Don't think I would buy this option over the EcoBoost, but more options is a good thing.
Anything with 400 ft-lbs is going to be great.

 

I can see certain uses for a diesel. but for what I do, no diesels for me.

 

I'm not a naysayer for sure, i was and early ecoboost owner and still lovin' it 57K miles later.

The ecoboost can work and idle all day with no issues. Police departments are starting to migrate into this engine and no one idles more than they do.

Modern diesels seem to not take a liking to extended idling like the old ones. I think choices are great and I think it's about time Ford jumped on this bus.

 

The 3.2 in the Transit is a invoice $5094 ($5645 MSRP), EB is $1683 invoice ($1865 MSRP)

Don't get me wrong, its a good motor and it pulls pretty well. I like that it's inline (talk about preferences, I get a bit excited over cylinders in a row, goes back to my Rambler love). But unless you run a fleet of diesel, the 2.7EB is pretty equivalent. I do like options though.

I'll step out of my sales guys shoes for a moment and say that the guys who get excited over diesel just because often are the compensating crowd. We have this short little fellow who sells cars and has a lifted Toyota. Short spiked hair. Two Great Danes (one actually named Diesel).... That sort. I was fine letting Nissan and Ram have those sales.

 

I expect Ford to use the Transit diesel not the 4.4L out of the Land Rover. If Ford wants to get the fuel economy figures that the ecodiesel does then they will use the smaller engine.
Having said that I would prefer a larger diesel with specs better than the 3.5 ecoboost but as Frantz says by the time you pay for the diesel option, added maintenance, DEF and higher diesel fuel prices you will not come out ahead. With these new diesels and their regen system they are also not conducive to short trips and start/stop driving.
Ford can very easily bump up the power on the 3.5 ecoboost if they feel that the Cummins is a threat and with the torque curve of the ecoboost you don't need a diesel.

 

If the F-150 will come with a diesel it´s likely to be the 3-liter V6 named Lion present found in Land Rover Sport.

This Ford F-150 might have a Land Rover turbodiesel V6

May have a better mileage than RAM 1500. More torgue than the 3,5 liter EcoBoost. A winner

 

Sounds like Mike Levine is doing damage control at the moment.

 

Lightweight F150 ?!?!! Bwahahahahahahah Seriously!

 

That's been Ford doctrine for years. Never comment on future products while attempting to reinforce how great their current products are.

I don't get it, can you clarify?

We'll see, but I suspect highway fuel economy has more to do with wind tunnel performance and powertrain efficiency than weight.

 

Throw that thing behind the 10-speed transmission, slap start-stop on it to help around town, and work on the aerodynamics for the highway, and you have a very frugal setup.

I do agree with superrangerman2002 that the F150 isn't lightweight. Sure, the new generation is lightER, it's still a heavy beast by any historical standard. I understand some of the reasons for this, but to call it lightweight is a stretch.

 

My '15 SuperCrew is 200 lbs lighter than a '14 Regular cab shortbed Tremor edition.

 

Whatever Ford has to do to meet standards in 9 years of 54.4mpg combined this is a start. But last year they announced a hybrid F150 by the end of the decade as well. We were promised a diesel F150 8 years ago with that twin turbo 4.4L Lion diesel but that fell through once the economy tanked and EPA standards changed. I do want to know a few things, how much different will this engine be compared to the Euro version? If I recall Euro standards seem to be lighter than EPA standards which also can cause reliability issues. Fuel economy from what I could find of this diesel in a Land Rover is about 30mpg highway...not sure what how many speed transmission but I think the F150 in this current generation is a bit heavier than the Land Rover so....it doesn't seem promising even with a 10 speed auto. I remember over estimating the 2.7L EcoBoost fuel economy and found out its no better than the 3.5FFV.

It does make sense that Ford is finally bringing a diesel to the F150 considering that Nissan Titan XD, Ram 1500 EcoDiesel, Chevy/GMC Colorado twins and soon a Toyota Tundra diesel will also becoming with I think the same 5.0 Cummins (don't quote me that was the only thing I heard). But with Ford having EcoBoost as their flagship what will this do to sales of it? I almost think the diesel is too late for Ford since Ecoboost sales are still up.

I just hope this engine won't turn into the 6.0L fiasco...yeah I know it was a Navistar engine...but Ford did not have techs up to speed on trouble shooting it and they pushed more power than what Navistar had designed for it.

I may look at a diesel F150 if it was proven reliable state side and that 10 speed doesn't have issues. I have a feeling XL model is going to start at $35K which is comparable with everyone else now.

 

The Land Rover Sport in US uses the same engine. Curb Weight 4709 lbs
The F-150 Super crew 4*2 145 with a EcoBoost 3,5 l Curb Weiight 4521 lbs

In the US Land Rover Sport is the 3 l V6 diesel consuming 22 mpg cityand 29 mpg highway
I think the F-150 will be 30 mpg.....

What about diesel clatter? There's none. At least not from within the cabin. Significant sound-deadening was added to the firewall, there's double-insulated glass in the windscreen, and the engine itself is cast in an ultrastiff graphite-iron block. The latter helps prevent unsettling idle vibration.
The new Td6 powerplant is a 3.0-liter turbocharged diesel V6 that generates 254 horsepower and 440 pound-feet of torque, the latter of which peaks at a stump-pulling 1750 rpm. It also provides a whopping 32 percent improvement in fuel economy over a the gas-powered V6 model, yielding 22 mpg in the city and 28 out on the highway for a total of 25 mpg combined, and a range of 658 miles of range on a single tank of fuel. Land Rover expects an average annual savings of about $450, meaning it would take about three years to begin seeing savings over the gasoline model, as the Td6 commands a $1,500 premium over the standard supercharged V6.

Read more: http://www.leftlanenews.com/first-dr...#ixzz3urpzTIhr

A new star is born.

 

After reading this Diesel Range Rover - First Drive it seems like at least in the Rover the diesel engine is lighter than some of the gasser options. Wonder how true this will be for the gas options in the F150? If I also recall when Ram put out the EcoDiesel, the highway estimate that was given was 1-3mpg than real world...about 30-32mpg. So it might get better mileage but who really knows yet. This engine from the looks is fairly new at least in the US market cause I cannot find much of any information on it.

 

I just jumped back from the Ram Trucks site. In a Ram 1500 with the 3.0L 4x4 Crewcab with 157" wheelbase and 3.92 axles, the max towing is 8750 pounds. A 4x2 with the same cab config peaks at 9000 pounds.

Since 87% of all F-150's sold are Screws, how much capability will be sacrificed as compared to owning a 3.5L Ecoboost?

The Ram truck more than meets the needs of the average half ton buyer, but, soooo many guys look at their trucks as an extension of their manhood. Is less capability going to fit into that caveman mentality?

I want Ford to offer so they can fully compete and I want to see the engine in the new gen Ranger as well.