This fall I attended a truck show for the first time. My daughter and I had a great time at this event, wandering past about 200 big rigs and other heavy-duty trucks. The show featured dozens upon dozens of Kenworths, Peterbilts, Macks and Internationals… and a solitary Ford. Not just any Ford, but the brand’s mightiest truck ever made – the flagship of its Louisville Line. This hard-working rig provides an opportunity to look at the Louisville Line in general, and specifically its biggest variant, the LTL-9000.
Ford hasn’t produced tractor trailers since the late 1990s, so the brand’s presence has largely disappeared from North American highways. However, in the 1970s and ’80s, Ford was among the top big rig manufacturers. Before delving into the Louisville Line itself, a brief history of Ford heavy trucks will add some context to the brand’s more recent offerings.
Ford’s experience in trucks dates back to the early 1900s, with delivery versions of its Model T. A major advance came in 1948 with the F-series, although even the biggest trucks in this range shared the F-1 pickup’s cab (as seen in the 1950 ad above).
Over the next two decades, Ford introduced several series of heavy-duty trucks. There’s no easy way to describe this truck ancestry, since Ford produced many of these series concurrently. The 1957 C-series cabovers brought a dedicated heavy-truck cab design, though these were produced alongside conventional F-series heavy trucks. In the 1960s, the H-series debuted, as did the N conventionals, and then the W-series replaced the H. By the late 1960s, Ford was a major player in North America’s heavy truck market, accounting for about a quarter of total production. However, its biggest play was yet to come.
Ford began planning for a new line of heavy trucks in 1963, due to forecasts of strong growth in this segment. The truck took a long time to bring to market, since the line was intended to include everything from urban delivery trucks to extra-heavy-duty longhaul tractors. In a rare move for any vehicle manufacturer, Ford developed both a new product line and a new factory simultaneously.
Van Vactor, right, with another Ford plant manager in 1968.
At this point, we can take a brief detour and talk about Ford’s site selection process. As with all major corporate decisions, this involved several competing priorities, and many people involved in the process. Among those people was John Van Vactor. A Kentucky native, Van Vactor left school as a teen in the 1930s to work on a Ford assembly line. Throughout the 1940s and 1950s he rose through the ranks as foreman and production manager at various plants, eventually becoming the manager of Ford’s Fern Valley Road plant in Louisville, which produced both cars and trucks. Van Vactor, who described himself as “virtually self-educated” was unusual among Ford management, who were largely products of elite schools.
He also had a different approach to site selection than did most executives. Van Vactor pointed out that from a human capital perspective, the new truck plant should be in Louisville, where his existing employees had considerable experience building trucks. Explaining that truck manufacturing had many unique attributes, and shouldn’t be thought of as simply car production on a larger scale, he was key in persuading Ford upper management to locate their new truck plant in Louisville. Management was impressed enough with Van Vactor that they appointed him the new plant’s first manager.
And what a job that was. At 2.7 million square feet, the Kentucky Truck Plant was the world’s largest truck factory when it opened in August 1969.
That’s Van Vactor at the wheel of Job #1
While a W-series cabover rolled off the production line first, the plant’s reason for being was a new model range, introduced shortly afterwards. In a nod to its factory location, Ford called this new range the Louisville Line. At the Louisville Line’s December, 1969 press introduction, Ford’s Heavy Truck Sales and Marketing Manager stressed the truck’s “ultra-modern” features that improve driver comfort, safety and ease of service, all with an eye towards more profitable operation. Demonstrating Ford’s existing reputation, the company received 4,900 orders before the first Louisville truck was even produced.
At introduction, the Louisville Line (or L-Series) consisted of 22 models for delivery, construction, and over-the-road purposes with gas or diesel engines, single or tandem axles, and widely varying gross weight ratings. This expansive model range only grew in succeeding years.
