2.7 mileage
Super Moderator
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 40,054
Likes: 1,524
From: Maine, Virginia
Let's talk real world here.
The European diesel Ranger is getting 32 to 35 MPG combined in the real world. It is also about 95% the size of the F-150.
Would I pay a $3000 premium over the base engine to get 10+MPG over the F-150?? Every day of the week!
Plus I would be able to recoup most of the difference upon resale. This is why we pay the almost $8k difference with the SD's we buy. The net real world cost actually work in the diesels favor (at least for us).
The European diesel Ranger is getting 32 to 35 MPG combined in the real world. It is also about 95% the size of the F-150.
Would I pay a $3000 premium over the base engine to get 10+MPG over the F-150?? Every day of the week!
Plus I would be able to recoup most of the difference upon resale. This is why we pay the almost $8k difference with the SD's we buy. The net real world cost actually work in the diesels favor (at least for us).
Elder User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 839
Likes: 0
From: outback
Well, up until not that long ago, diesel was 20%-30% cheaper than gas. If those days are forever over then maybe diesel will never make sense for small trucks.
I hear ya and I think Ford should at least offer the 3.2 in the F-150. However, the EB is something like $1500 over the 5.0 and the Ecodiesel is close to a $3000 option. When will the diesel break even? We've all had this discussion dozens of times, diesel vs. ecoboost and I'm yet convinced that dollar for dollar, the diesel is the best answer.
OK, so on an average of 12000 miles per year here's a simple example:
ecoboost at 20 MPG's over 12000 miles uses 600 gallons @ $3.25 p/g is $1950.
Diesel at 25 MPG's over 12000 miles uses 480 gallons @ $3.75 p/g is $1800.
$150 per year in fuel savings. But, the diesel costs $1500 more than the ecoboost your looking at 10 years just to break even on fuel costs alone.
It may take 150,000-175,000 miles of actual use to break even completely with maintenance, repairs and fuel.
What does all this mean for the second or third owner? It starts all over again as a diesel typically sells for more than a gasser used.
I'm not an educated man but simple math shows me that the diesel isn't the answer until the buy in cost comes down....which we all know it won't.
OK, so on an average of 12000 miles per year here's a simple example:
ecoboost at 20 MPG's over 12000 miles uses 600 gallons @ $3.25 p/g is $1950.
Diesel at 25 MPG's over 12000 miles uses 480 gallons @ $3.75 p/g is $1800.
$150 per year in fuel savings. But, the diesel costs $1500 more than the ecoboost your looking at 10 years just to break even on fuel costs alone.
It may take 150,000-175,000 miles of actual use to break even completely with maintenance, repairs and fuel.
What does all this mean for the second or third owner? It starts all over again as a diesel typically sells for more than a gasser used.
I'm not an educated man but simple math shows me that the diesel isn't the answer until the buy in cost comes down....which we all know it won't.
Elder User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 839
Likes: 0
From: outback
I don't know how Ford can release a truck and not tell everyone the numbers. It makes no sense. They should have had this information for over a year for Pete's sake!
Elder User
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 705
Likes: 1
From: Clay Country, GA, NE MS
Patience, patience, my main man mint. Ye cain't even buy one until maybe this coming fall. Ye got a while.
Posting Guru
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,247
Likes: 3
From: monroe ct
Why you ask? Its simple marketing. It gets everyone talking about it like we are doing here. Free advertising. Now some of us will have more questions and guess what we do? Go searching. Then we will end up on more sites talking about the same thing and so on and so forth.
Super Moderator
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 40,054
Likes: 1,524
From: Maine, Virginia
Why you ask? Its simple marketing. It gets everyone talking about it like we are doing here. Free advertising. Now some of us will have more questions and guess what we do? Go searching. Then we will end up on more sites talking about the same thing and so on and so forth.
Elder User
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 817
Likes: 0
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 6 Best Deals Available on New Fords & Lincolns Right Now
Brett Foote
This Hennessey Takes the Expedition Tremor's Off-Roading Capability to the Next Level
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Fords at 2026 Carlisle Ford Nationals
Joe Kucinski
3 Best / 3 Worst Parts of Modern Ford Ownership
Brett Foote
10 Amazing Upgrades That Solve Common Ford Truck Owner Headaches
Pouria Savadkouei
Every 2026 Ford Engine Explained
Brett Foote
10 Ugly Ford Trucks That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
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
Posting Guru
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,247
Likes: 3
From: monroe ct
I'm actually upset to see the 5.4 go. I think there was plenty that could have still been done with that motor. Having owned one since 08 I've grown to like the motor. Having hauled over 6000lbs, towed over 11,000lbs and pushed more snow then I care the remember this motor had never let me down or disappointed with performance. I came from a 96 with a 7.3 and would hands down take another 5.4 over it any day
Elder User
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 730
Likes: 9
From: plymouth mi
I hear ya and I think Ford should at least offer the 3.2 in the F-150. However, the EB is something like $1500 over the 5.0 and the Ecodiesel is close to a $3000 option. When will the diesel break even? We've all had this discussion dozens of times, diesel vs. ecoboost and I'm yet convinced that dollar for dollar, the diesel is the best answer.
