Ford says no to Diesel F-150

[Scooby074]

Put 350+ gas hp in it, and it would

No thanks!

I got a ford pickup with a gas guzzler. 18 US mpg mixed, but mostly hwy. Im getting tired of dumping fuel in it. Last fill up was $118.00.

That ranger with the 3.2l diesel (200hp 347ftlb), automatic and 4x4 is getting 12l/100km city and 8.6l/100km hwy. Thats 19.6 US Mpg city and 27.4 US Mpg hwy. using the euro factory numbers.

If you step down to a smaller engine, the 2.2l (125hp 243ftlb edition) gets 8.3l/100 and 7.2l/100 hwy. 28 US mpg and 32.7us mpg respectively. The 2.2 is also available in a 150hp, 277 ftlb version that gets about 1l worse city but 0.2l better highway. Id STRONGLY consider the HO 2.2l.

 

[94BULLITT]

No thanks!

I got a ford pickup with a gas guzzler. 18 US mpg mixed, but mostly hwy. Im getting tired of dumping fuel in it. Last fill up was $118.00.

That ranger with the 3.2l diesel, automatic and 4x4 is getting 12l/100km city and 8.6l/100km hwy. Thats 19.6 US Mpg city and 27.4 US Mpg hwy. using the euro factory numbers.

If you step down to a smaller engine, the 2.2l (125hp edition) gets 8.3l/100 and 7.2l/100 hwy. 28 US mpg and 32.7us mpg respectively. The 2.2 is also available in a 150hp version that gets about 1l worse city but 0.2l better highway. Id STRONGLY consider the HO 2.2l.

A gas motor in a Ranger should come close to that. A Ranger back in the late 90's with a 4.0 5 speed and 4x4 would get 22 on the highway.

 

[Scooby074]

A gas motor in a Ranger should come close to that. A Ranger back in the late 90's with a 4.0 5 speed and 4x4 would get 22 on the highway.

27 hwy with the big diesel and 33 hwy with the 2.2, thats considerably better than 22 . Thats also on a current truck, that's larger and has extra weight due to being a crew cab and all the current goodies that drivers want today, like airbags. It would be even better if if it wasnt dragging around several hundred pounds of the "fluff" they stick in trucks today.

33 hwy would be darn sweet!

 

[94BULLITT]

27 hwy with the big diesel and 33 hwy with the 2.2, thats considerably better than 22 . Thats also on a current truck, that's larger and has extra weight due to being a crew cab and all the current goodies that drivers want today, like airbags. It would be even better if if it wasnt dragging around several hundred pounds of the "fluff" they stick in trucks today.

That is a 5mpg improvent with a diesel with 15 years in technology but like you said the truck is bigger. IDK if it is heavier. It probably is more aerodynamic though. The new GM 1/2 ton with a 5.3 is supposed to get 24. That makes that 27 in a smaller truck with a diesel look not that good. I think they could do better if they wanted too. I wonder if they will ever do cylinder cut out in a diesel.

 

[94BULLITT]

Check this out

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnoWfWjzFK4&feature=youtube_gdata_player

 

[scoutcub]

2011 F-350 6.7 3.55 gears 4x4


The Diesel gets up and moving a tad faster. It tops the hill at 50MPH. The gas tops at 48MPH.

Big difference in gearing also. If the diesel had the 4.30....

 

[wmonroe]

2011 F-350 6.7 3.55 gears 4x4

Video Link: http://youtu.be/phZ_rkv0Sv8

The Diesel gets up and moving a tad faster. It tops the hill at 50MPH. The gas tops at 48MPH.

Hill tests like these don't really tell me much about how a truck performs day to day. When was the last time anyone had to tow a trailer all out up a hill and then done? I want a truck that is comfortable towing and keeps me relaxed, a diesel will do that. A gas engine running near redline up almost every hill (plenty around here) will have you exhausted after a couple hours. Maybe in the Midwest where it's flat a gas hd truck is fine.

 

[jejeosborne]

Hold in guys we are getting carried away. All these ford enthusiast say there is no way possible for a diesel to pencil out since ford isn't doing it. And you know if ford says it you have to take that as gospel. Sorry this may be a mean spirited post just tired if the blind ford followers.

Does it "pencil out"? If so, it is logical. Most agree it doesn't. My thought is it doesn't "pencil out" in at least half of the HD owners either.
I am not brand loyal to anyone. Anyone who makes what is logical for me at time of purchase wins my business. I agree some people blindly follow one brand and that is illogical as all brands leap frog with good products so most of the time that person has an inferior vehicle.

 

[Peacock]

Hill tests like these don't really tell me much about how a truck performs day to day. When was the last time anyone had to tow a trailer all out up a hill and then done? I want a truck that is comfortable towing and keeps me relaxed, a diesel will do that. A gas engine running near redline up almost every hill (plenty around here) will have you exhausted after a couple hours. Maybe in the Midwest where it's flat a gas hd truck is fine.

That's it! Who wants to listen to the gasser scream it's guts out?

 

[Scooby074]

That is a 5mpg improvent with a diesel with 15 years in technology but like you said the truck is bigger. IDK if it is heavier. It probably is more aerodynamic though. The new GM 1/2 ton with a 5.3 is supposed to get 24. That makes that 27 in a smaller truck with a diesel look not that good. I think they could do better if they wanted too. I wonder if they will ever do cylinder cut out in a diesel.

11mpg improvement with the 2.2 But I agree there are likely some aerodynamic improvements helping and it's not all engine.

One thing about the mileage quotes on the Ranger is that I actually BELIEVE them! I have no doubts that the truck could get 33 on the highway, will the new GM get 24 real world? Thats sort of happening with ecoboost, mileage isnt what was expected in real world applications.

While were going back to the '90's to compare mileage to today, back in '93 I had a Jetta with the old 1.9 Turbo Diesel that would get into the 50 mpg range all day, every day! Given all the latest and greatest high tech we've thrown at it (hybrids for example) we still havent come up with something as simple that gets that kind of mileage.