If anyone at Ford listening...............
#17
A diesel for the F150. Been a loyal Ford car and truck owner since '79 but if Dodge, GM, and Nissan have diesels and Ford doesn't I will be jumping ship in a year or so. The ecoboost has good towing power but fuel mileage is pathetic both unloaded and towing (for mine and all of the rest of the SCREWs with 3.73's and the 6.5' bed)
#18
#20
859 starting MAX minus ~hundred for options means payload is in the 700's. Even much lower than a Raptor.
That's embarassing!
Last edited by Rambo; 02-12-2014 at 08:54 PM.
#21
#23
It gets even better...
"The truck with the smallest payload capacity turned out to be the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel (Laramie Longhorn with air springs),
with a calculated payload of 490 pounds, which equals just 7 percent of the truck's actual weight."
From the 2014 PUTC V6 shootout:
http://special-reports.pickuptrucks....l-braking.html
"The truck with the smallest payload capacity turned out to be the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel (Laramie Longhorn with air springs),
with a calculated payload of 490 pounds, which equals just 7 percent of the truck's actual weight."
From the 2014 PUTC V6 shootout:
http://special-reports.pickuptrucks....l-braking.html
#25
A diesel in the 700 lb lighter truck should boost fuel economy both loaded and unloaded considerably.
I wouldn't consider the Dodge due to payload. I need max tow and diesel. The Cummins in the Toyota and Nissan sounds interesting. I did read that Dodge picked their diesel over the 5.0 Cummins because the Cummins only got 24-25mpg on the highway. Heck I would love to get that.
Rumors are that GMC will bring in the baby duramax as well.
I think there are enough guys that tow everyday (construction worker with cargo trailers for instance) that would jump on a diesel for better fuel economy
Seems that Dodge went with the diesel for the fuel economy advantage only, they didn't have towing in mind. They claim a 3 year payback for the premium engine price but that included higher residual value of the diesel.
My '11 ecoboost got 3 mpg better both unloaded and towing but it was a SCAB and weighed near 1000 lbs less.
If Ford can dump 1000 lbs of weight, add a 10 speed tranny, active shutters, and get fuel economy back up to some decent figures I might consider another gasser.
I had a 2013 SD from April to Aug of this year before going back to an ecoboost. My arms couldn't handle the rough steering of the F250 so I went back to EPAS and IFS. Fuel economy on the diesel was very good on the highway. Towing was 11-15mpg. Of course that is one heavy truck with a powerful engine. A lighter F150 with around 450-500 ft lbs of torque should deliver some outstanding fuel economy.
I also see some of the "diesel guys" buying them just because it's a diesel.
I would expect about 10% of F150 buyers to go with a diesel if it became available. If they used the already available inline 5 from the Transit development costs would be minimal
#26
Do you know that the 3.2L I5 is a $6k option over the V6 gasser in the Transit? Do you realize how much gas you can buy with that, especially with diesel fuel being 20-30% higher than gas?
#27
Nissan Titan's upcoming Cummins diesel originally meant for Ram
http://www.autoblog.com/2013/09/27/n...meant-for-ram/
Quote:
"The move comes after Chrysler decided to use a 3.0-liter V6 EcoDiesel engine designed by VM Motori (which is partially owned by Fiat) due to fuel economy concerns with the Cummins engine. Chrysler wanted its 2014 Ram 1500 trucks to achieve at least 26 miles per gallon. "Our simulations were showing 23 to 24 mpg [for the 5.0-liter engine]," says Mike Cairns, head of engineering at Ram."
#28
#29
Agree, no one needs to know where I go and how fast I drive to get there!
If anyone at Ford is listening...
We do not want to be tracked.
"Ford exec apologizes for saying company tracks customers with GPS"
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...-customers-GPS
We do not want to be tracked.
"Ford exec apologizes for saying company tracks customers with GPS"
http://www.detroitnews.com/article/2...-customers-GPS
#30