I'd like to see something similar to the RamBox for bed storage.

 

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)

 

Do you think enough 1/2 ton buyers tow often enough to justify a diesel? The 6-8 times I tow per year, I don't care what my mpg is. If I towed more or more often I'd go to a SD. I suspect your situation is quite unique. Fair comments?

 

Read recently a new Ram Eco Diesel Longhorn with 6.5 ft box has a max payload of @ 770 lbs. That won't meet your needs either.

 

Wow!

859 starting MAX minus ~hundred for options means payload is in the 700's. Even much lower than a Raptor.

That's embarassing!

 

That means you won't be able to tow ANYTHING if you put 4 adult males (or fat women) and a full tank of fuel in the truck. Cripes - the old Ranger 4 banger had a higher payload rating than that!

 

Towing? You couldn't even haul a sack of groceries if you had 4 adult males in there!

 

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

 

How the hell can that Ram tow 8200# when the payload is only 490#???????

6460# scale weight? That's almost as heavy as a 3/4 ton truck.

 

I tow about 30-40% of the time. My '13 gets awful fuel economy towing (I usually get 8-9 mpg towing heavy but has been down to 7). On lighter tows still only manage 11mpg. Unloaded at 60mph I get 18mpg, at 70 I get 15mpg
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

 

And with 200 HP/350 ft-lbs, you wouldn't have a 10k lb tow rating.

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?

 

Actually the 5.0 Cummins V8 diesel was reported to be showing 23-24 mpg on the highway in a 4x2. That doesn't sound very good to me.

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."

 

Time will tell on both but for now I don't like the looks of the truck.

 

Agree, no one needs to know where I go and how fast I drive to get there!

 

I'm pissed that I missed the 490 lb payload

WDH for the push mower on a 100 lb trailer anyone?

They need to hide even that 859 figure like it's a taboo, inbred, redhead, oney-eyed, abomination child