As for nomenclature, all Louisville truck models started with “L” and had alphanumeric designations. The LS featured set-back front axles. Short-hood models were called LN, and a “T” indicated tandem rear axles. For the numerical portion, gas-powered trucks were in the 500 to 900 range, while an extra zero was added for diesels – being 6000, 7000, 8000 and 9000. At first the biggest of the L’s was the LT- and LNT-9000 extra-heavy tractor units.
The Louisville Line proved very successful. Ford didn’t mess with success, either, and these trucks saw minimal changes over their first few years. In 1976, however, the Line grew… literally.
With the new LTL-9000, Ford extended its reach further into the over-the-road linehaul market. A set-forward front axle and longer hood allowed for larger powertrains, and the LTL-9000 became a popular choice for owner-operators, taking on competitors such as the Kenworth W900, Peterbilt 359 and Mack’s new Super-Liner. “LTL” fit into Ford’s heavy-duty nomenclature, though it was likely a pleasant bonus that the name also referred to the longstanding trucking acronym “Less Than Truckload.”
As with many large truck lines, changes came slowly to the L-Series. Ford’s most noticeable visual update arrived for 1982 with the introduction of rectangular headlights and a more squared-off grille. Aside from that, it takes a mighty dedicated truck enthusiast to spot model year differences.
Our featured truck is a 1984 model. The large grille, long fenders, and bullish quad headlights give the LTL-9000 an assertive presence. A 20” Texas-style bumper certainly helps convey assertiveness as well.
The hood-side vents represent another distinguishing LTL-9000 feature; Ford’s smaller trucks (i.e., everything else the company made) didn’t have them.
Judging by its VIN, this LTL came with a 14-liter (855 cid) Cummins Big Cam III six-cylinder diesel under its 5½-foot long fiberglass hood. Ford offered six Cummins engines – three NTC and three Formula versions, developing between 300 and 400 hp. If six options weren’t enough for a potential buyer, there were more. Two Caterpillar and two Detroit Diesel engines rounded out the LTL-9000’s spec sheet. All LTL-9000’s in the mid 1980s came with an Eaton Fuller 10-speed transmission.
Most L-Series trucks were custom ordered, either by owner-operators or by fleets, so each buyer could spec a truck to his own needs. Ford offered a seemingly infinite variety of configurations. Optional front and rear axles, rear suspension systems, fuel tank sizes, and so on provided a great variety of weight ratings, range and other attributes.
While I couldn’t determine this truck’s exact specifications, it’s clear that it still works for a living. Here it’s towing a MAC LTT 42-ft. double conical tank trailer. Any guess as to what’s in the tank?
Molasses, apparently. Not molasses for pancakes, but rather for livestock. Molasses can be added to feed – especially for cows, but also for horses, swine or sheep – because it benefits digestion by breaking down fiber. Also, livestock typically like the taste, hence the happy cows on the trailer’s rear.
This truck belongs to a motor carrier from Ephrata, Pennsylvania, about 250 mi. from our truck show. And with its sleeper cab, the big Ford is ready for long hauls. While LTL-9000s were available as both day cabs and sleeper cabs, this particular sleeper may not be original to the truck, since it bears the badge of an aftermarket manufacturer.
The Rest Rite brand of sleepers was manufactured by a western Pennsylvania firm called Artman & Company, and were regionally popular in the 1970s and ’80s.
I wasn’t able to photograph our featured truck’s interior, so this brochure shot will give us a glimpse into the LTL-9000’s cab. The main photo here shows the optional Hi-Level trim, which included high-back bucket seats would be at home in a conversion van, thick carpet, ample interior padding, and woodgrain applique on the dash. Not all 9000s were this posh; the midrange ‘Custom’ trim is shown in the upper right, while the standard interior was relatively spartan. However, Ford did prioritize driver comfort, and the Louisville Line was well regarded for its accommodating cabin.
By the mid 1980s, however, the Louisville trucks were showing their age, and the decade was a tough one for big truck makers. The early 1980s recession pounded commercial durable goods purchases. With fewer goods to move due to a stumbling economy, overall US heavy truck sales (Class 8) fell about 25% through the first half of the decade.
