But does your '12 have HIDs? What about My Ford Touch? (I can't remember if that was added in '12 or '13). Those two things right there account for a good bit of cash.

 

I've driven dozens (work at a car dealership), and dozens of Cummins and Dmaxes, which can't compare btw, but the new ones won't last. The point of a diesel is to get great gas mileage, which they don't IMO because they get 14-16 instead of 20, and to last 3 times longer than a gas burner, which I have little faith that they will. Paying $15k extra for the diesel and much higher maintenance and repair costs needs to be offset by greatly increased gas mileage and long term durability. I still don't like that the Ford 6.7 has PMRods either, but they seen to have held up well enough thus far unless they've been messed with.

EGR and DPF deletes are still worth 3+ real world mpg and improved engine life. Granted, the growing pains of the new emissions systems are something that they have to go through but it's miles away from where it needs to be. I suppose it could be equated to the (post) OPEC era emissions restrictions and how those motors suffered, except the diesels are doing much better. The fact of the matter is that an EGR, by nature and by design, harms the engine and there's simply no way around that. If you (anyone in general, not you specifically) have got one, it should come off the second your warranty expires, if not the moment you take possession.

I absolutely love diesels and love the insane amounts of power that they're able to produce, but diesels used to save their buyers money, and the current ones simply do not. The gas is the better way to go when overall cost is considered. Personally, I'd still buy a diesel anyway because I think gas burning 3/4+ tons are icky, but I don't drive a truck for practicality purposes. Diesels are indeed monsters, especially the new ones. Too bad tuning for even higher power them blows em up haha.

HIDs were added for 2013, not sure about the Touch. Those lights are like a $1k option too, so they definitely bump the price!

 

I can tell you the '11+ trucks do get 20+ MPG. My dad had one (traded it because he sold his fifth wheel) and he would regularly get 20-21 MPG empty, better than his 7.3 and 6.0. He would get 13 MPG towing a 10k lb 32' fifth wheel. He gets a solid 20% better fuel economy than my '08 6.4L, and gobs of power to boot. These are hand-calced numbers too.

The emissions equipment have become nearly a non-issue on the new Ford's. My '08 can be a pain (I have a lot of short trips), but overall, it's really not that bad.

As far as the cost, the diesel isn't $15k more than a gasser, and you know it. Sticker price is $8300, and invoice is going to be around $7500. Yes, the maintenance costs are higher, but not drastically. You do get longer oil change intervals in a diesel. Not to mention, resale value. Plus, I have heard of no major issues with the 6.7L signifying it's not going to last a while.

Don't bank on 3+ MPG from a (illegal) tuner, either. You won't see that hand-calced...no chance!

If Ford makes an EcoBoosted V8 Super Duty, that will probably be my next truck.

 

I'll take a gas 3 valve V-10 Super Duty ANY time. Pulls like a diesel. In fact, give me a ZF6 with it too.

 

If you see Ram, that's because Ram copied Ford in 2009. Ram did it to give it a bulkier look like the Ford. The front end of the Atlas comes from the Super Duty. The headlights look like the 2008 Super Duty. The mirrors have nothing to do with Ram. I don't see any inspiration from Ram on this truck.

FLASHBACK: All New 2009 Dodge Ram 1500

"What do you guys think of the new design?"

"OMG they copied ford"

"not too bad i guess. i do see a bit of ford in it."

"when i look at that front end, i do see ford-esque body lines. same with the headlights. i'm not saying dodge copied ford or anything. i guess it's just..."

"To be completely honest; I see quite a bit of Ford in it. Like P71 said; body lines and headlights."

"Yeah the front does look like a f-150."

"Definitely see some Ford in it and it looks like..."

 

I don't know anyone that gets 20+ mpg with the emissions still in place on a 6.7 unless it spends a ton of time on the highway, which most around here don't. But 3+ mpg increase I see all day long, and hand-calculated is the only thing I refer to. And in a lot rural counties in Texas, it's perfectly legal because they don't have emissions testing. I also don't have cats on my truck either. Do you know people that have deleted the emissions to ask them what they're MPG and power increases were? It doesn't do quite as much for the 6.7s, but the 6.4s need it to release their potential. All the 6.4 is is a tweaked and improved 6.0.

The emissions equipment isn't THAT bad, but the EGR, DPF, and DEF are all harmful, especially the EGR and it will cause the engine to wear more rapidly than one without 100% of the time. Your 6.4's have issues with the DPFs clogging too, which leads to a whole slew of catastrophic failure scenarios from excess heat. All new diesels are in the shop much more frequently for issues than the 7.3s, pre 2004.5 5.9s, and earlier Dmaxes. And most trips are emissions related, whether directly or indirectly, so I'm not too sure about what you think is OK with those systems.

But yes, you're right on the cost. A replacement motor is that much though.

 

Previous diesels didn't get 20+ unless they were on the highway either. Yes, my father's '11 6.7L would easily pull down 20-21 on the highway.

I'm not saying the systems are OK, I'm just saying it's not as bad as the early ones. Did I wish my truck didn't have DPF? Sure. But, it's not the end of the world as some would have you believe. To me, it doesn't make sense that we can clean the air by burning more fuel, but what do I know? I do appreciate the fact that the DPF eliminates the soot and the black smoke. Emissions treatment equipment is here to stay, whether we like it or not. I contemplated removing the DPF, but for me, it just wasn't worth the risk and the cost of the equipment.

