If you go back to the ALH in old VW TDI's the fuel economy was even better....my 01' is an honest 50+ mpg car and runs like new with 200K....what it doesn't have is the seat pinning power of my Ecoboost.

 

Like I said, though, the F150 would have to be capable of towing 10k WITH A FAMILY in the cab, and have a payloaf of at least 2200. That wont happen. Ford wants us to go to a Superduty.

If the F150 Supercrew could tow 10k (the 11700 currently is driver only), and get 20+ highway, if be in.

 

Oh, and I'd be in if the diesel adder was under $5000. More, and I'd go Superduty again. That said, I'm still considering the 6.2L gasser this time. The big issue is a gas truck with 125,000 miles when used will be worth squat over a diesel.

 

I don't think any diesel anywhere will power a crew cab f150 with a 10,000 lb trailer and get over 20 MPG.

 

No, 20 mpg DAILY driving. Towing, I'd expect 12-15. Even the 6.0L + size diesels don't get that towing now. The daily driving is where I'd like to excel. I only tow about 5,000 miles a year, so tow mileage doesn't matter to me, just power.

 

What you need is an ecoboost truck

 

Yeah, waiting on a 6.2L EcoBoost in the Superduty. That's the only place I'll find the payload I need.

I ordered an EcoBoost last spring, but it came in without the heavy duty payload package. I declined and took the 2010 F250 Harley I have now, with the 6.4L. Normally, I'd have been unsettled, but my trailer is too big for the F150. I've been a diesel boy since 1999, and love my 6.4L, but I've got a good one with decent mpg. I'm just weighing options if I can't delete and tune in the next year. Then, she'll be gone.

 

I have 340K on mine (1/3 of the way to my goal), runs like brand new! I get 50+ MPG meaning twice the MPG as everything else (You can't count the 40 MPG cheapy tin can cars availble, we're talking Autobaun crash rated cars here!).....fuel could go up to $8 a gallon before I get worried. Then again, I don't have a car payment so fuel is cheap no matter what the price is compared to a car payment.

Attn Ford, Raj Nair: You snooze, you loose....Americans want MPG even with a $2800 premium like for the RAM 1500. (What do you think Super Duty folks talk about? Or the Eco-Boost folks? Mileage.). It's doesn't matter what fuel costs, it's always better to have power, mileage, and longevity keeping a vehicle 10+ years rather than trade and spend $40K on new every 3.

I'll take a 34 MPG Volkswagen Amarok please. Million mile engines, and no rust through in 6 years like on a Ford. Wake up Ford!

***Stepping off my podium***

 

I really don't think so. The 2014 Ram 1500 with the gas V6 is rated to tow 7,400 lbs and gets 25 MPG. The expen$ive diesel will tow less than 2,000 lbs more and return the same 25 MPG with fuel that costs 15% more. I wouldn't buy one.

And I would't be interested in the diesel F150 either. If I wanted a high-MPG truck that sacrificed a bit of towing capacity I'd be driving a 3.7L F150 at the moment. But it won't tow my trailer, and I'd bet my hat that the new diesel engine won't either. But my EB will.

And longevity...is this a serious argument? Show me some data that a light duty diesel engine will outlast a gas one. I can show you some ridiculously expen$ive repair bills for the hapless diesel owner who gets just one bad tank of fuel. How much fuel savings will cover the cost of a $10,000 repair? I've had diesel trucks in the past and I really liked them, but modern gas engines are tough to beat for a light duty truck.

 

Modern fuel systems and emission systems seem to be the nemesis to reliability of new diesels. The idea that a diesel is extremely reliable is an outdated idea. I'm sure the core engine is still durable, but all the things bolted to it are the problem.

 

**OFF TOPIC**

TOM!! You finally changed your signature picture!!

 

Exactly, and why I seriously doubt that we will ever see a small diesel in the F150. Look at all the problems with the 6.0s, 6.4s, even 6.7s. They all get substantially better when you get rid of all the emissions crap.

We even see this in fire apparatus. Vehicles that should be 110% dead-*** reliable, and we have problems with the computers causing the motor to shut down, the DPF regen catching things on fire or reaching the "you need to clean me or I'm going to shut down for good and make you call a wrecker" stage at the most inopportune times. We are seeing a trend toward gas motors for this reason... we don't have a choice in the larger vehicles, but for brush trucks, utilities, small rescues, etc., a gas motor makes a lot more sense. Plus, you are about $10K ahead just in the truck's purchase price.

Go ask anyone operating a large diesel fleet what their maintenance cost per mile has done over the last 10 years. Even adjusted for inflation, I would bet money that their cost has at least doubled. Primarily thanks to all the emissions stuff and the problems it can cause.

Such is life when politicians decide they can legislate things well ahead of the technology to actually make such things possible.

 

I think that if Ford does come out with the diesel it will be less hp, torque and towing capability than the ecoboost. It will be more for those that want higher fuel economy and tow less weight.
This is Dodge's approach with the new ecodiesel.

I also agree that Ford is concerned that a more powerful half ton would cut into the Super Duty market.

I also have concerns about how the new pollution equipment effects fuel economy. Back in the day a diesel could get 17mpg towing now they get 9-10 with the same load. Granted today's diesels have more hp and torque but I would rather have the fuel economy.

 

Yeah it took me awhile. I need to get a better photo with the trailer though.

No they don't...it's not even close. The 6.0L engines had more problems with oil coolers and stretched head bolts than they did EGRs. The 6.4L engines are no different; the EGR coolers and DPF don't cause many problems at all. Problems with the emissions equipment on the 6.7L engines are downright rare.

But one tank of bad fuel will cost you $10K in repairs, and that has nothing to do with emissions controls.


+1

I don't think that has anything to do with it. 2 out of the 4 engines offered in the F150 make more power than ANYTHING put in a previous generation Super Duty. My little V6 was faster up a hill with a heavy trailer than the 6.4L truck we had out that day.

I think your memory is a little funny. Go to the OBS forums and look at the fuel economy of the old 6.9 IDI, 7.3 IDI, and first-gen Powerstroke. Then go to the 6.7L forum and look at the fuel economy coming from the latest technology. You'll find that the 6.7L is the most efficient engine put in a Super Duty to date. It's not uncommon to see 21-22 MPGs in a crew cab 4x4 truck. Can you find a crew cab 4x4 with an older engine that comes close?

Can you find me an example of someone who went from 17 to 10 MPGs towing the same trailer with a newer truck?

 

As a "proud" previous owner of a 6.(d')0(h), the head bolt issues started as a result of the EGR. I should know - I had the top of the motor rebuild and the turbo replaced 3 times in 98K. I actually traded the truck in with 98K on the clock as it sat in the dealership's bay being repaired.

The usual chain of events was this:
The EGR system took soot-filled diesel exhaust and deposited it back into the intake ahead of the turbo.
Diesel soot (carbon) plus intense heat in the turbo equals carbon deposits (coking) on the vanes of the turbo.
The turbo vanes get constricted, so they can't alter geometry to control boost. No control plus no wastegate equals overboosting.
Overboosting equals head gasket problems.

Now, the head design was weak for sure, but it would usually hold up under standard boost conditions. Get the turbo coated in carbon deposits and not so much.

My record boost was 67psi. I knew I was in trouble when the turbo PSI indicator slapped the peg, followed by the temperature gauge doing the same thing. That was the third and final straw.

The 6.4s and the 6.7s are less problematic, but you still have to deal with the DPF issues and replacement, etc.

At the end of the day, I still maintain that you won't see enough fuel economy improvements out of a baby diesel to make it worth the additional up-front purchase price, nor the maintenance over time.