I would have been all over this (like white on rice) a couple of years ago, even with the extra initial investment and no "real" justification for owning one.

I've since grown weary of paying as much as a dollar a gallon extra in needless fuel expense.

I'm not giving up my 6.0 any time soon (yeah, 400 HP is addicting!), but sometimes I wonder about my motivations...

-blaine

 

There's no problem with the technology of producing these cleaner fuels. The problem is the expense of converting refiners to do so. It's purely an economics exercise.

 

Yeah but if I'm not mistaken the next gen. 3.5 which will be in the 15 150 is rumored to make 430hp and over 500lb.-ft. torque.

 

The ecodiesel generates about 280hp and 420lb.-ft. torque.

 

If diesel still reigned as champ as cheapest fuel on the road (being $0.75 cheaper) I'd consider one in a heart beat. But since its somehow more expensive (can't be too hard to refine more sulfur out of it) than gas, not willing to throw more money to maintain it.

 

No it is rated at 240hp and 420tq. Notice how RAM uses the tq number a lot but leaves out horsepower.

Due to the low horsepower the new truck is slow. Put a decent sized trailer with some weight and wind drag then try to merge onto a highway when everyone is driving 75mph and you will wish you had the horsepower of the the 5.7l, EB, 5.0l and etc. Torque is good but you gotta have a decent amount of horsepower, especially in todays market. It is not 1987 anymore.

As for the article (OMG 8,000 in 3 days) the dealers are ordering stock. Because there will still be plenty of guys whom will throw $50k+ (plus financing costs) at a commuter truck they really don't need or have a use for (well they may go to Lowes once every 2 months for a 2X4) and be concerned about getting a few more mpg. Penny wise and pound foolish is the nice way of describing it.

 

My take is I own a Dodge 4x4 V10 truck & love it. I also own a Ford F150 4x4 302 & love it. But I agree with others diesel is just to expensive to own any diesel. Oh yea they get better mileage but not enough to add $.50-$.80/gal. of diesel in my opinion. Then you don't have Eco oil & filter changes. Added price of the diesel isn't Eco either. I have a friend with a 6.7 Cummins & he is complaining all the time about the cost of diesel & that driving it in town it doesn't get that great of mileage. Oh out on the road towing it does fine.
I won't be buying a diesel in my life time I'm pretty sure of that.

Yet the Dodge is a great truck & the diesel is a proven diesel that is from Europe. It is a joint venture of GM & Fiat. The engine is from a Detroit Diesel plant in Europe & have been used in GMs in Europe if I read correctly.

 

Yeah I meant to put "I think" in front of the 280 number. I wasn't sure about that, and really didn't feel like taking the time to look it up. Either way it's a no brainer for me. Egobooster for me! Especially if I had to choose between the 2 engines.

 

It would be be better if your numbers were right. The extra 40hp would help more than some may think.

 

When you get down into it, the 5.7L Hemi has 16 plugs all together, half of them are a pain to get to no matter if its a 2500 or 1500. I think the 6.4L Hemi even has dual plugs per cylinder. So that's added cost. Mileage wise sucks (17 or 18hwy on a good day?). Plus its a 7 quart oil pan instead of 5 or 6. Only upside to it is the ability to run E85 but you lose power.

With the indoctrination of being economy friendly, its choose your poison of what you want. Do you want the added costs of having a modern diesel (emissions BS) or a poor economy V8 gas? Even if fuel prices were $1.25 for gas and $0.95 for diesel and you have the added emissions with the diesel, still pick your poison.

That or go with an under-powered 3.6L V6.

 

Running costs or not, the thing is, diesels sell.

The take rate for diesels in the Super Duty model line is about 75%, and thats with an 8k premium on the engine, on the Ram its about a 3k premium over the V6! The things will fly off the showroom floors.

 

True but the other half of the argument here is the capability of the Ram ecodiesel truck. It's literally a grocery getter with a pickup box.

The big three with diesel options are all highly capable and well proven work horses that people are willing to plunk their hard earned $$$ down for.

I stated in another thread that NIssan is marketing the 5.0L Cummins a stump puller, Ram is marketing theirs as a fuel sipper. Where's the middle ground? Will Ford be the smarter player here and market an oil burner that will achieve respectable MPG's and yet pull like an ecoboost?

Ford has a chance to be the hero here. And in my humble and fairly uneducated opinion, I think the unsuspecting Ram ecodiesel buyers are going to be pissed when they figure out what Ram has done.

 

How long does it take to do EPA testing on diesels? Ford has the "Lion" turbo diesels out in the European countries both in twin turbo and single turbo setups. If they brought them here how long would it take them to meet EPA standards? They'll do everything an Italian diesel can do in a Dodge.

I'd pay to see someone take a wrecked Egodiesel engine and drop it into a newer F150...doesn't matter if it was in the Jeep or the Dodge same engine and tranny. If someone did this and then did a side by side test with an EcoBoost we could see what the results would be like.

 

The thing is that the manufacturers are limited to importing 25% of their products in the country. Ford is just about there. Now they can exceed that limit, but will have to pay a fine. Partly why so many foreign companies are building assembly plants here now a days. Now for the second part of your comment. First how would they compare any differently then they are already? Second who would want to do this conversion, and what's the benefit? More fuel milage? At what exspense? The egbooster gives the same torque and loads more power in it first gen mule. And the second gen will offer even more of both. As far the fuel mileage that's more of an issue with gears. I can't see a diesel that is design to be a fuel sipper offer vastly improved mileage over the egobooster when towing the same loads. And there is another point. The egobooster in max tow form is rated to tow 11,300lbs. The egodiesel in max tow is rated to tow 9,800lbs. Part of that is due to the suspension I'm sure. But part I'm sure as well is due to the loss of top end power. As mentioned before torque is great and in needed, but there comes a point when you need the h.p. as well.

 

I'd be crazy enough to do it if I had the funds. HP is torque x RPM/5252...it means nothing. Caroll Shelby put it best "Horse power sells, torque wins races." Torque tells me something, horsepower does not. That's why you don't see small gas engines rated in HP anymore...its inconsistent with others in the same class. Same with displacement as well...it varies from where its measured from. 5.7L in GM was 350 cubes, for Dodge its 345 cubes, Ford was 351 cubes.