2014 Super Duty
Hotshot
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 11,591
Likes: 14
From: Pflugerville, tx
Ford needs to be the first to introduce adjustable suspension. Similar to air bags but better yet. Able to please the people wanting a cadi ride and the people that want to haul their house in the bed.
IFS vs strait axle, eh. Strait axle is 1909 technology. IFS CAN be perfect if engineers took the time to make it right. I get pissed off when I think about these guys getting paid all kinds of cash to design stuff for companies like ford but then come out with some stupid crap that even the stupidest idiot on the street can tell you won't work out.
IFS vs strait axle, eh. Strait axle is 1909 technology. IFS CAN be perfect if engineers took the time to make it right. I get pissed off when I think about these guys getting paid all kinds of cash to design stuff for companies like ford but then come out with some stupid crap that even the stupidest idiot on the street can tell you won't work out.
I have the same set of conversations at my company.. lots of folks yelling at the product architects, and the development engineers.. 'do this, do that", and at the same time saying 'DO ONLY what the customers tell us'.. make up your mind..
either we are customer driven, or rogue..
sam
Senior User
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 411
Likes: 5
From: Cle Elum WA
If you want IFS, buy a car or a Chevy, and by the the way, Chevys IFS and aluminun center section is garbage, truly a joke in a "Heavy Duty" truck.
Thats why the Chevies are lighter because they are garbage.
Back when the F250 diesel 4x4s were twin I beam or whatever they called it, the guys were crying that they had to buy a F350 to get a solid front axle.
Solid front axle in the 250 is way cool.
I think Ford is right on track building real trucks.
Greg
Thats why the Chevies are lighter because they are garbage.
Back when the F250 diesel 4x4s were twin I beam or whatever they called it, the guys were crying that they had to buy a F350 to get a solid front axle.
Solid front axle in the 250 is way cool.
I think Ford is right on track building real trucks.
Greg
New User
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
What about engines that are dependable
I have a 6.0 diesel and its been in the dealer 3 times for injector and EGR work during waranty. Now what happens when its out of waranty. It would break me to keep these constant trips to the dealer when I have to pay for it.
Are the new super duty Fords any better on long lasting engine service with no abuse of the driving and pulling power?
Are the new super duty Fords any better on long lasting engine service with no abuse of the driving and pulling power?
Senior User
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 411
Likes: 5
From: Cle Elum WA
I have a 6.0 diesel and its been in the dealer 3 times for injector and EGR work during waranty. Now what happens when its out of waranty. It would break me to keep these constant trips to the dealer when I have to pay for it.
Are the new super duty Fords any better on long lasting engine service with no abuse of the driving and pulling power?
Are the new super duty Fords any better on long lasting engine service with no abuse of the driving and pulling power?
. I would cut my losses and dump the 6 liter ASAP unless you have deep pockets.
One would think after all the six liter problems, that this new 6.7 liter motor by Ford, should be much better, time will tell.
Greg
Cargo Master
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 2,624
Likes: 7
From: OR and UT
The SuperDuty is built the way it is in order to meet a plethora of work duties. I have no problem driving a truck that rides like a truck and if I wanted a nice riding, gas sipping (relatively speaking), pretty "truck", I'd buy an F150.
Thanks, but no thanks. I'll stick with my SuperDuty.
Thanks, but no thanks. I'll stick with my SuperDuty.
Posting Guru
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,719
Likes: 1
From: PA
I like my c-channel frame. I like my solid axle dana 60. I like my leaf spring front suspension. They already changed to coils, which I can live with, but change to IFS on the f250 and i'm definitely buying a Dodge next time. I'm alrady on that borderline becasue I can still get a real manual trans in the Dodge.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 23,174
Likes: 1,678
From: Stephensville WI
Lighter frames?
IFS?
The only changes I would like to see is;
1 Steering box eliminated. Go to a rack & pinion system.
2. Better power steering pump.
3. Heavier ball joints.
4. Redesigned ESOF, eliminate troublesome vacuum system.
IFS?
The only changes I would like to see is;
1 Steering box eliminated. Go to a rack & pinion system.
2. Better power steering pump.
3. Heavier ball joints.
4. Redesigned ESOF, eliminate troublesome vacuum system.
New User
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
The number one reason I went with my superduty, is because it has a frame like a semi truck, not a boxed frame like a toyota. Number two reason is because it has real axles, not independent. Number three is because it has a v10. Icould never afford a new pickup, so I don't really care what they come out with new. But, if I were ever able to buy a new one, the style of frame must not be boxed because where I live,rust is a huge problem. UNLESS the box frame is made of stainless steel.
When is the next generation Super Duty due out? The 2011 still has a lot in common with the original 1999, and I think it is about time we saw a new-from-the-ground-up Super Duty. The new engines have made a big difference, but it is time the rest of the truck was completely updated. There are some things I think need improvement.
First off, the powertrains are fine. They are new, and I think all that is needed are some software tweaks for the Torq-Shift and maybe a larger displacement 6.2L to put the V-10 to rest in the 450 and 550.
