Why would Ford put a diesel in the F150?

[mrxlh]

All I can say is if you want to see a change, and I mean real change, vote Independant, (party of your choice Green, Libretarian, ect.) Sending home Republicans in mid terms this year to replace them with Democrats did absolutly nothing. Nothing has changed since they have been in office. Pleosi is a bigger household joke now that she is speaker than when she was threatening. Yawn........The only way we will ever get elected officials to listen, is send them home if they don't do their job. It takes 2 election cycles for this to work, but it will and does work. Common people just have to do their job and go vote. Now before the merry band of FTE gestapo comes in and yells politics, which I'll admit this thread is full of them, you cannot discuss fuel, environment and farming without involving politics. (the first 2 which directly relate with what we are discussing) This is just as important, if not more important than Amsoil, which used to be taboo here on FTE as well.

[MadMedic20]

Originally Posted by mrxlh

The only problem with legislation, is that it never works. The free market has to drive it, or it winds up costing more or shifting costs to something else. The biggest thing the government could do to help is release a single standard for fuel that accomidates everyone. Not the rest of the country playing to Kalifornias standards, if they don't like the standard, simple, don't buy any fuel. Ride bicycles instead. Now for all of you mamby pambys of the kinder, gentler way, before you open your mouth, it really is just that simple. Groundwater contamination is no better than air pollution. Which is all we have to show for MTBE additives dreamed up by Kalifornia. Let the market run wild with e85 and b99, again just release a standard that it has to meet to be sold. The country would embrace this in less than a year. If the government stays out of it where it may become profitable for farmers, cheaper for consumers, and better for the environment.

I was not suggesting government legislation to control prices or anything. Legislation to open up restricted areas like ANWAR and the Pacific coast and Gulf coast. I would love to see government stay out of 90% of the things they get into. But it was government that made those areas off limits so it will have to be government to open them up.

CARB members should all be burned at the stake. MTBE was huge mess, it put hundreds of small locally owned gas stations out of business. They mandated you replace under ground storage tanks to keep the MTBE from leaking and then a few years later banned MTBE. Banning it is what they should have done in the first place instead of making private businesses go under.

[mrxlh]

No No, I agree, about the drilling and exploration part, they are effectively the only ones who can make it legal as you have stated. I am talking about mandating the use of this or that or visa versa, all it does is drive up costs. Mandating the use of a certain percent of ethanol in gasoline for a certain state. All that did was create an artificial demand for ethanol, as no one really needed it bofore the mandate. Now if it were to be cheaper than regular gasoline, well then people would flock to it, but it would keep regular gasoline in check. If you mandate that it be in all gasoline, you have no checks and balances as it is all mandated and no one has a choice. The same holds true for Bio Diesel.

Back to the regularly scheduled program......................If I gave you a choice on your next truck of XXX number of towing capacity and estimate that it gets 17MPG, for $xxxxx and then I could show you the same truck for say $2500-3000 more, which would still have the same payload capacity, but just tow said load that much better, and estimate that it gets 25MPG, and uses cheaper fuel, it really is a no brainer. B99 compliant vehicles are comming sooner than you think. Whoever receives the highest payoff first wins, with an endorsement and bragging rights, and probably alot more EPA credits and the like.

[glasseater]

Originally Posted by DOHCmarauder

I don't know either way, but are you saying the average salary/income has gone up over 350% since the 70's????


I can vouch for myself concerning the 80's.........I actually made more money than today......and fuel is 3X's as much now.

And I can honestly say fuel prices are changing my lifestyle drastically....I cannot spend $300+ for fuel for a day on the lake any longer. The Sea Doos are marginally cheaper but still come close to $200 for a day including the truck.

It's acually very close to fly 2 people to LA/Burbank from Vegas than to take the V10.

In fact, fuel prices LAST year were affecting me bad enough to trade the Marauder for a TDI.

i'm just goin with what the discovery channel said haha

[Kwikkordead]

Love your posts mrxlh. We see eye to eye on a lot of things.

I've noticed and interesting developement at work.
I've garnered quite a reputation among the Bio diesel crowd as a good tech for repairing their old Diesel Rabbits and the newet TDI's so I work on a lot of them.
Across the board from old 84 Rabbits, 86 Jetta's, to the newer 2003 TDI and even the common rail models. They are all struggling to make 32 MPG on B99.
I haven't figured out what the deal is. I've checked and verified cam and pump timing. Made sure that pump is not turned up for extra power, all that.
It seems strange that the B99 would be the problem, but it's about the only thing in common.
Maybe they are buying some crummy fuel.

