pierce were "Meduim Duty"(except the Towers) just like the E\-One (below 40 degress or flowing water) and Seagrave ladder proir to the Pierces. Crimson only offers a "Heavy Duty" ladder. Info from thier websites are below
100' Medium Duty Pierce
http://www.piercemfg.com/Specification.h...6f5ba3de8b
105' Heavy Duty Pierce
http://www.piercemfg.com/Specification.h...aba538323c
Crimson
http://www.crimson-fire.com/content.aspx?id=1324
[/quote]
Yes that is a good point Dr Feel Good and I really don't know if Pierce had bid on the fourth round as this was the fourth set of bids on the Truck's as when they "almost" awarded the contract to E/One last spring it had been the third round of bids.
I do know that on the third round of bids (about a year ago) E/One,Pierce, Crimson and Ferrara had all submitted bids and supposedly Pierce was reported to be the 2nd lowest bidder after E/One.I myself wonder if "Heavy Duty Aerial" had been written into the specs by the City of Chicago or if the type of Aerial Ladder that they wanted was unspecified and Crimson was just lucky enough to win the latest bid. Anyway if Chicago could get Heavy Duty Aerials for the price of Medium Duty Aerials, why not.
This is only speculation on my part, but I really wonder (just like many of you) what was going on that made the City reject the "best offer" on three rounds of bids? I wonder if it was because the Department of Fleet Management now handles the heavy apparatus and they didn't know what they were doing or whether if it was for other reasons that they had to keep repeating "request's for bids" over the last almost 2 years?
Facebook
Google
Reddit
Twitter