3.2- liter diesel...
08-21-2014, 09:03 PM
#51
You mean MADE truckloads of cash of the eco-boost, right? The engineering and tooling are both paid off long ago on that business model...
08-22-2014, 08:18 AM
#52
I'm just saying I don't see them abandoning the platform after so much was spent on it. It'll be Ford's primary motor for the F150 for several years I'm sure.
08-22-2014, 09:56 AM
#53
Senior Member
I doubt you will see a diesel under the hood of the F-150 anytime soon. Ford is making too much money off of the ecoboost family to warrant a change. I also believe that with the decreased weight and upcoming (rumored) 10-speed transmission you will see EPA estimates that get close to the Ram ecodiesel; maybe not with the 3.5L (I'd say 17 city 25ish hwy) but definitely with the 2.7L (18 city 27 - 28 hwy).
08-22-2014, 12:23 PM
#55
08-22-2014, 12:34 PM
#56
International man of Myst
I doubt you will see a diesel under the hood of the F-150 anytime soon. Ford is making too much money off of the ecoboost family to warrant a change. I also believe that with the decreased weight and upcoming (rumored) 10-speed transmission you will see EPA estimates that get close to the Ram ecodiesel; maybe not with the 3.5L (I'd say 17 city 25ish hwy) but definitely with the 2.7L (18 city 27 - 28 hwy).
I could see it as a possibility in the XL and XLTs targeted at fleet buyers who have a shop on site, fuel purchase agreements, and want long lifetime over any other consideration (basically the same target market as the transit).
09-09-2014, 07:07 PM
#57
You guys are right, there is no real demand for a 150 diesel truck.
That's why Ram sold out their initial production allocation of trucks in 3 days - look it up. Seriously, do some research. Good luck even FINDING one of the Ram diesels.
I test drove one and it was a very nice truck, very quiet also, very good power.
Set the cruise at 75mph and it showed about 26 mpg, probably get better after break-in. My 2011 F150 gets about 18 if I'm lucky under similar conditions.
My F150 gets an all around 15.5 mpg. I think the Ram would get at least 20 mpg all around. That's enough to offset the higher fuel costs.
That's why Ram sold out their initial production allocation of trucks in 3 days - look it up. Seriously, do some research. Good luck even FINDING one of the Ram diesels.
I test drove one and it was a very nice truck, very quiet also, very good power.
Set the cruise at 75mph and it showed about 26 mpg, probably get better after break-in. My 2011 F150 gets about 18 if I'm lucky under similar conditions.
My F150 gets an all around 15.5 mpg. I think the Ram would get at least 20 mpg all around. That's enough to offset the higher fuel costs.
09-09-2014, 07:29 PM
#59
Senior Member
You guys are right, there is no real demand for a 150 diesel truck.
That's why Ram sold out their initial production allocation of trucks in 3 days - look it up. Seriously, do some research. Good luck even FINDING one of the Ram diesels.
I test drove one and it was a very nice truck, very quiet also, very good power.
Set the cruise at 75mph and it showed about 26 mpg, probably get better after break-in. My 2011 F150 gets about 18 if I'm lucky under similar conditions.
My F150 gets an all around 15.5 mpg. I think the Ram would get at least 20 mpg all around. That's enough to offset the higher fuel costs.
That's why Ram sold out their initial production allocation of trucks in 3 days - look it up. Seriously, do some research. Good luck even FINDING one of the Ram diesels.
I test drove one and it was a very nice truck, very quiet also, very good power.
Set the cruise at 75mph and it showed about 26 mpg, probably get better after break-in. My 2011 F150 gets about 18 if I'm lucky under similar conditions.
My F150 gets an all around 15.5 mpg. I think the Ram would get at least 20 mpg all around. That's enough to offset the higher fuel costs.
The following users liked this post:
hydro (09-09-2014)
09-09-2014, 07:29 PM
#60
Senior Member
X diesel enthusiest
I agree with the many on this site that don't see the value in diesels. Quickly my background for saying that. I just sold a 99 SD with the coveted 7.3. 355,000 trouble free miles. I left it alone, no putzing with chips, the exhaust was standard less the CAT that I thought would increase mileage. Removing it didn't do much if anything. Like I said it was trouble free and a joy to drive. Would I buy another diesel? NO! Where you boys find over $50k for these things and them rip them apart either with mods or wild driving is beyond me.
Diesels in this day and age simply do not provide any cost savings over a gasser. They run longer, the mileage is no better and the cost of fuel is constantly high. Usually $4.00 per gallon or more. 17 MPG with the diesel, 18 with the 5.4L I now have. But 50 cents a gallon cheaper. And a whole lot easier to find. And you don't stink to high heavens with ever fill up. Cold weather, especially below zero really is a nightmare. Dinking with glow plugs and blended fuels which together with the required idling cuts your mileage in half and runs the cost per gallon up in the northern states.
Ford, let the smokers go the way of the clutch and hand shaker. We don't need that anymore either. I wonder if Ford or Dodge ever made a profit off these things anyway?
Diesels in this day and age simply do not provide any cost savings over a gasser. They run longer, the mileage is no better and the cost of fuel is constantly high. Usually $4.00 per gallon or more. 17 MPG with the diesel, 18 with the 5.4L I now have. But 50 cents a gallon cheaper. And a whole lot easier to find. And you don't stink to high heavens with ever fill up. Cold weather, especially below zero really is a nightmare. Dinking with glow plugs and blended fuels which together with the required idling cuts your mileage in half and runs the cost per gallon up in the northern states.
Ford, let the smokers go the way of the clutch and hand shaker. We don't need that anymore either. I wonder if Ford or Dodge ever made a profit off these things anyway?