Source: Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association.
Even with economic headwinds, competition increased, and Ford’s market share slipped. While Ford held 15% of the US heavy truck market after the Louisville Line’s introduction, by 1987 that was down to 10%. At that time, some industry analysts thought Ford may exit the heavy truck market, with its Louisville plant operating at just half capacity. (Eventually, Ford shifted some medium-duty production to the Kentucky Truck Plant, and light-duty pickups were added in the 1990s.)
However, Ford updated its Class 8 trucks with the AeroMax in 1988 (a long version to update the LTL-9000 came along a few years later), outwardly reinforcing its commitment to this segment. Speaking about the upcoming 1990s, Ford’s Heavy Truck General Sales Manager said “We plan to be among the leaders in the heavy truck field.” Turns out the opposite was true.
AeroMax sales were disappointing, and in 1997, Ford exited the heavy-truck market, selling its heavy truck division to Freightliner for an estimated $200 million. This was a complicated transaction because Ford sold its assembly equipment and research capital, but kept the Louisville Truck Plant. That meant Freightliner had to find a location to manufacture these new (to them) trucks, and provide contracts to Ford heavy truck dealers. Freightliner accomplished this in less than a year, moving Louisville’s production equipment to St. Thomas, Ontario and creating a new brand – Sterling – for these former Fords. The first Sterling rolled off the St. Thomas assembly line in February 1998, with a stylized “S” in place of the Ford oval. The Sterling brand, however, only lasted for a decade. After failing to meet sales expectations during the 2000s, Daimler discontinued Sterling in 2009. With it, went the last remnants of Ford heavy trucks in North America.
Ford’s Louisville Line spanned both the peak of Ford’s heavy truck success, and its eventual demise. This particular truck is likely one of the most memorable – Ford’s biggest truck, and with the distinctive, chiseled 1980s appearance that made it unmistakably a Ford. For me, this truck was the best-of-show.
Photographed at the LargeCarMag Southern Classic Truck Show in Raphine, Virginia in October 2024 .
In those years Ford made very good trucks. Both this LTL 9000 and the Aeromax were my favorite American trucks.
It’s a shame that Ford is no longer one of the main truck producers like it was a while ago.
What a great truck! I am reading this from the seat in a relatively new but spartan day cab (International), and this Ford looks like a great place to spend some time, especially time on the open road. I love that this one has been preserved so nicely.
I remember seeing L series trucks and remembered that Ford eventually exited that business, but I never knew much else, so thanks for the backstory. For my money, a big problem in American business is that there are so few guys like Mr. VanVacter.
I figured that the trailer must have been some kind of food product given the lack of hazard placards.
I agree about Mr. Van Vactor – I came across his name in researching the Kentucky Truck Plant, and his story seemed compelling enough to spend a few paragraphs talking about.
In my opinion, these higher-end 1980s trucks had the best cab interiors, The simulated wood, chrome-ringed gauges and plush upholstery that looked tacky on a car looked just great in a big rig. In the ’90s it seemed the interiors became more business-like and plasticky, – which I understand, but I find these 1980s interiors much more alluring.
So still enjoying that licence JP, Ive been cleared by my doctor to work again and an aiming to do some seasonal driving again soon,
I retired hurt from a food tanker fleet, none that looked like that though and there was some weird and wonderful obsolete tanker trailers in that yard that no longer can be used, mostly they are undersized for todays loads,30 tonnes being the minimum viable payload now.
Liking it just fine! I’m one of about 30 drivers assigned to a major area manufacturing operation so it is local driving, usually only around 100 miles a day. I would like to drive more, but it’s an easy gig with good hours, which allows time for reading and commenting here during my multiple daily waits to be unloaded. 🙂
Modern Ford truck, built in Turkey by Ford Otosan.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_F-Max
Apparently Ford still sells trucks in South America as well as Europe. I have no idea where these are assembled
https://www.ford.com.ar/posventa/mantenimiento-garantia/camiones/
I believe that’s an even more complicated story, involving VW! Probably VW do Brasil as well…
That 916 seems to use a Ford Cargo cab, whereas the bigger versions could be VW Constellation-related.
