Ford says no to Diesel F-150

[Monster5601]

I don't believe you could ever get a payback from the extra cost of a diesel in a less than 1 ton truck, at least not as long as diesel is higher priced than gasoline. NOT ONLY do you have the $4-5K premium in engine cost, but about 3 times the quantity of oil, more expensive fuel filters, air filters and lets not forget the DEF that is now on USA diesels. That more than makes up for the paltry amount of extra MPG that is claimed for diesels. Gasoline engines now rival the power and fuel economy of a diesel and are good for at least 200,000 miles before major engine problems might be encountered. Unless you are pulling a load and running a hotshot delivery service averaging 100K per year in mileage, diesels don't make a lot of sense here.
(In every other country that I have been, diesel is cheaper than gasoline and all the vehicles are diesel (except the motorcycles). Some places (Peru for instance) a diesel engine and manual transmission is mandatory unless you wish to pay a double duty tax for automatic and gasoline engine. Most countries have a severe limitation on engine displacement also. While here in the good ole USA, we just insist on cramming bigger and bigger fuel guzzlers in even the smallest of cars and many if not most of those trucks with huge engines never pull or haul anything other than humans.

The diesel up-charge on the RAM 1500 is under $2800. My son is a powertrain engineer at Chrysler and he told me the new diesel takes 8 quarts of oil, one quart more tan my Hemi but, the change interval is 10K miles, 3k more than my Hemi. An air filter is and air filter, the diesel adds a water separator. DET is cheap, less than $2.50 at truck stops but I don't know how much the RAM diesel will use. This diesel is no more to maintain than a gasser and any differences are to little to worry about.

More data on the engine is here: http://www.allpar.com/mopar/V6/VM-RA-diesel.html

If you Google "VM 3.0-liter diesel" you will find more than you care to know. This is a new page on diesel engines in smaller vehicles.

The bigger problem will be getting one since VM Motori can only produce so many. Here is additional I found yesterday talking about the new diesel and its future.

Chrysler supplier: Diesel future promising - Light-duty diesels, offered in the 2014 Ram 1500 pickup and Jeep Grand Cherokee, could spread to other Chrysler Group nameplates if the automaker wants, says the president of the Italian supplier building the engines. "Wherever there is a [Chrysler 3.6-liter] Pentastar, there could be a VM 3.0-liter diesel -- Dodge Durango, Chrysler 300, Dodge Charger, Jeep Wrangler, the minivans," says Raffaele DeVivo, president of VM Motori North America. DeVivo told Automotive News that he believes up to 30 percent of 2014 Ram 1500 buyers will select the optional 3.0-liter V-6 diesel engine when it goes on sale near the end of the year. VM Motori could be producing up to 135,000 3.0-liter V-6 diesel engines within two years for the Ram 1500 and the Grand Cherokee and other products, he said. In 2012, VM Motori produced 55,000 3.0-liter diesels worldwide, and plans to build 86,000 this year. VM Motori S.p.A. has two 50-50 shareholders, General Motors and Fiat. DeVivo believes today's refined diesel engines will dispel Americans' memories of loud, smelly diesels. "The Jeep Grand Cherokee with the V-6 diesel engine is state of the art, and the NVH is very nice," the transplanted Italian said in his office in Auburn Hills, Mich. NVH stands for noise, vibration and harshness. Ram brand head Reid Bigland told reporters in late June that he expects at least 10 percent of Ram half-ton pickup buyers to choose a diesel powertrain, and that number could climb up to 30 percent. Ram has not revealed the diesel Ram's fuel economy, but industry speculation is that it could reach as high as 27 or 28 mpg on the highway, compared to 25 mpg for the Ram powered by a 3.6-liter V-6 gasoline engine.

(Automotive News, July 15)

 

[wmonroe]

I think it is great to have the option, if someone doesn't like diesels or its not an economical option they don't have to buy one. Someone else might find it economical or maybe they just want it (lots of us fall in that category with tractors) and they can go buy one. Competition and options between the automakers benefit us all.

 

[check 6]

Interestingly, diesel in this part of Texas has dropped to parity with regular gas. Good news for my mower and tractor and our soon to arrive Porsche Cayenne diesel SUV for my wife

 

[TomSeller]

many if not most of those trucks with huge engines never pull or haul anything other than humans.