[mrxlh]

Thanks Dan, as far as the bio goes, maybe off spec fuel? Firesoutmatt runs B99 in his truck and has noticed no fuel mileage loss. Possible fuel system issues? As that is a very good question.

[Kwikkordead]

I'm going to have to start a spreadsheet with those people, I think.
Some of it can be blamed on fuel leaks. The 80's diesels with the old rubber are springing leaks all over the place.
The TDI's are staying dry however.
Highjack over.

[U.P. Builder]

I was talking to my brother in law at a wedding reception last night and he mentioned an F-150 under development that is supposed to be getting 60 mpg!? Talked a little about hydraulic assist and stuff but it was loud in there and we didn't talk much more about it but could it be true. Seems almost impossible. And what is hydraulic assist. Maybe I'll do a little googling to see what I can find.

Edit: Found a few articles but nothing in stone from Ford. Here's one.
Ford F-150 to debut hydraulic hybrid system by 2008?

Posted Feb 14th 2006 11:00AM by Erin Mays
Filed under: Concept Cars, Trucks/Pickups

Autoblog reader Brent drew our attention to a web site, called New Tech Spy, that claims Ford's F-150 will soon come with the Hydraulic Launch Assist system first seen on the Mighty F-350 Tonka introduced at the 2002 North American International Auto Show. And while it was likely always Ford's hope to put the system on its F-series trucks, this is the first outside confirmation that we've been privy to.



At an alleged 60 mpg, Hybrid Launch Assist would not only reinvent the pickup truck market, it'd likely turn the industry on its ear altogether.

The HLA system is all about storing the energy that vehicles normally lose during deceleration, taking that energy, storing it hydraulically, and using it again when needed. The key to the technology is instead of storing the energy in batteries (as with most regenerative braking systems on conventional hybrids), the storage is hydraulic, which can be up to three times more efficient than nickel metal hydride storage. New Tech Spy says we should see the HLA Ford F-150 in its 2008 lineup.

[Kwikkordead]

The hydraulic assist is great for urban stop and go driving. It's the same idea as the gas/electric hybrid technology except it uses hydraulic pressure instead of a battery pack.
It won't do a bit of good on a long trip or if you have a long commute.
The Toyota Prius can barely manage 23 on the highway.
But for urban setting or a UPS delivery truck that has to stop every 100 yards, it will be good.

[diesel_dan]

Now that is just about too cool to believe!

Can I have mine (it'd be an Expy tho) with the new diesel option as well?!

On edit: I see Kwik's post and I'd also assum it'd do well in hilly areas, wouldn't you? (It's all about hills where we live...)

Assume it'd store energy on the downhills and expend it on the ups...

[troposcatter]

I have to agree about the difficulty of retrieving the cost of a diesel, If you buy a new one just to drive around and for pleasure I don't think you really recover the cost. If it's for commercial use I can't really see spending mony on a gas hog like the V10. My wife has an 01 PSD crew cab and I have an 84 F150 4x4 with a 300 and a four speed and a Isuzu Hombre four with a five speed I drive every day. we bought them all used cash only, I refuse to make payments. My wife found a really good deal on her truck a few years back we had the cash so she made the guy an offer and he called back and took it. I was driving an old 82 courier with a 2.3, don't laugh, I drove it over 500 thousand miles, two transmissions, one engine, and two heads. then I bought the 84 F150 a pig but dependable and easy to work on, ecept for the emissions and that damn feedback carb. then my wife came home one day from a cart builders place (yes horse carts) and said he had an Isuzu pickup he would sell for 800 I didn't wan't to look but she dragged me over there to see it. Turned out the only thing wrong with it was the air didn't work and he was walking with two canes, he just didn't like it it was hard for him to get in and out and to drive it with bad knees. It cost me a little over three hudred to repair the AC and it gets about 26 to the gallon. Right now even if I drove my old pig of an F150 every day at 14 miles to the gallon, payments on a new deisel would cost me more than fuel would now, plus my insurance would cost me more. I've kept my eyes open for a Pup diesel or something similar but they are hard to come buy right now. I like my wife's PSD it is huge ,we don't drive it often but I've got a cover for the back seat for the dogs and other pets and I'm trying to talk her into a shell for the bed and it gets about 17 to the gallon the way I drive.