Thanks for a great story. Given the rusty patch on the frame rail I’m gonna say the frame has been lengthened a little more than the length of the fuel tank. Worked on and drove a pile of these things from the smallest gas powered L700 the biggest LTL9000 (tractor turned dump truck turned feed truck). Inadequate electrical meant all kinds of extra wiring strung across firewalls and under dash boards as these trucks aged. We ran them as trash trucks w/ 1100 series V8 Cats. I’ve asked this question many times, does anyone else remember the TV ad showing an L model tractor with a clear plexi-glass hood promoting the color coded syn-flex air lines?
Great writeup, I always wondered about the history of Ford’s big rigs. I had no idea it was so brief.
The marketing of the Louisville name was prominent into the 80’s; even though I knew quite a bit having worked in the truck industry for a few years before I bought my 1986 Ford Ranger, I figured it would be a good sign of quality that the Ranger was built there. And it was a reliable well-put together truck. Except for the blue paint, similar to this LTL9000, which started peeling almost immediately. But warranty covered a repaint that looked great for the next 8 years.
Interestingly, although the “Louisville” name faded a bit into the background in the late 1980s / early ’90s, Ford resurrected it in 1996 for the service-oriented L-Series trucks, which for a few years were named simply the “Ford Louisville.”
As for the Rangers, I believe they were built at the Louisville Assembly Plant, which (confusingly) is different than the Kentucky Truck Plant, was is also in Louisville, and was where the big rigs were built. The Louisville Assembly Plant was originally called the Fern Valley Road plant, and has been in operation since the 1950s. Louisville was definitely a Ford town.
I’m not great with Kentucky geography; in fact it’s one of the few states I’ve never set foot (or wheels) in. But I remember the typical Ford UAW Sticker on the Ranger’s windshield that highlighted the Louisville name and I associated it with the big trucks. So branding worked. I also learned that it’s pronounced “Lou-uh-ville”.
The aeromax cabs were huge to the contemporary mack RD cabs of the dump trucks I use to catch rides back to the yard in. I love the look of the long hood Petes and KW’s but for driver comfort those wide cab trucks are hard to beat in my mind.
I haven’t seen a Ford heavy truck in quite a while, but just this past weekend I saw an AeroMax (a rolloff truck, not a tractor-trailer, but still I was surprised to see one on the road).
This was my LTL 9000
Last I saw it it had 3,000,000 miles on it. Nothing ever wore out. Sold it with 2,500,000. 3406B Cat motor and 13 speed. Odd thing was that because they sat the engine far back (actually had an interior covering the back of the motor) it cornered well for a big rig and that was noticeable when you had a Suburban over the hood.
Great looking truck! I recognize the graphics as the “Classic” multi-tone color scheme that Ford offered for a few years.
Great essay! Thanks. As some of you might know, I sold trucks for a good part of my career.
Thanks!
What a fine (and unexpected) addition to our big truck coverage.
On the other end of the L-Series engine spectrum, in its early years at least, the 240 six (same as in my pickup) was the base engine in the LN-500 (GVW: 20,000 lbs) and the 300HD six in the LN-600 (GVW: 24,000 lbs).
What a gorgeous truck!
That grille must be almost as big as those from modern pickup trucks… Anyway, that’s where a huge grille really belongs, IMHO
PS in my opinion these trailers with twin set back axles are so cool… here in Brazil we’ve never had these, as trailers here almost always have triple axles put a couple of feet forward
Long ago I visited the St. Thomas Truck plant. What I remembered was that it was basically assembly-only. The frames, cabs, everything else came from outside suppliers, some from the U.S. The frames I think came from Milwaukee, I don’t know where the cabs came from. I wonder if that was how things were done in Louisville?
