smokeywren

PowerStroke is just a brand name Ford puts on any of their turbo-charged diesel engines. The International/Navistar 7.3L, 6.0L and 6.4L diesel engines were called PowerStrokes when installed in a Ford truck. The Ford designed, engineered and built 6.7L diesel is called a PowerStroke. The 4.5L International/Navistar V6 diesel engine was called a PowerStroke when installed in a Ford (City Delivery) truck. And the 3.0L diesel used in the current Range Rover will be called a PowerStroke engine when installed in a Ford truck.


So don't kid yourself, the 3.0L Powerstroke engine will not be designed, engineered and built by Ford. They buy it from the manufacturer and install it in Ford vehicles. The same way they previously bought Navistar engines from International and installed them in Ford SuperDuty trucks.

SixShooter14

I'll have to find the article. But it was reported to be an "in-house" engine. Not the recycled Range Rover 'lion'.

If I find the article, I'll post the link.

I found this from C&D:
I'm sure it'd be cheaper to use an existing design. Hopefully they will improve it.

VernDiesel

I think this will be a great addition to the Ford Stable. LOTS of guys love their 3.5 EB for towing their TT, enclosed car hauler, boat whatever but hate the gas bill that comes with it. No it won't be anywhere near as quick 0-60 as the EB but that doesn't mean slow or doggy. Lots of these folk will trade some acceleration for great towing economy & diesel reliability. At the end of the day this puts more f-150s on the road.

Some guys that own whatever f-150 now take it personally like it's going to take away from their choice. That's stupid IMO. It will make the f-150 line up better period. It's also clear despite Fords run away success with the f-150 that they have lost some market share to the EcoD. I'm sure that doesn't set well with the Execs.

I tow daily big miles like a semi but not Super Duty heavy. Towing fuel economy & longevity or reliability are key for me. So now eventually I'll shop the f-150 where as before I would not because they had nothing for me.

acdii

I will reserve thoughts on an nF150 diesel until they have been out for a while and have actual numbers and trims posted. If the same team that designed the current PS is doing the new 3.0 it should be a very good engine. The deciding factor for it for me is maintenance costs. The Ecoboost costs no more than a 5.0 in maintenance, but having had a 7.3 Powerstroke, maintenance on that was 3 times that of a gas engine. So how much oil capacity, how many filters, cost of filter(s), cost of DEF, and time between changes will all be a deciding factor.

So far with the EB, I have been very pleased with them, my last truck got on average 20 MPG summer, 18 winter, 8 towing. Since I do more highway non towing driving, the 8 while towing isn't too painful, and it kept the lifetime down a bit to 17.8, but even so, 17.8 with a 6500# brick isn't bad.

My new 2016 so far is reporting 19.6 MPG, will see how close the lieometer is to actual hand calcs, but if it follows the same algorithm of the 14, it should be within .5MPG. Hoping that the 3.55 gearing improve towing economy, even if it gets 10 MPG that is a large improvement.

Gene K

The Ram Ecodiesel has a 13750 GCWR I believe. If Ford can make 5% more power than the Ram that puts us at 14500 GCWR. That should put a Screw 4x4 at 9000 to 9500 lb Towing depending on engine weight.

VernDiesel

My 4 door 6.4 bed 4x4 has a GCWR of 14,500 but others are higher & lower depending model & options. I have towed GCVW of 15,200 through mountains & with Turbo brake & trailer brake controller & was very comfortable. Well also with no sway WDH & air bags.

Highway I have gotten 30 mpg for a tank keeping it 65 -70 with tune. Towing averages 15 to 17 with an Airstream at 65 mph or 14 with a box TT. Both EcoD & Ford Lion (in Range Rover) 3 liter put out about the same depending on tune etc. Mine with tow tune does 268 HP & 475 TQ. Factory the EcoD is rated 270 HP 440 TQ in the Mazerati SUV.

BTW it's not power that's limits towing on the EcoD but cooling ability. Hopefully next generation they do it like Ford did on the EB.

acadianbob

None of that really makes any difference. The number to pay attention to is payload capacity. That's where the Dodges fall on their face.

VernDiesel

Honestly payload ratings & tongue weight numbers from a brochure are only useful as a guide before you buy truck & trailer. To do it safely you are adjusting your hitch/WDH etc at a scale watching your axle weights & percentages. Comparing standard axles the big 3 & Toyota are all close. Rams are 3,900 each.

No brand goggles Fords should make for a better tower as it will have a better cooling system.

Axle & CVWR are the most important numbers for towing safely.

Aj06bolt12r

Folks. Diesel engine does not equal reliable and dependable any longer. Those days came to an end in 2008. Really 2004 if we are talking Fords.

VernDiesel

Well no doubt emmissions have come into play. But end.. No. Some newer diesels are proving to be reliable despite emmissions equipment somewhat depending on duty cycles and certainly many delete. So far I've been very fortunate with my 2014 that has 260k towing Airstream TTs commercially. But many who have a really short commute and or spend a lot of time on a low idle do not if they haven't been deleted.