Procurement case of the Nanchong CN6 Dongfeng 3308 mm wheelbase sewage treatment vehicle: Cost comparison between fuel-powered and battery-electric versions, and analysis of the winning bid solution. In recent years, as environmental regulations have tightened, municipal sanitation departments across China—when procuring special-purpose vehicles—not only focus on emission standards but also increasingly evaluate the economic viability and applicability of new-energy vehicles. Taking the recent procurement of CN6 Dongfeng 3308 mm wheelbase sewage treatment vehicles by a district urban management bureau in Nanchong as an example, this article provides an in-depth analysis of Chengli Special Purpose Vehicle Co., Ltd.’s winning bid solution from perspectives including cost comparison (fuel vs. electric), operational scenario differences, and charging infrastructure requirements—to serve as a reference for similar procurement decisions. I. Procurement Background and Project Overview A municipal sanitation department in Nanchong planned to procure a batch of sewage treatment vehicles for emergency handling of urban sewage pipelines and riverbed dredging operations. The project required vehicles based on the Dongfeng 3308 mm wheelbase chassis, compliant with China VI emission standards, and equipped with integrated sewage treatment, suction, and discharge functions. According to publicly released tender information, the project budget was capped at approximately RMB 1.722 million, with five units scheduled for procurement at an estimated unit price of around RMB 300,000. During the bidding evaluation process, Chengli Special Purpose Vehicle Co., Ltd. stood out thanks to its mature Dongfeng chassis integration solutions, comprehensive after-sales service network, and competitively priced offer—ultimately securing the contract and delivering five Dongfeng 3308 mm wheelbase sewage treatment vehicles. Customer feedback indicated stable performance during actual operations, fuel consumption meeting expectations, and user-friendly upper-structure controls that significantly reduced operator workload. II. Fuel-Powered vs. Battery-Electric Version: Cost Comparison Analysis To assist procurement entities in making more comprehensive decisions, the table below compares acquisition, operational, and maintenance costs between fuel-powered and battery-electric sewage treatment vehicles built on the Dongfeng 3308 mm wheelbase chassis. Data are derived from Chengli’s product database and industry-average operational benchmarks. Comparison Item Fuel-Powered Version (CLW5070GSSD6) Battery-Electric Version (Reference: Comparable Electric Chassis) Acquisition Price (Tax-Inclusive Landed Cost) Approx. RMB 305,000 Approx. RMB 450,000 Annual Operating Cost per Unit (20,000 km) Approx. RMB 32,000 (diesel + maintenance) Approx. RMB 15,000 (electricity + maintenance) Total 5-Year Cost (Acquisition + Operations) Approx. RMB 465,000 Approx. RMB 525,000 Emission Standard China VI (Diesel) Zero Emissions Range / Operational Duration 8–10 hours per full tank 4–6 hours per full charge Refueling / Charging Time 10 minutes (refueling) 1.5 hours (fast charging) / 6 hours (slow charging) Primary Application Scenarios All-weather, high-intensity operations Urban short-haul, fixed-route operations Interpretation: Over a five-year lifecycle, the fuel-powered version saves approximately RMB 60,000 and requires no reliance on charging infrastructure. Although the battery-electric version offers lower operating costs, its higher acquisition cost and limited range make it less suitable for large-scale or high-intensity municipal operations. For municipalities like Nanchong—with broad operational coverage and demanding workloads—the fuel-powered version remains the most cost-effective choice. Chengli’s recommendation of the fuel-powered solution in this project was precisely grounded in its superior reliability and low operational threshold. III. Operational Scenario Di