The other thing I remember was that (and this was more hearsay than anything, so I could be corrected), by the time the Ford heavy truck operation was shut down, it had long since given up on the owner-operator market, and was basically only marketing to large fleets with a limited set of options.
Freightliner was going through a huge accquisition binge at this time, led by James Hebe. Around this time Freightliner also bought Western Star, American LaFrance, Thomas Built buses and Oshkosh Custom Chassis, and their parent Daimler Chrysler bought Detroit Diesel. But there was a lot of overreach, and by the time the dust had settled in 2008 management had turned over, Sterling shut down and American LaFrance sold off only to declare bankruptcy soon after. Western Star and Thomas Built survive as part of Daimler Trucks North America along with Detroit Diesel.
A mighty fine piece of work Erik, I was really looking forward to this!
I first read about these in the early eighties, I thought they were the perfect mix between modern and the typical ‘West Coast’ looks of yore. But I must add I was even more impressed by the contemporary CL 9000 cabover, especially by its interior (example below).
The Louisville chassis were also shipped to the Netherlands (and at the end to the UK) as underpinnings for the towering Ford Transcontinental cabovers, always Cummins powered.
Thanks Johannes – glad you liked it! A CL-9000 would have been an even rarer catch!
I hadn’t realized that Louisville trucks were exported to Europe, but in researching this article I came across a few Dutch brochures for them. Quite surprised.
Actually, the Transcontinental was the subject of my very first CC-article, originally posted in June 2014. How time flies….
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/trucks-and-heavy-equipment/curbside-classic-a-louisvillian-goes-to-amsterdam-the-story-of-the-mighty-ford-transcontinental/
Interesting! (though first thing I did was to look at the comments to see if I’d written something like “I hadn’t realized that Louisville trucks were sold in. Europe.”)
This is one of the Dutch brochure images I’d come across. I assume that these conventional L-Series trucks were actually imported, rather than made in Ford’s Amsterdam plant.
Wow, what a surprise! I just found that brochure alright, it turned out to be for the Belgium market (‘voor de Belgische markt’, as printed on page 2) Certainly not built in Amsterdam.
We had plenty of heavy US trucks and tractors in the sixties and seventies. But it was either a Mack, a Mack, or a Mack…
Ah – thanks for pointing that out! Didn’t occur to me that a Dutch brochure would be for anywhere other than the Netherlands.
Wow, have never seen one out here in the Bay Area. That front face does look authoritative. The massive chrome bumper screams get out of my way, fool…
Ah, yes, the Ford sale to Freightliner. They also stopped making Ford school buses once that went into effect. Anyone know that backstory?
I drove a few Ford Louis years ago as concrete agitators those trucks are gone now aged and work out if existance the same company had some Sterlings and I drove some of those too, at my last job I was issued a 8 wheeler sterling 600 Detroit up front and an incompetent 18 speed eaton auto shift trans, that truck had 2,000,000 kms racked up and not one rattle in the cab unlike the spare truck I also used on that job, a Freightliner Century that was a real rattletrap,
Sterling/Ford died off as a heavy truck brand and other than powertrain parts nothing exists to repair them now so the last survivors are slowly getting parked up as they expire.
Excellent find and background info Eric. Thank you! It is not often, heavy trucks can be described as elegant-looking. But the imposing eggcrate grille, combined with the quad rectangular headlights, lent a solid sense of luxury and sophistication, to the appearance of these. Aided by their relative rarity. A very pleasant surprise!
Great post! I’ve always been a fan of Ford’s larger trucks – and hated to see them exit the market.
I don’t ever remember seeing these in my lifetime but that’s a handsome looking big rig. I always kind of found it a shame Ford and GM pulled out of big trucks, there are sound business reasons behind it but on the other hand Ford’s car related business decisions amounted to some real stinkers during the Nasser era the Aeromax was canned. That is to say I think Ford would have been better off sticking to this line of business than the Premier Auto Group foreign acquisition direction.
