I agree with the guy you quoted. You can't give me a good enough deal on the old design.
The 2016 looks just like the first 99 that I bought back in 1998.
Same doors, cab, box, windows ect. Uglier front clip.
old, old, old...


You buy a new 16', and in a few months, you will be relegated to the back row with all of the used trucks....

 

is that a fact? I like my grille..but looks are subjective. I'm not ready for a new truck yet. But I hope when I am, ford changes that putrid front end on the 17's!

 

Current body style is absolutely 18 years old.....and Ford knew it......spare the Gen talk, sans the morphing of the grille to the present '16, these trucks haven't changed much PHYSICALLY over the last 18 years

 

Actually they changed a lot!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Super_Duty

 

With all due respect, I guess you can keep selling yourself on that thought by googling what you want to read.
Fact remains that the truck's entire body still looks the same as it did since Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinski were soiling blue dresses in the Oval Office.

I haven't purchased a Super Duty in years because it has become so stale and aged. It's even more prehistoric than the Lincoln Navigator, if that's possible.
JMHO.

 

My take on this is a little different than everybody else. The new body style is only going to be new until your neighbor down the street has one too!
I buy a SD to do a job and my '16 pulls everything I have with ease!
The KW W900, and the Peterbilt 379 havent changed that much in appearance forever, yet they still do the job that needs doing, and still sell! But that is just me! OP, You are probably going to be able to buy a '16 holdover for thousands less than a '17, and it will do the same job!

 

The '14 F150 didn't really get killer rebates though when the '15s rolled out. I don't think the money will be much different than any other "end of year" stuff. The SD does have a closer ratio of and If the current SD does the job and thats what you need then good on ya! There are a few cases where the added capability will be helpful. If the lower COG on the new trucks changes the drive as dramatically as it did on the F150 that alone would be plenty enough for me to wait. Trucks still look better than cars, and it will matter more what everyone else thinks than what you think at the end of the day if you are an appearance guy for the most part. Cabs and doors that don't rot is pretty appealing to me.

 

That's not true.
The Pete 389 and the KW W-900L are dinosaurs, just like the old Superduty. They definitely do not sell. I guess there are a few O/Os left out there who would rather look better than make money. Soon, they will be broke.
Nobody buys the 389 or W-900 anymore because they simply are no longer viable.
Those old staples are now being replaced in a widespread fashion by the KW 680 and the Peterbilt 579. The Freightliner Cascadia and the Navistar Prostar are also built to the new standards of efficiency.
Less attractive than a big hood?? Yeah. Efficient? Yeah. Large aerodynamic and light weight national carriers have driven down margins to the bone.

Paccar has offered aero trucks for years, but if you want to make money and provide for your family, you need to park the long hoods and pick up a couple MPGs. It's either that, or leave a ton of profit on the table.

I've got a close friend who is a coast to coast O/O who owns a 310" WB W-900L pulling a new 53' Reefer.. Sharp truck. On paper, he is leaving $900.00 in fuel inefficiency on the table on every round.
Downright silly IMHO, but I guess he feels he needs to look good. I can not relate...

With efficiency driving the small truck industry now, it only makes sense that Ford leads the way in lightening up the truck. I expect a more efficient Powerstroke in a few short years in order to compete. This latest fuel price slump won't last.
This new Ford Superduty is only the beginning. Look for another round of serious updates in 2019'