And yes, it IS illegal to remove the DPF in Texas, and every other state in the union. It is illegal to tamper with emissions equipment. Period! (well, except for off road use only) It is a federal law, not a state law, so it doesn't matter what Texas does. We don't have emissions inspections here in MO where I live (the larger cities do though), but it is still illegal to remove the DPF. Again, removing the DPF is illegal in the good 'old US of A, regardless of which state you are in.

 

I'm glad he can get that. An early 24v Cummins, especially manual, can get close to 20 without being on the highway though. But I'd take anything over the 13 mpg I get while cruising at 60-65 . . . I don't like the Dodge is the only company left with manuals available. Ford might still have them for the XLs, but I want to say they did away with them for the '11+'s maybe? GM hasn't had them for a long time.

The stuff in bold is my biggest issue with all of this! Completely agree with that. More clowns making laws when they know nothing about what they're implementing. I love seeing trucks roll coal though; I actually got black-smoked pretty badly just a few hours ago. It's technically illegal to "tamper with emissions systems," but that means that one is also not allowed to remove their cats and put them back on doing exhaust system maintenance because that's "tampering" and they didn't technically have anything wrong with them. But you can pass inspection squeaky clean all the same and it doesn't make a lick of actual difference. Until recently, emissions standards were not required of diesels anyway. The EGR is the main thing that is removed though, not the DPF. The DPF is benign compared to that EGR (except when they clog). Regardless of how harmful either may or may not actually be, I'd be pissed if my diesel didn't hit 250-300k before requiring major work, and I don't trust a truck with the emissions equipment in place to do it. It's a handicap. Between the increased MPG, longevity, and HP, the $600-800 for a full EGR delete is well worth it to me. DPF removal is a little more wish-washy if you're trying to justify its removal financially.

 

2010 was the last year for a manual tranny in ANY Ford truck except Ranger.

Last guy I talked to with a Ford 6.7 was getting 16 mpg on the highway unloaded and 11 mpg towing his 5er. He also said that it goes through DEF like water.

My nephew had a 2000 Cummins, stock except it had a straight pipe, at 60 mph on the highway he was getting 29. He would still have it except the tranny blew up. He replaced it with a 2008 F-350 with a 6.4, that was a pile of junk. The BEST he ever saw was 15, and that was before it stuck in regen and plugged the DPF. It had a stick and some fool offered him a LOT more than it was worth because he HAD to have a manual.

Another friend has a 2005 F-350 with a 6.uhoh, it gets 12 no matter how it's driven.

Another friend (roofing contractor) has a whole fleet of 7.3's from the early 2000's, and he's going to keep them running indefinitely. His wife has a 2000 Excursion with a 7.3, stock it got about 19 on the highway, with an intake, exhaust, and tune he got it up to 26. With the switch to ULSD, that dropped to 21.

 

Ford has completely eliminated manual trannies from all trucks.

I would agree that the EGR is probably more harmful than the DPF. I was thinking more on removing DPF not increasing fuel economy drastically. The addition of urea has allowed them to back the EGR down some, which has helped on the newer trucks.

I think that as time goes on, companies will come up with better and more efficient ways to handle emissions.

And passing emissions testing in your area is one thing, being federally compliant is another. No matter how you spin it, removing the DPF is in violation of federal law. Removing cats and putting them back on is not tampering. Tampering means altering from the production version.

 

How are the feds gonna know if you removed anything from your vehicle, unless you tell them. Besides nothing is illegal until you get caught.

If your old enough to remember the emissions equipment on gas cars in the early seventies, most of that crap didn't work or not for very long. It took the big three in Detroit about 10 years + to get to the point where they actually worked for more than 6 months and reduced emissions with out killing power.

 

Seriously? If that isn't a childish response....

How are the cops going to know you killed someone? How is the IRS going to know you didn't lie on your taxes? How, how, how? Seriously? Unbelievable! As I tell my kids, we don't have to like the rules, we just have to follow them.

And things are illegal whether you get caught or not. You only get punished if you get caught. For some of us, having a conscience is enough of a punishment for doing something illegal.

Thankfully, technology has come a long way in 40 years, and people have learned a lot in that time as well. If it took 10 years to get something to last 6 months, then I guess we're WAAAY ahead of the curve, since my '08 F250 (first model year with the DPF) is still going strong without a hiccup after 5.5 years.

And with that, let's get back to the 2014 build and price discussion. This has gotten way further off track than I intended.

 

The 6 month thing was a bit of an exaggeration. The whole system was built on miles of low quality vacuum hoses that deteriorated and broke. And when that happened the whole system malfunctioned and the car barely ran. I can remember spending days trying to find a vacuum leak only to end up replacing all the hoses, just to have them dry rot and have to replace them all again a year later.

I agree.

 

I did mention that diesels are going through the growing pains like the gas burners did in the 70s, so I agree there. But essentially everything glc and 05RedFX4 said were my thoughts and points.

But I agree with getting back on track too! I suppose we should before before the thread gets heated, is closed, and we're all banned . . .

 

Yep, I agree with you too...growing pains like the 70's, but not as bad. Cars then really sucked! But, you can't say that about today's diesels. Robbed of potential? Sure. Suck? Absolutely not!


We don't want that to happen!