I bought an ESP from Framingham Ford in MA for my '04 when they first came out, with an agreement in writing that if I didn't use the ESP in 7 years or 70k miles whichever is sooner, I can get my 2k back.

I think it's 7/70, have to double check. But I have the form to get my money back if I never use it, have checked a couple times the past few years to not forget about it and make sure I get my money back when the time comes (since I've never used it, not even for the horrid engine whine I've had for years now).

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by I just made this up
Sporting a 20% greater fuel economy is grand, but when combined with the 20% higher cost for diesel fuel, the need to add urea at the oil changes and the $5,000+ inital upgrade price over its gasoline counterpart, is it really the best option? My calculations show that an owner would have to drive eleventy billion miles before the benifit of owning the diesel can pay for itself.

Okay, that was all my opinion... and this is coming from someone who loves diesels. I was in the market for one before I bought the F150.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
I agree but you also have to consider that the diesel engines will last ALOT longer than the current gasoline engines.

 

and that there are no regular tune ups, urea is going to be cheap and readily available. In europe its in your local gas stations like windsheild washer fluid. Plus if you use a truck for its intended purposes...ie....towing, hauling you typically see significent gains in fuel economy vs. a gasoline engine.

 

The weak point of any modern vehicle is the electronic controls, and diesels are getting more and more of it to pass emissions, which means more stuff to go wrong and more $$ when it does.

A gas engine will easily last 200k if well maintained, usually at that point most people are ready to move on to something else anyway because the truck itself is wearing out.

 

Changing spark plugs every 100k, and a $15 fuel filter every 30k works for me. Not really that big of a deal.

Now you have to haul a lot to justify a diesel with the milage, because of the difference in price compared to gas. They have diesel 3/4 and one ton trucks discounted at dealerships around here to be the same price as V-10's just to get them off the lot. Sure you get better milage but the fuel costs more, so if there is an advantage it isn't much.

 

Last time I changed the plugs at 100k on my 99F150 I had a a $350 bill 10K miles later due to a plug blowing out of the head, not to mention coil packs having to be replaced, as well as any other ignition components. Diesels are getting more complex to meet emmisions but gasoline engines are already headed down the same path. If I could get a diesel discounted to the same price as a V10 thats a no brainer anyone would be crazy at that point to buy a v10. Resale will be considerably higher, much more power, and you will ofset the fuel cost due to higher fuel mileage compared to a v10.

 

I agree with all that is being said for the simplicity and reliability of a diesel, but as mentioned a gas engine will go a long way between tuneups now a days, and the tuneups are still way cheaper than on a diesel.

Diesel oil changes cost more, fuel filtration has to be tended to more often, the electronics are subject to more heat and vibration than on a gasoline engine,things are expensive when they break (and things do break) and the actual chassis that the diesel is installed in is no different than th gasoline engine, so unless you want to drive a thrashed and worn out truck with a solid motor in it, the argument of longeveity is null in my book. You can get 200,000 miles out of a gasser, even while working it (I took my 1998 to 202,000 miles of hard work from day 1 with zero problems). I finally sold the truck becuase the chassis was needing all new bushings, tierods and the rearend started to make a little more noise. The motor in it was fine, as was the transmission... the interior was okay for a work truck, but the chassis was in need of work. I imagine a heavier diesel sitting up front would have worn out these parts sooner rather than late.

If you need to haul huge loads, get a 3/4 ton or 1 ton with a diesel. If you want to get good economy and maintain 1/2 ton capability opt for the F150 diesel, and if you aren't as concerned with economy and would rather keep your savings up front and put the money else where get the V8 gasser.

 

http://autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ar...4861/1530/FREE

Here is the important part: dealers saw a placard comparing the engine's performance with that of the current 5.4-liter gasoline engine.

Wow! So we now know the specs of the 4.4L Diesel:
327 hp
420 ft/lb tq

IMHO this is quite.... a letdown.

So lets look at some other small diesels:
Jeep 3.0L T Diesel
215 hp
376 ft/lb tq

New 2010 Gm 4.5L Diesel
+310 hp
520ft/lb tq

Interesting...

 

I don't see the attraction of diesels nowadays, other than for towing. Diesel is $4.00+ a gallon here... Almost a full dollar more than gas. Also, thanks to DPFs and EGR, diesels aren't even getting close to the same fuel milage that they used to. Combine that with the maintenance costs and overall complexity of a diesel engine... I just don't see the advantage anymore.

 

Oh I agree. My point is that Ford and Gm design an engine at same time, for competitive products, and at this point in time baring some drasticlly new info, sure looks like we (Ford) are gonna get beat bad! And I didn't even mention GM indicated 25% mpg improvment over 5.3L while Ford said 20% improvment over current 5.4L. I guess everyone can say whatever they want at this point...

Hope not, but we'll see.

I'm not getting a diesel either.

 

I think Duramax is definately the best diesel between the big 3 (6.4, 6.6, 6.7). It's all speculation at this point though. Nobody is going to know for sure what is best until these things hit the street... But honestly, I don't think there is going to be a huge market for a half ton diesel. I think the Ecoboost v6 will outsell the diesel by 2:1 considering the difference in diesel and gasoline prices

 

I kinda agree re eccoboost. Although I still think many guys will have a hard time buying a V6 (gas) engine in thier F-150, no matter what the numbers are. (I'm one of them) That said we who knows what were all gonna do to deal with these rising fuel prices?

Re Diesel, Its hard to believe you'd be able to get 500+ tq in a light duty truck... I wonder what kind of tq mgmt Gm will program into those units...

 

I would guess they're going to use a heavy duty trans/torque converter/ etc.. but that is some monstrous torque for a 4.5 L engine

I agree about the v6, I don't know if I'd buy the ecoboost or not, but if it got 20 mpg I would be VERY tempted.

 

I get a consistent 23mpg in my 5.4. I think it is the high gearing.

 

Naw, it's not that interesting or that much of a letdown. Compare the various Powerstrokes. The 6.0 liter Powerstroke was really set on kill from the factory. It had about 80 cubic inches less displacement than the old 7.3 did, throwing down more torque and horsepower. The 7.3 at its best factory form was rated at somewhere around 275 hp/525 ft-lbs. The 6.0, with less displacement and some technological trickery (4V cylinder heads, variable geometry turbo), and some questionable design (it had fewer head bolts than the 7.3, meaning less clamping pressure on the block; and if that wasn't enough, the stupid bolts were torque-to-yield) was a 325/570 engine. It was wound really tight from the factory - to the point where some PCM calibrations were developed to actually detune the engine a hair, to try to help keep them together. But Ford had to keep up with the Joneses, and for the first year or two, they got bit...hard.

Now, take the 6.4 liter. We got more displacement than the 6.0, another turbo, and it's rated at "only" 350/650, even though initial tests and internet scuttlebutt had them somewhere around 400/700. Comparatively speaking, we're not putting that much more power down than a healthy 6.0; Ford and International runs the 6.4 a little on the conservative side, in the name of engine longevity...they got their nose bloodied with the 6.0, I don't think they want it to happen again ever with any future engines. From what I hear, a few parts quality issues aside (injectors, HPFPs), mechanically the 6.4 seems to be holding up better than the 6.0 did.

I'm sure the new 4.4 is on the mild side, too. Engines blowing up in Ford's bread and butter F150 would be a hard disaster to recover from, so I figure they're taking some precautions to minimize any troubles at launch. Maybe a few years after the intro, after they get some real world data of how the engine is performing in consumers' hands, they'll turn the wick up and match or beat the competition's power figures. But now, they're understandably gun shy - this engine has to work in the F150, it's do or die.