Boeing has sold over 3000 737MAX. Just look at that number for a minute. The 737ng only had about 400 orders before first delivery. Airbus has done a better job in emerging markets than Boeing and has gigantic mega orders for over 400 planes from both Air Asia and IndiGo. Congrats to them for their big backlog, but Boeing has done pretty well too. 3500 orders and they haven't delivered yet means there is plenty of opportunity for 737-10 sales, although we might see the 737-9 disappear.
About 3350 actually. But that is still 1500 short of the A320NEO, an aircraft that required significantly fewer changes over it's predecessor (and therefore cheaper to develop), and by all accounts an aircraft that commands higher prices too. 3350 means very little if you sell them at close to break-even cost. 3350 also means very little when two manufacturers enjoy a virtual duopoly, and the best-selling jet is already sold out many years into the future.
Comparing the number of orders before delivery is nonsensical. The global aircraft market was significantly smaller back then.
How do you know it won't match the A321 in efficiency? Lots of fanboys through nebulous generalizations around like it is based on an old design, fan diameter or other vague ideas, but head to head the 737MAX and A320neo families look to have very comparable Efficiency per seat.
1. It is
a very old design, and that has influenced the development of the MAX in many detrimental ways. As a pilot I also find the lack of automation vs the A320 family very significant.
2. Fan diameter is
relevant. There is a reason why the fan size is growing on all aircraft nowadays. The A320NEO (81 in.), C919 (78 in.) and MC-21 (81 in.) will all feature significantly bigger fans, and they all compete for the same mission profile. Sure, many will then respond by saying that the smaller fan is an advantage on shorter flights. But that completely misses the fact that the true short-haulers, the regional jets, also feature bigger fans than the 737MAX nowadays. The C-series (73 in.) and Embraer E2 (73 in.) will both have fans that are bigger than the MAX, as will the SSJ NG eventually. It seems pretty conspicuous that a 240 seat 737 will have smaller fans than a 100 seat regional jet
Don't forget that the A321 has a lot of extra weight on board that a 737 does not like overwinter slides...
... oversized cabin doors
The 737-900ER already features an extra full-size door and slides for it. There is also a pretty good chance that the door configuration will be changed into an A321 layout on this proposed 737-10.
BTW, the A321 doesn't feature overwing emergency exits. True, the 240 seat version will, but it gets rid of the full-size doors forward of the wings too.
powered cargo doors, oversized cabin doors, larger diameter fuselage, heavier engines,
Powered cargo doors = bigger cargo hold = an advantage.
"Oversized" doors? How many times have we heard that 757 style boarding doors was necessary in this size category? Funny how suddenly it is a disadvantage when the 737 doesn't feature it
Larger diameter fuselage = advantage
Heavier engines? Yeah, by about 200-300 kg pr. engine.
The gear on the proposed 737-10 will not be lighter than the A321s.
the A321 has a lot of extra weight on board that a 737 does not
The A321 at MTOW and with 240 passengers will weigh 389 kg per passenger. The same number for a 737-9 (albeit with 220 pax) is 400 kg. Using a rough calculation, assuming a linear growth of weight with length, the 737-10 should achieve 395 kg pr passenger at 230 pax.
Using the same method for MZFW, those numbers are 307 kg for the A321, 322 kg for the 737-9 and 307 kg for the 737-10.
The A321 is heavier overall, but lighter per passenger.