In early 2024, the Urban Management Bureau of a district in Wuxi launched a new procurement project for Ford Transit V362 service vehicles. Regarding this procurement, Project Manager Director Wang candidly stated: 'This is our second purchase—the lessons learned are fully incorporated into the tender documents.' Three years ago, the agency procured the same vehicle type for the first time; however, numerous issues emerged during operation, resulting in significantly increased post-purchase maintenance costs. Based on publicly available tender information and Chengli Special Purpose Vehicle’s service case studies, this article provides an in-depth analysis of this repeat procurement—from initial pitfalls to avoidance strategies in the second round, and further to the vehicle selection logic adopted by experienced buyers—offering authentic reference for government procurement. I. Pitfalls from the First Procurement: Appearing Cost-Saving but Ultimately Costly In 2020, the bureau procured five Ford Transit V362 service vehicles for daily inspection and emergency response. The budget was controlled at approximately RMB 497,000 (per publicly available tender information), with the winning bidder being a non-mainstream upfitter. During the first six months after delivery, operations ran smoothly; however, problems gradually surfaced after one year: • Poor Chassis–Body Integration: Some vehicles exhibited abnormal chassis noise when fully loaded. Inspection revealed that the upfitter had failed to optimize body layout according to the V362 chassis characteristics, causing premature aging of the suspension system. • Slow After-Sales Response: Upon breakdowns, the upfitter could only provide basic repairs; for chassis-related issues, it deferred responsibility to Ford authorized dealerships, forcing end-users to coordinate between two parties—resulting in repair cycles as long as 15 days. • Inconsistency Between Tender Specifications and Actual Vehicles: Two units failed annual inspections due to discrepancies between published technical parameters and actual configurations, requiring rectification at an additional cost of approximately RMB 8,000 (per local procurement practice). • Unstable Parts Supply: Specialized body components (e.g., electrical systems, tool cabinets) became unavailable six months after production ceased, necessitating custom fabrication and increasing per-repair costs by roughly RMB 3,000. Director Wang summarized: 'During the first procurement, we focused solely on vehicle price while overlooking critical factors such as chassis certification compliance, after-sales service network coverage, and parts supply chain reliability. As a result, over three years, cumulative repair expenses plus downtime losses far exceeded the initial cost savings.' II. Avoidance Strategies for the Second Procurement: Shifting from 'Price-Centric' to 'System-Centric' When restarting procurement in 2024, the agency directly applied prior lessons learned, upgrading its selection criteria to a holistic 'chassis + body + after-sales' tripartite evaluation framework. This project’s budget ranges approximately from RMB 464,000 to RMB 552,000 (per publicly available tender information), with four Ford Transit V362 service vehicles planned for procurement. Chengli Special Purpose Vehicle—leveraging mature local manufacturing experience in Suizhou and a proven track record serving over 500 municipal sanitation and environmental units—was shortlisted for final evaluation. Key Risk-Mitigation Measures: • Pre-emptive Certification Compliance Verification: All bidders were required to submit their Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT) vehicle type approval certificates, with physical vehicle parameter verification conducted on-site. Chengli’s CLW5040XJH6 service vehicle (built upon the new Transit V362 chassis) possesses complete MIIT certification, enabling nationwide registration and routine annual inspections withou