Chassis- This is an area that needs to be looked at. The current chassis is too heavy. I think Ford needs to consider a boxed design made out of higher grade steel, at least 45,000 psi.. Special attention would need to be paid to corrosion protection (go back to that wax coating), and it would probably make sense to keep the chassis-cab models a C-channel behind the cab. One problem with the current Super Duty is the unladen weight is so high the trucks have less payload than GM and Dodge though they have similar GVW's.. A lot of the excess weight is in the chassis.
Front suspension- Twin-I-Beam on the 4X2's needs to go! It doesn't handle as well as GM and Dodge and it still wears out tires fast. And, I think IFS should be considered for the 4X4's. A well designed IFS has a lot of advantages over a SFA. Handling, ride, ground clearance, overall height of the truck can all be improved. Don't think of the pre-2011 GM front ends, they were not strong enough. It can be done, and result in a better truck.
Body- I think Ford needs to rethink the unitized front cab structure. Welding the inner fender supports and lower core support to the cab firewall not only makes for extensive repairs in moderate collisions, but it makes servicing difficult. This is one of the reasons the cab must be removed for many engine repairs. Resistance to corrosion needs to be improved as well, particularly the bed.
What do you think?
First off, the powertrains are fine. They are new, and I think all that is needed are some software tweaks for the Torq-Shift and maybe a larger displacement 6.2L to put the V-10 to rest in the 450 and 550.
Chassis- This is an area that needs to be looked at. The current chassis is too heavy. I think Ford needs to consider a boxed design made out of higher grade steel, at least 45,000 psi.. Special attention would need to be paid to corrosion protection (go back to that wax coating), and it would probably make sense to keep the chassis-cab models a C-channel behind the cab. One problem with the current Super Duty is the unladen weight is so high the trucks have less payload than GM and Dodge though they have similar GVW's.. A lot of the excess weight is in the chassis.
Front suspension- Twin-I-Beam on the 4X2's needs to go! It doesn't handle as well as GM and Dodge and it still wears out tires fast. And, I think IFS should be considered for the 4X4's. A well designed IFS has a lot of advantages over a SFA. Handling, ride, ground clearance, overall height of the truck can all be improved. Don't think of the pre-2011 GM front ends, they were not strong enough. It can be done, and result in a better truck.
Body- I think Ford needs to rethink the unitized front cab structure. Welding the inner fender supports and lower core support to the cab firewall not only makes for extensive repairs in moderate collisions, but it makes servicing difficult. This is one of the reasons the cab must be removed for many engine repairs. Resistance to corrosion needs to be improved as well, particularly the bed.
What do you think?
Thread Starter
|
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,516
Likes: 198
I would like to see a boxed rail chassis on the pickups because from an engineering standpoint a box is better than twice as strong as a C-channel, all things being equal. The frame could be made stronger than the current chassis with less weight, giving a higher payload and towing capacity, not to mention a bit better fuel economy. Also consider tow ratings- look what the new GM's can do WITHOUT an equalizer hitch. Ford makes a big deal about their tow ratings being slightly higher, but Ford requires an eqiualizer hitch on trailers over 8,000 lbs.. GM HD's can tow max. trailer weight (17,000 lbs. on some models) right on the ball. Some of you brought up corrosion protection, which is certainly more of an issue with boxed frame rails than C-channels.
I remember reading (sorry, don't remember where) that Ford was considering a flip type front hood/fender unit on the next Super Duty, like a larger truck. Great idea!
I remember reading (sorry, don't remember where) that Ford was considering a flip type front hood/fender unit on the next Super Duty, like a larger truck. Great idea!
Cargo Master
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,098
Likes: 136
I would like to see a boxed rail chassis on the pickups because from an engineering standpoint a box is better than twice as strong as a C-channel, all things being equal. The frame could be made stronger than the current chassis with less weight, giving a higher payload and towing capacity, not to mention a bit better fuel economy. Also consider tow ratings- look what the new GM's can do WITHOUT an equalizer hitch. Ford makes a big deal about their tow ratings being slightly higher, but Ford requires an eqiualizer hitch on trailers over 8,000 lbs.. GM HD's can tow max. trailer weight (17,000 lbs. on some models) right on the ball. Some of you brought up corrosion protection, which is certainly more of an issue with boxed frame rails than C-channels.
I remember reading (sorry, don't remember where) that Ford was considering a flip type front hood/fender unit on the next Super Duty, like a larger truck. Great idea!
I remember reading (sorry, don't remember where) that Ford was considering a flip type front hood/fender unit on the next Super Duty, like a larger truck. Great idea!
I read that same thing in a truck magazine and was shocked. I'm sure Ford will catch up because that could be a great selling point for GM. I mean my 250 "needs" an equalizer above 6k, as stated by Ford. But for longevity I dont want a boxed frame on the salty roads here in winter, unless made of stainless steel like someone else stated.
If it's true... i like the idea of a flip hood/fender unit, if it could be done right and last.
