By Bill Adams
Commentators, observers, and pundits expressing opinions in trade journals and their websites are seldom if ever held accountable for their views and evaluations—although occasionally a reader will object, challenge, or comment via a “Letter to the Editor.” Any statement reflecting derogatorily upon a person or entity should be challenged. Having forums to bloviate does not give commentators blanket immunity from oversight.
A statement recently made caught my attention as “apparently” disparaging some manufacturers of apparatus bodies. It read: “Plastic composites are the most corrosion-resistant of the four materials for constructing pumper bodies, but they are the most difficult to repair in case of damage.” Disclaimer: I do not own stock in a “poly” body company; I have never sold nor bought one, and I have no experience repairing them.
Composite or Plastic?
In my opinion, a composite body is one made from fiberglass, whether it be molded, layered, or any combination thereof. Non-metallic bodies are manufactured of a polypropylene material, often called a copolymer polypropylene, a thermoplastic and sometimes derogatorily referred to as plastic. For the sake of simplicity and to avoid infringing on trademarked products, this narration refers to bodies manufactured by the following companies as “poly” bodies.
The three major domestic builders of poly bodies are United Plastic Fabricating, Inc. (UPF); APR Plastic Fabricating, Inc. (APR); and PolyBilt, a corporation equally owned by ProPoly of America, Inc. and W.S. Darley & Company, Inc. Each can elaborate on its own trademarked bodies, poly materials, and methods of construction. I believe the aforementioned statement inferring poly bodies are difficult to repair was either disingenuous or based upon misinformation. I asked the three “poly” bodies companies to respond to it.
UPF
Andrew Lingel, UPF President: “UPF has a dedicated Field Service Department to address warranty issues that can also assist customers with non-warranty repairs, which seldom occurs. They are fully capable of resolving most problems in the field. If necessary, we would send fabricators out of our factory to enable a fire department to get its apparatus back in service.
“Manufacturers of most fire apparatus are apprehensive about sending one of their bodies to a local shop for repairs. Not only do they want to ensure the work meets their level of quality, they are equally concerned with ‘Why did this happen?’ in the event of a warranty issue.
“By nature of poly’s composition and the various methods of construction used by the manufacturer, it may be more likely a welded seam let go rather than damage done to the poly surface itself. Similar to “metal apparatus bodies” that can be repaired on a local basis, poly bodies are capable of being repaired by qualified plastic fab shops. UPF can assist in facilitating local repairs. Almost all manufacturers, regardless of the type of body material used, would require returning a truck back to their factory in the event of major structural crash damage.”
APR
Chad Falls, Director of Sales, APR: “I do not agree with the statement that our bodies made from a copolymer polypropylene are more difficult to repair if damaged. Our units are tough. It requires an incredibly forceful impact to significantly damage one of them. Our bodies are much stronger and have far greater impact resistance when compared to steel or aluminum. For example, one of our bodies was t-boned at 40 mph, and, subsequently, the only necessary repairs were replacing the roll-up door and providing s