It wouldn’t have worked out, unless they had bought another big truck company. Maybe GM’s? Their market share was just too low. Just like the car industry, the big truck industry has become global, and requires a certain level of volume and capital to keep up with the competition.
The only American big truck company that survived as American-owned was Paccar, and they bought DAF in order to increase their global presence.
Excellent post, Eric. I learned a lot. I especially appreciate the info on John Vactor. He seems to be cut from a background that pretty much doesn’t exist in corporate culture nowadays.
Every tender palm that buys a big faced pickup just because, sees himself driving this LTL 9000.
Read in the morning when Ford sold to Freightliner and later in the day read Nissan in talks with Honda.
Yes, great article on a ubiquitous truck. Though successful, the Ford Louisville series drew a fair amount of criticism when introduced for its modular design that resulted in a certain level of crudeness, an issue Ford eventually addressed when they sought more of the owner-operator business as you can see with later Louisvilles like the LTL-9000. There were actually a few good reasons Ford got out of the heavy truck business. First and foremost was the profitability of the line, as far back as 1978 Ford considered withdrawing from the market due to very meger profits. Word was the whole heavy truck operation made barely enough money to cover Ford’s NASCAR efforts. Most of Ford’s heavy truck sales were low bid to fleets with slim margins which didn’t help, and neither did the cabover CL-9000 which was supposed to appeal more to the more profitable owner-operator market. Despite the poor profitability, in the late 80’s Ford decided to replace the by then antiquated L-series with a brand new truck, known internally as the HN80 program. HN80 was supposed to not only replace all existing L series models but the medium duty F series as well. It was an ambitious project that unfortunately ran over budget and behind schedule, and the first versions of the HN80 Louisville didn’t hit the market until 1996. Even more significant than HN80’s troubles for the demise of Ford’s heavy truck operations was that behind the scenes while HN80 was under development Ford’s light duty truck group had made a very convincing arguement to turn the Kentucky Truck Plant over to exclusively produce the upcoming Super Duty line of heavy duty light trucks. One well-optioned Super Duty could generate as much profit as 4 HN80 trucks and KTP could produce substantially more Super Duty trucks than HN80’s per hour. As JM Solberg pointed out, Ford found a willing buyer for the HN80 and the legacy parts business for Ford’s earlier heavy truck models (not to mention the dealer network, which some say was what Hebe was really after). The decision was easy to make, and KTP was converted over to Super Duty production by mid-1998 after the last of the HN80 tooling was shipped to Canada. Despite losing quite a bit of money on the HN80 development (which I suspect was recouped in short order), I don’t think Ford ever regreted getting out of the heavy truck market.
It seems like Ford made the right decision – today they own the class 4-7 market with a 29.6% share, well ahead of Freightliner with 21.3 and International with 14.2. They also profit by using Ford engines and transmissions instead of buying them from Cummins and Eaton.
The big, big brother of our LN700 grain truck. Though not much of the interior is shared, I can still see the outward similarities.
From what I remember reading back in ’97, Ford sold the Louisville truck lineup to Daimler Benz because Ford had only FIVE percent of the heavy truck sales market. More truckers were buying Paccar trucks (Kenworth and Peterbilt), Navistar, Freightliner, & Mack. Ironically, Daimler Chrysler’s reason for shutting down its Sterling truck division ten years or so later, was that Sterling only ever got five percent of the market. Not enough owner/operators bought either Fords or Sterlings, and fleet sales were dropping (Consolidated Freightways, Central Freight, and Roadway were three companies that were heavily Ford fleets
Very interesting reading: bought a Ford LTL 9000
Brand new in 84 big cam Cummins formula power with a 15 speed transmission : that was one of the most durable rugged and rattle free trucks ever built. It sure was a shame to see such truck disappear from market.
The company I worked for had several of the 9000 series Fords.i worked and drove them for years. My favorite was with the 425 cat and 13 speed. The vision was great ant the comfort was great. I am sorry they aren’t around any more