Posting Guru
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,118
Likes: 1
i like the idea of having an ifs 250 and solid axle 350. in reality right now the 250 and 350 are pretty much the same truck and it would be a good way to make some distinction and more importantly give more options to us customers so everyone can get exactly what they're looking for in their truck
i would be talking about using a quality ifs setup -im not a fan of torsion bars- but something that is durable, reliable, easy to adjust, and is without question heavy duty capable
i would be talking about using a quality ifs setup -im not a fan of torsion bars- but something that is durable, reliable, easy to adjust, and is without question heavy duty capable
Thread Starter
|
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,516
Likes: 198
i like the idea of having an ifs 250 and solid axle 350. in reality right now the 250 and 350 are pretty much the same truck and it would be a good way to make some distinction and more importantly give more options to us customers so everyone can get exactly what they're looking for in their truck
i would be talking about using a quality ifs setup -im not a fan of torsion bars- but something that is durable, reliable, easy to adjust, and is without question heavy duty capable
i would be talking about using a quality ifs setup -im not a fan of torsion bars- but something that is durable, reliable, easy to adjust, and is without question heavy duty capable
Torsion bars are durable, reliable, and easy to adjust. The problem is they don't have a lot of travel. They use torsion bars on tanks, they can be engineered to give whatever capacity is required.
Post Fiend
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 6,949
Likes: 1
From: utica il
If you want to make any distinction between 250 and 350 do it like this; bump the ratings of the 250 to the max of a srw 350 and make all 350's dually's <--makes sense to me.
boxed frames? no. plain and simple, no. half the country or better has to deal with road salt issues and the people who actually use their trucks for work will end up with crap in those tubes that will eventually cause some issues down the line. these are expensive work trucks, not throw away commuter cars. and as stated, a lot of these trucks end up at upfitters and get different options of beds/boxes and other upgrades added that would be hindered by a box type frame.
ifs???? are you kidding me? no. if anything they need to beef the solid axles by either figuring a way to make balljoints stronger or going back to kingpins. and for the little baby jesus's sake, get rid of the unit bearings. i realize this is the lame new america where repacking bearings means you might have to get some grease on your hands, but seriously a couple hundred bucks or better for some bearings? and that is per side. bearings, races and grease are cheap. unit bearings are quick, easy, and expensive, did i mention weak?
super duties ride rough???? really? jeez, you sally's must've put your panties on backwards or something, because compared to so called real trucks (97 and older f350 4x4's) these trucks do ride like caddy's. here's a hint jacko, tow or haul something in the bed, you know, like a truck is supposed to do. it will ride great.
These are just some of the reasons I wish the diesel craze never would have happened. All of the "insert favorite phrase for rich sissy's with more money than common sense honest brains" bought 3/4 and 1 ton trucks because it was the in thing to do, and since they seem to have money to burn they heavily influence the market with the mass amounts of them out there. the king ranch is a g/d abomination to pickups the world over. if you need that much comfort in a heavy duty pickup, maybe you should just retire from work, because if you own one and use it like an actual truck, i can only guess you are an oil tycoon from texas.
I personally hate these "yuppy" trucks nowadays and doubt I'll ever purposely own one. I'd rather sink money into old iron.
EDIT: travel is the reason ifs and torsion bars are worthless for offroad work/play, not capacity.
boxed frames? no. plain and simple, no. half the country or better has to deal with road salt issues and the people who actually use their trucks for work will end up with crap in those tubes that will eventually cause some issues down the line. these are expensive work trucks, not throw away commuter cars. and as stated, a lot of these trucks end up at upfitters and get different options of beds/boxes and other upgrades added that would be hindered by a box type frame.
ifs???? are you kidding me? no. if anything they need to beef the solid axles by either figuring a way to make balljoints stronger or going back to kingpins. and for the little baby jesus's sake, get rid of the unit bearings. i realize this is the lame new america where repacking bearings means you might have to get some grease on your hands, but seriously a couple hundred bucks or better for some bearings? and that is per side. bearings, races and grease are cheap. unit bearings are quick, easy, and expensive, did i mention weak?
super duties ride rough???? really? jeez, you sally's must've put your panties on backwards or something, because compared to so called real trucks (97 and older f350 4x4's) these trucks do ride like caddy's. here's a hint jacko, tow or haul something in the bed, you know, like a truck is supposed to do. it will ride great.
These are just some of the reasons I wish the diesel craze never would have happened. All of the "insert favorite phrase for rich sissy's with more money than common sense honest brains" bought 3/4 and 1 ton trucks because it was the in thing to do, and since they seem to have money to burn they heavily influence the market with the mass amounts of them out there. the king ranch is a g/d abomination to pickups the world over. if you need that much comfort in a heavy duty pickup, maybe you should just retire from work, because if you own one and use it like an actual truck, i can only guess you are an oil tycoon from texas.
I personally hate these "yuppy" trucks nowadays and doubt I'll ever purposely own one. I'd rather sink money into old iron.
EDIT: travel is the reason ifs and torsion bars are worthless for offroad work/play, not capacity.