GM had 1/2 ton diesels from around 1978 till at least into the 90s. It was in an era with diesel fuel cheaper than gas, no DPFs and no urea tanks. I don't seem to remember Ford sales suffering too much as a result then.

 

Y did they stop? Diesel fuel was the cheapest fuel up until the fall of 05(ironically when I took position of my current money pit of a truck(I mean that in a good way as I to love this truck)).

 

One factor may have been increasing difficulty meeting the 1/2 ton emission standards with the fuels available in that time period.

 

Chevys diesel back then was a diesel that Nobody really wanted. Probably a good reason to discontinue it. no power, unresponsive, loud clatter and not real reliable.

The new "Mini-Max should prove to be a very sought after engine. I for one will buy the first Suburban/Expedition i see with an oil burner under the hood.

I am not brand loyal. I believe that all three of the "Big Three" make a good truck. Each of them have bragging points and each has something not so great. Chevy has the Allison, Ford has the truck its self and Dodge has the Cummins.

I need to replace the Excursion that I wrecked and I really don't need anything that heavy duty. Just want an SUV that will get fair MPG while towing the toys. For me, that spells diesel.

 

Dang I oughta scrap my engine and trans and just put a cummins engine strapped to an allison trans and I would have the most bad a$$ truck around!!!

 

I've been a Ford man for a long time now. It's not that I am a dedicated fan of Fords either. Ford has to EARN my business and up until now they have done just that.

I have an '84 F250 4x4 with the NP435 trans, NP208 xfer case, and 300 CID 6-cylinder engine. My plan was to buy a 2010 F150 diesel truck and sell the F250 to anyone who wants a tough old truck for hunting, fishing, or just plain off-road thrashin' and bashin'. If Ford cancels or delays the diesel F150, I will have to buy something else in 2010. I don't like the idea of buying a foreign made truck but will do so if they offer a product that works for me.

Like I said above... Ford has to EARN my business. I'm not going to hand it to them on a plate just because they are my preferred auto builder.

Ed

 

Now that would be a truck I would buy

 

You're not the first that have mentioned that I think.

I've seen several Ford/Cummings Frankenstein'es in magazines, I don't remember what tranny any of them were running, except that I think one was running a manual tranny....

just a thought;
bdraft

 

That would be an awesome truck that would own the entire truck market. Why not get together so they can get out of debt?

 

Short answer:
In a nutshell....too much bitchin' not enough buildin'.

Long Answer:
Because they would spend too much time fighting on the name of the rig or selling it badged in their own name, the companies couldn't agree on what we know so each would expect to build the whole truck and sell it to the other companies, the committees that would go along with it would be a killer....

Then again, there are other good diesel engine companies out there. CAT supposedly makes several decent engines that would fit into various trucks (and cars), just like Cummings does.

Then again, some of the larger trucks have 'manu-matics' (auto-shifting manuals) and clutchless manuals that might serve better than an automatic. (That is one thing I hate about Ford, they car cutting back on the vehicle and engine combination that are available with manuals....seems to me if Ford could go with a 100% automatic fleet they'd be happier.)

thank you for your time;
bdraft

 

Yeah, they probably would... right up to the point where their customers would leave them in droves. Slush box? BAH!

Ed

 

The early Chevy diesels were rebuilt gas engines and they stunk for reliability. My brother in law had one working the oil fields that constantly was having fuel delivery problems.
Its a wonder that the next generation of diesels didn't get waylayed by those first pieces of stuff.

I don't blame any of the manufacturers for not bringing the half tons to market at this time. If you've noticed the price of diesel which was about 15 percent higher than gas about a year ago is now 60 percent higher. They would have to make a diesel that gets in excess of 30 mpg to be an advantage over a gasser. With the higher cost of a diesel they would be a hard sell and something they don't need right now.

 

I agree with you on the higher cost of diesel, but a Dodge Ram 2500 with a Cummings 12 valve has pulled off 30.1 mpg when a magazine tried some cheap tricks to get better mileage. (None of it was computer work, the 12v didn't have computers for the most part.)

Now with that in mind; a lighter weight half-ton truck with user selectable power/tow/economy switch and programing in the computer to adjust....why wouldn't it be possible to get outstanding mileage?? You could even have the computer select 'economy mode' when certain conditions are met....why couldn't a truck get 30, maybe 35mpg even if the driver had the A/C on full blast?? That is coming close to double the best that the current crop of gassers can manage.


later;
bdraft

 

They were pieces of crap, however, all manufactors did that at one time or another. But due to Chevies worse luck then the others, I would neve get a duramax.

Maybe, but that all depends. Certainly if it's just a daily driver, then what you say might have a lot of weight. However, if they use it for other things then just a daily driver, then you have to factors those in, not just mpgs. All this is dependant on the specs of the truck though as well.

 

Can you spell I-R-A-Q?

At the peak of the war effort and recovery efforts, the US military and construction contractors were consuming 1,000,000 gallons of diesel per DAY. Couple that with the fact that the refineries in this country are oriented towards higher efficiencies in gasoline production, and not diesel production, and the net result is a big drain on the supply chain for diesel fuel and correspondingly higher prices.

If the promised petro expansions along the gulf coast result in processes oriented more towards diesel production, the gasoline:diesel production ratios may become more balanced and we could see a closer alignment of prices between the two again. But the consumption overseas from military action would need to be curtailed for the real price cut that we all want.

To go along with that, though, the automakers are going to have to be directing this shift in petroleum refining efficiency. Until the production and operation of more diesel engines takes place over here (like it is in Europe), the gasoline engine will drive refinery operations in that direction and leave those of us wanting diesel having to pay higher prices.

Don't get me wrong here, I do not want to, and am not trying to fuel a discussion on military action overseas! NADA! Just talking about the effects of supply & demand.