OK, so on an average of 12000 miles per year here's a simple example:
ecoboost at 20 MPG's over 12000 miles uses 600 gallons @ $3.25 p/g is $1950.
Diesel at 25 MPG's over 12000 miles uses 480 gallons @ $3.75 p/g is $1800.
$150 per year in fuel savings. But, the diesel costs $1500 more than the ecoboost your looking at 10 years just to break even on fuel costs alone.
It may take 150,000-175,000 miles of actual use to break even completely with maintenance, repairs and fuel.
What does all this mean for the second or third owner? It starts all over again as a diesel typically sells for more than a gasser used.
I'm not an educated man but simple math shows me that the diesel isn't the answer until the buy in cost comes down....which we all know it won't.
OK, so on an average of 12000 miles per year here's a simple example:
ecoboost at 20 MPG's over 12000 miles uses 600 gallons @ $3.25 p/g is $1950.
Diesel at 25 MPG's over 12000 miles uses 480 gallons @ $3.75 p/g is $1800.
$150 per year in fuel savings. But, the diesel costs $1500 more than the ecoboost your looking at 10 years just to break even on fuel costs alone.
It may take 150,000-175,000 miles of actual use to break even completely with maintenance, repairs and fuel.
What does all this mean for the second or third owner? It starts all over again as a diesel typically sells for more than a gasser used.
I'm not an educated man but simple math shows me that the diesel isn't the answer until the buy in cost comes down....which we all know it won't.
More Turbo
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 667
Likes: 28
That's what I'm afraid of....
I own a construction company and of course most of our equipment is diesel.
I just don't understand Ford's hesitation to bring a small diesel engine into their lineup.
I had an opportunity to see their new diesel Ranger in Europe last summer and thought it would be exactly what I need to carry a couple of guys and some tools. We have a couple of SD to tow anything heavy...
I guess what Ford doesn't realize is that not everyone needs or wants a truck that can tow 10,000 pounds...
I own a construction company and of course most of our equipment is diesel.
I just don't understand Ford's hesitation to bring a small diesel engine into their lineup.
I had an opportunity to see their new diesel Ranger in Europe last summer and thought it would be exactly what I need to carry a couple of guys and some tools. We have a couple of SD to tow anything heavy...
I guess what Ford doesn't realize is that not everyone needs or wants a truck that can tow 10,000 pounds...
Thread Starter
|
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,320
Likes: 13
From: Mid Atlantic
but the guy I talked to was an American who did the conversion...Also, when I was in Italy last year we rented a Focus station wagon and like most of the cars (yes cars) in Europe it had a diesel, in this case a 1.6L. In over two weeks of driving through cities, mountains and highways we averaged between 40 and 45 MPG with a car full of adults and all our junk. This was not just one adult driving on a flat highway at 55 MPH, this was real world.
I seem to notice that people who don't like diesels have never actually owned one...those of us who have them love them. All I'm asking Ford to do is offer them as one of the options....not make every one who buys a truck have to have one if you don't want it.
Super Moderator
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 40,054
Likes: 1,524
From: Maine, Virginia
T- I understand that the Europeans (and most of the rest of the world) uses the metric system but the guy I talked to was an American who did the conversion...
Also, when I was in Italy last year we rented a Focus station wagon and like most of the cars (yes cars) in Europe it had a diesel, in this case a 1.6L. In over two weeks of driving through cities, mountains and highways we averaged between 40 and 45 MPG with a car full of adults and all our junk. This was not just one adult driving on a flat highway at 55 MPH, this was real world.
I seem to notice that people who don't like diesels have never actually owned one...those of us who have them love them. All I'm asking Ford to do is offer them as one of the options....not make every one who buys a truck have to have one if you don't want it.
but the guy I talked to was an American who did the conversion...Also, when I was in Italy last year we rented a Focus station wagon and like most of the cars (yes cars) in Europe it had a diesel, in this case a 1.6L. In over two weeks of driving through cities, mountains and highways we averaged between 40 and 45 MPG with a car full of adults and all our junk. This was not just one adult driving on a flat highway at 55 MPH, this was real world.
I seem to notice that people who don't like diesels have never actually owned one...those of us who have them love them. All I'm asking Ford to do is offer them as one of the options....not make every one who buys a truck have to have one if you don't want it.
I'm certainly not anti-diesel, in fact, I love them and have always wanted one.
To me, the upcharge is absurd. I know they cost more to build but the initial cost a little much, wouldn't you agree?
Then of course of the cost of diesel here in the US is stupid. We can't refine enough to satisfy our needs, keeping the prices waaay high.
As I stated before, I think Ford should offer a diesel across the entire blue oval line-up. The five cylinder going into the transit van is going to be exciting, but what's the cost?
Half the users here on FTE seem to be anti-turbo and scared to death of the ecoboost, (I'm neither) can you imagine the take rate of a diesel?
I'm really excited to see how the diesel does in the Chevy Cruze. MPG's, reliability, resale, etc.
New User
Joined: Jan 2014
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
When compared modern turbo diesel and modern gas (turbo) engines we are always getting better mpg from diesel. Similar performance but gas engine will have at least 15-20 % higher fuel consumption. In real world this can easily go to 30 %. This is just from the view of mpg not the cost when buying.