Very true. For whatever reason I always look in the back of pickups when I walk past them. Amazing how many look like they never had anything in the bed or on the hitch. And often they are diesels. Pure grocery getters.

 

[94BULLITT]

I don't believe you could ever get a payback from the extra cost of a diesel in a less than 1 ton truck, at least not as long as diesel is higher priced than gasoline. NOT ONLY do you have the $4-5K premium in engine cost, but about 3 times the quantity of oil, more expensive fuel filters, air filters and lets not forget the DEF that is now on USA diesels. That more than makes up for the paltry amount of extra MPG that is claimed for diesels. Gasoline engines now rival the power and fuel economy of a diesel and are good for at least 200,000 miles before major engine problems might be encountered. Unless you are pulling a load and running a hotshot delivery service averaging 100K per year in mileage, diesels don't make a lot of sense here.
(In every other country that I have been, diesel is cheaper than gasoline and all the vehicles are diesel (except the motorcycles). Some places (Peru for instance) a diesel engine and manual transmission is mandatory unless you wish to pay a double duty tax for automatic and gasoline engine. Most countries have a severe limitation on engine displacement also. While here in the good ole USA, we just insist on cramming bigger and bigger fuel guzzlers in even the smallest of cars and many if not most of those trucks with huge engines never pull or haul anything other than humans.

I agree.

Sent from my Samsung SPH-L710 using TractorByNet

 

[Loadstar]

Very true. For whatever reason I always look in the back of pickups when I walk past them. Amazing how many look like they never had anything in the bed or on the hitch. And often they are diesels. Pure grocery getters.

When I turned 18 I bought a international 1750 loadstar. Truck has a DV550 v8 and it had better milage than a 91 chevy pickup. All I ran that truck for was work commute, dates, and partying. Bought my Freightliner for the same reason. It gets decent milage with a 60 series Detroit. The Freightliner does better at 17,000lb than my 78 f250 gasoholic. I would choose a pre emissions diesel over gas anyday.

 

[Peacock]

That may be true comparison with Rams but Ford has big plans for the Eco Boost which is already doing 24 mpg in a 4x4 Crew Cab on 87 octane.

Chris

Where is a 4x4 Ford truck rated that?

 

[Diamondpilot]

Where is a 4x4 Ford truck rated that?

I just did a trip to Cincy last week in my father's Super Crew Eco Boost 4x4 and 3.73 gears. Me, wife, father, 2 kids, and the bed full of baby items to give to a friend.

Left Muncie on 35 to Richmond, your neck of the woods, to I70 then down through Eaton to Fairfield right by Bass Pro and back. We did 23.7 mpg.

His truck, a 2011 has averaged 18.2 mpg since new with some light towing. Its rated at 16/21 window sticker but Motor Trend is getting what he does in their tester on the long term report.

http://m.motortrend.com/roadtests/oneyear/trucks/1212_2012_ford_f_150_lariat_ecoboost_update_1/

Chris

 

[fordmantpw]

Ford is likely saying no because they do not have an immediate source of a diesel engine to use in a half-ton truck.

Sure they do. They have the 3.2L I5 diesel that will be going in the new Transit vans.

 

[Peacock]

I just did a trip to Cincy last week in my father's Super Crew Eco Boost 4x4 and 3.73 gears. Me, wife, father, 2 kids, and the bed full of baby items to give to a friend.

Left Muncie on 35 to Richmond, your neck of the woods, to I70 then down through Eaton to Fairfield right by Bass Pro and back. We did 23.7 mpg.

His truck, a 2011 has averaged 18.2 mpg since new with some light towing. Its rated at 16/21 window sticker but Motor Trend is getting what he does in their tester on the long term report.

http://m.motortrend.com/roadtests/oneyear/trucks/1212_2012_ford_f_150_lariat_ecoboost_update_1/

Chris

I'm sure they can get that.

Most people do not, however. The fleet average on fueleconomy.gov is between 12 and 19.

In a head to head comparison done recently the GM 5.3. beat the EcoBoost in fuel economy. That was a skewed test though.