The new 3.0 diesel is a beast
11-10-2018, 06:08 PM
#11
Junior Member
Join Date: Sep 2018
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just test drove the 5.0 earlier today and I wasn't that impressed. I will go back and test drive the 2.7 EcoBoost and see if that impresses me more. This might sound completely nuts but I am cross shopping the Ridgeline and F-150. I don't require the size or towing capability of the F-150, but, I love the looks and the twin panel sunroof is awesome. The Honda drives great, is just about the perfect size, and I love the rear trunk.
12-17-2018, 09:34 AM
#12
2014 F150 Tremor
I'm amazed how members are knocking this new engine and don't know anything about it. It's not the same Rover engine. 80% newer parts designed for truck duty.
I have the FX4 Off Road and on some level highways at 65 mph and can average 28 mpg. I went from a gas guzzling Tundra to this. Like I say if you don't own one, you have nothing negative to say.
I have the FX4 Off Road and on some level highways at 65 mph and can average 28 mpg. I went from a gas guzzling Tundra to this. Like I say if you don't own one, you have nothing negative to say.
12-28-2018, 12:57 AM
#15
I'm amazed how members are knocking this new engine and don't know anything about it. It's not the same Rover engine. 80% newer parts designed for truck duty.
I have the FX4 Off Road and on some level highways at 65 mph and can average 28 mpg. I went from a gas guzzling Tundra to this. Like I say if you don't own one, you have nothing negative to say.
I have the FX4 Off Road and on some level highways at 65 mph and can average 28 mpg. I went from a gas guzzling Tundra to this. Like I say if you don't own one, you have nothing negative to say.
Last edited by isthatahemi; 12-30-2018 at 10:33 AM.
01-29-2019, 05:20 PM
#16
We have diesels in our fleet (not F150's, transits and F250's). And even the great mileage they get never ever pays off the extra purchase price with diesel being $.15 a litre more expensive, DEF, expensive oil changes, and disappointment every time you hit the gas and need it to go.( More so the underpowered transit.)
Last edited by ModularFord; 01-29-2019 at 05:22 PM.
01-30-2019, 08:56 AM
#17
Have you driven the 3.0 or are you just dealing from no experience. I don't have any issues passing whatever I want at any time. It falls in the middle of the 3.5 and the 5.0 on the acceleration scale, from my personal experience.
If I wanted something for speed and acceleration I probably wouldn't use a pickup, maybe a Porsche.or even a Tesla.
If I wanted something for speed and acceleration I probably wouldn't use a pickup, maybe a Porsche.or even a Tesla.
Last edited by skudrunner; 02-02-2019 at 07:14 PM.
01-31-2019, 10:29 AM
#18
The numbers in the first post seem a little off from what I've seen.
American trucks dyno'd the Diesel at 224 hp and 392 ft/lb.
American trucks dyno'd the Diesel at 224 hp and 392 ft/lb.
The following users liked this post:
chuck long (03-23-2019)
02-01-2019, 07:24 AM
#19
2014 F150 Tremor
Crank shaft numbers and rear wheel will differ. Drive the dam truck first rather than being a back seat driver. Like or don't like but please don't come here with your fortune telling remarks about something you don't have or experienced.
The following users liked this post:
jcb206 (07-16-2019)
02-01-2019, 08:21 AM
#20
Per the OP, the dyno in the first post was measured at the wheels:
"This dyno graph was posted up on the other forum and I am very impressed with the 3.0 diesel torque. Even though its only rated for 440 ft-lbs it blew the 470 ft-lb 3.5 out of the water and was well past its crank rating at the wheels"
I'm just noting an observation, or is that not allowed??