New Ford F150

[srs]

I wondered that too. I doubt it as to do any kind of touch up you have to strip and re-anodize. More than likely it will be alodined, epoxy primed and painted.

Trust me, aluminum can corrode but under similar conditions steel corrodes a whole lot faster.

This question is for all: Will this new Ford be a good/better choice for people who live in states that use a lot of salt to clear the roads in winter? Just wondering. Stanley

 

[s219]

Many other auto manufacturers have used aluminum for years with no ill effects (aluminum hood and roof panels have been especially common). Ford is not really breaking new ground on the F-150 in this case. I wouldn't expect any issues with corrosion, repairability, etc.

 

[crazyal]

Many other auto manufacturers have used aluminum for years with no ill effects (aluminum hood and roof panels have been especially common). Ford is not really breaking new ground on the F-150 in this case. I wouldn't expect any issues with corrosion, repairability, etc.

In most of the country probably not but near the sea and up in the rust belt states I'm not so sure. I have no clue about the modern ones but I did have an older Range Rover and salt used on the roads in the winter was real bad. After 3 years in the salt you could see the panels eating away (I suspect it'll be better now).

The problem was dissimilar metals. How does Ford attach the fenders? Do they use aluminum bolts? Aluminum is a poor choice for a bolt as it's very weak. Do they use steel and have steel to aluminum contact that will corrode very quickly? Do they use some sort of plastic isolation washer? Do they use glue or rivets that will require more work if the panels need to be replaced?

Also how much will this cost? Aluminum is not cheap. I see some places are saying that the MSRP will start around $30k. The base price (just a quick search) shows that the 2014 F150 starts at $24,500. That's a pretty big step if true.

 

[jejeosborne]

I noticed the new 2.7 liter ecoboost will be flex fuel. Interested in seeing the HP and torque curves with both fuels.

 

[fordmantpw]

In most of the country probably not but near the sea and up in the rust belt states I'm not so sure. I have no clue about the modern ones but I did have an older Range Rover and salt used on the roads in the winter was real bad. After 3 years in the salt you could see the panels eating away (I suspect it'll be better now).

The problem was dissimilar metals. How does Ford attach the fenders? Do they use aluminum bolts? Aluminum is a poor choice for a bolt as it's very weak. Do they use steel and have steel to aluminum contact that will corrode very quickly? Do they use some sort of plastic isolation washer? Do they use glue or rivets that will require more work if the panels need to be replaced?

Also how much will this cost? Aluminum is not cheap. I see some places are saying that the MSRP will start around $30k. The base price (just a quick search) shows that the 2014 F150 starts at $24,500. That's a pretty big step if true.

Ford has offered an Aluminum hood on the F150 since '99 I think. Those are sold everywhere, and there are tons of 'em. I'm pretty sure Ford has this figured out, otherwise they wouldn't be betting the farm on a change like this with their bread and butter vehicle.

I would expect a price increase of $500-$1000, no more than that. Pretty much in line with what everyone does with the next new model comes out. It wouldn't surprise me to see Ford keep the MSRP exactly the same, then mid-way through the year, raise the price $500, then the '16 gets another $500 price bump. It's really pretty standard, and look for Ford to do the same. They can't get away with rising prices $5000. The numbers I have found show about a $1000 price increase for Ford to produce the truck in Aluminum. They won't pass all that on to the customer at once.

 

[HHR]

My '07 Ford Freestyle has an aluminum hood with a steel inner layer. It corrodes where the two metals meet and the paint flakes off in big strips. Ford has been using an aluminum lift gate on their Expedition since '03 and every single one I have seen lately has had major corrosion/paint failure. If ford had a reputation for corrosion resistance and paint quality, I may have more confidence (I think Audi has it down with their aluminum A8) but I wouldn't touch a first year "pop can hybrid" F150 with a ten foot pole.

 

[ecamD]

I don't see the hype in this new truck.

Same old leaf spring suspension, same ok but not great 6-speed auto, minor changes in Ecoboost so probably no change in fuel mileage, dropped the Raptor, dropped the big-block V8, etc...

Before anyone jumps on the "they dropped 700 lbs so the EB will now get 30mpg" bandwagon. Think again!

I've driven plenty of miles with my truck empty and with my family adding over 500lbs and it didnt change the fuel mileage at all. It takes a 2000lb pallet of wood pellets in the bed to make a noticeble difference.

 

[D7E]

In most of the country probably not but near the sea and up in the rust belt states I'm not so sure. I have no clue about the modern ones but I did have an older Range Rover and salt used on the roads in the winter was real bad. After 3 years in the salt you could see the panels eating away (I suspect it'll be better now).

I have spent most of my life with land rover defenders and they just lasted for ever , My japanese trucks were far worse to rot .

 

[EddieWalker]

I disagree. I notice a significant decline in mileage with an extra 500 pounds in it. If you ever watch the BBC, there is a show called Top Gear, where they showed clearly that by adding weight to the trunks of three different sedans, the loss of how far they could drive on a tank of fuel. It is also well documented that since fuel requirements become something the government required, all the manufacturers have gone to great lengths to make their vehicles lighter. This is the easiest, cheapest and fastest way to increase mileage. As a result, fatalities have increased. The lighter they make them, the less protection we have, and the number of people dying increases.

Eddie

 

[fordmantpw]

I disagree. I notice a significant decline in mileage with an extra 500 pounds in it. If you ever watch the BBC, there is a show called Top Gear, where they showed clearly that by adding weight to the trunks of three different sedans, the loss of how far they could drive on a tank of fuel. It is also well documented that since fuel requirements become something the government required, all the manufacturers have gone to great lengths to make their vehicles lighter. This is the easiest, cheapest and fastest way to increase mileage. As a result, fatalities have increased. The lighter they make them, the less protection we have, and the number of people dying increases.

Eddie

That's not completely true, Eddie. A lighter vehicle can be just as safe (even safer) than a heavier vehicle. How heavy are cars today compared to the big boats of 40 years ago. Have you seen the Impala vs. Impala crash video? It shows the difference of an old Impala ('69 maybe?) to a newer 2000's model. There is no comparison at all, and I know which vehicle I would rather be in.

Sure, compare a 2k lb car and a 5k lb truck hitting a semi, and there will be a huge difference. Crash each of those vehicles into a brick wall, and the lighter one can be just as safe as the heavier one. Keep in mind, a heavier vehicle has more mass and much more inertia, so there has to be more crumpling of the heavier vehicle to distribute the forces of the crash.

Here are a couple links to the crash video I mentioned (and sorry, it was 2009 Malibu vs 1959 Bel Air):

Crash test Chevrolet 1959 vs Chevrolet 2009 - YouTube
Crash test 1959 Chevy Bel Air collision with Chevy Malibu Car Crashes - YouTube