[MadMedic20]

Originally Posted by Kwikkordead

The hydraulic assist is great for urban stop and go driving. It's the same idea as the gas/electric hybrid technology except it uses hydraulic pressure instead of a battery pack.
It won't do a bit of good on a long trip or if you have a long commute.
The Toyota Prius can barely manage 23 on the highway.
But for urban setting or a UPS delivery truck that has to stop every 100 yards, it will be good.

It would be worth it on any vehicle. If you have a vehicle with computer display for mpg, trying reseting it while on the freeway cruising at 65 or so. My V10 shows me getting around 22mpg. As soon as you get off the highway and have to start doing stop and go driving it very quickly drops. So if HLA could help keep my numbers up I'd be happy with it/

[David85]

The nice thing about concept vehicles is that you never have to actually prove your claims unless you put them into production for the general public. Eliminating braking losses will have no effect on the highway fuel economy of the truck.

The only vehicles that gets close to 60 mpg are new the VW TDIs (on a good day). If it has a gasoline piston engine, than there is no way it will get anything close to 60mpg in a 4-5K lb truck.

It seems to me that ford is doing some damage control since fuel economy is actually going down slightly across the board in its full size trucks. By claiming that they have the ability to make trucks with out of this world fuel efficiency, they are hoping to deflect some criticism.

GM is doing the same right now with the chevy volt concept, a car which falls short of 15 year old electric and hybrid vehicle technology.

The most practical way to get good fuel economy is to build an electric drivetrain, and use an engine to maintain the battery at a preset state of charge. This system lends itself to running on battery power alone, and with batteries getting better every day, the pure electric range can be several hundred miles or more. But since ford and others make their money selling v8 engines and automatic transmissions, this is not going to happen anytime soon.

And don't believe what the mpg meter tells you, ford has been making their fuel gauges innacurate for over ten years now. They are purposely designed to stay in the first quarter of the gauge longer than the last, giving the impression that you are burning less fuel (it was a measure intended to cut down in initial complaints of poor fuel economy).

[MadMedic20]

Originally Posted by David85

Eliminating braking losses will have no effect on the highway fuel economy of the truck.

It will help boost your overall mpg. The around town mileage brings my average down a ton. I have been able to squeeze 17mpg out of my V10 Excursion, HLA could get me into the 20s, not that I would spend thousands to update my Excursion with this, just an example.

Originally Posted by David85

The only vehicles that gets close to 60 mpg are new the VW TDIs (on a good day). If it has a gasoline piston engine, than there is no way it will get anything close to 60mpg in a 4-5K lb truck.

I agree that even a small diesel powered HLA assisted F150 will never get 60mpg. But getting into the mid 20s would be fine compared to where we are now.

Originally Posted by David85

And don't believe what the mpg meter tells you, ford has been making their fuel gauges innacurate for over ten years now. They are purposely designed to stay in the first quarter of the gauge longer than the last, giving the impression that you are burning less fuel (it was a measure intended to cut down in initial complaints of poor fuel economy).

I have noticed about the gas gauge staying in the first quarter longer and then dropping like a rock. But I trust my overhead display. I have double checked it by hand many times and It has proven to be accurate within 0.2mpg.

[U.P. Builder]

Originally Posted by David85

And don't believe what the mpg meter tells you, ford has been making their fuel gauges innacurate for over ten years now. They are purposely designed to stay in the first quarter of the gauge longer than the last, giving the impression that you are burning less fuel (it was a measure intended to cut down in initial complaints of poor fuel economy).

I've really been checking the accuracy of the so called Lie-O-meter lately and I've found it to be pretty accurate. I've been comparing it's readings with both a Scanguage and hand calculated and they've all been within a tenth on the last tank. It's interesting watching the instantaneous readings on the Scanguage. Watching it drop to 3 mpg on take off from dead stops even drively gently but hitting high 20's when cruising on level ground at even speeds.

As for the fuel level guage staying in the first quarter longer than the last, I think they all do that. Every car I've ever owned takes awhile to start to drop off full, but the last quarter doesn't seem to last long at all. Sometimes it's the shape of the tank, but mainly I think that the sending unit float stays at the top of the tank until the fuel drops to a certain level giving the impression that the first quarter lasts longer.