I have never followed new vehicle launches before, but it utterly amazes me that none of the (important) specs for the 2017 SD have been published yet. I can't believe that they are this close to starting the build process for these trucks and haven't determined what the engine/tranny/suspension specs are going to be, hell they have supposedly been testing for years.


So is this a marketing ploy or are they really that disorganized?

 

Of course they know all the specs. They are purposely not releasing them. This is not to keep them from you or me. It's to keep them from Ram and GM. Give out your number to beat too early and someone likely will beat it.

 

The tipping of the hat to the competition is surely part of the delay in releasing specs but the anticipation by those interested must also be part of the plan. Since the release of the vehicles is on a normal track everyone will know in due time. A delayed release would surely have more details earlier to preserve the customer base. Similar to the gender of a newborn the surprise adds to the elation. Of course there will be naysayers and outright haters but those will be there regardless of how the release occurs. I am purchasing a new truck this year after 16 years with my current super duty and while torn between the wait, order, wait some more and adopting from existing dealer stock I will ultimately look back on the process, hopefully with a wonderful vehicle and drive off with my camper on board for many years of travel and fond memories of this purchase process. And thanks for the forum with which to opine, learn and contribute.

 

The Cab & Chassis power specs have been released so far. Up 10% on HP, and 14% on TQ.

 

At this point in the process the numbers are what they are, I am sure Dodge and GM are interested as well, but it's not like they can make a significant changes to their designs at this stage either. Sure they can make a few tweaks here and there and maybe fudge a number or two to post a miniscule bump in numbers but nothing of any significance.


I guess I am in the minority because I don't care about the advertisement propaganda stating which trucks have a couple extra theoretical HP or FtLbs of torque, the real evaluations will be when the trucks are out and people can give real world results. Look at the Rams, according to the ads they should be the best towing trucks out there, but in real life they just don't get the job done.


Even if they didn't post the HP, torque, tow/haul numbers, you would think that they would be posting info on configurations (i.e. transmissions, interiors, colors, options, reliability improvements, etc) trying to get people lathered up and ready to order as soon as possible.


I understand the sales hype and all advertisement crap, but if they designed and build the best truck they can within the constraints they were given they should be proud of their product and be bragging about what they have to offer not waiting to the last minute to add a hood emblem of something to one-up the completion.


"Build the best you can and dare the completion to try to beat you."


Philosophical rant over.

 

AMEN to what dlauffenburger said. Like what they are building or not, I will always support Ford, almost to a fault. I believe in the corporation and especially their resistance to a government bailout. It is amazing that GM still can't build a truck that would fly to the moon with the billions of $ assistance we all paid for, but they did have a lot of catching up to do, paid with our dimes and nickels. And isn't Ram, or Dodge a branch of Fiat? The minute differences in the top end vehicles mean little or nothing. Most of us buy well below the maximum weights available and many buy as available from dealer stock or used. Pre-release figures are often changed. Take a build sheet from the website well into the model year and sit down with a dealer and one will find lots of discrepancies. The postulation and presumption is fun and for me at least, a way to pass the time until I finally sit down at the dealer with his computer and sign in for a new ride, one I expect and believe will serve my purpose for many years to come.

Damn, I still wish they would bring Green Gem back to the SD paint booth.

 

Where would one go to keep up with the latest anouncements about the specs? Plain old Ford .com or is there another site that Ford has for such things?

 

All valid points. However, if doing it the way you suggest was of a marketing benefit, Ford would do it that way. Something tells me that they have the best strategy for them possible even if it does irritate a forumite here and there.

 

This is a common misconception. All of the big three went before congress. GM and Dodge got their money through TARP. Ford got it's money in the form of a loan through TALF. 5.9 billion actually. Ford Credit also got 15.9 billion. In exchange for these loans Ford agreed to fast track more fuel efficient vehicles that the government wanted built.

 

I'm seriously in the market for a new truck--I'll buy one before the new year, and Ford's coyness is tiresome. I prefer Ford but I'm no fanboy and when the time comes I'll buy GM if it's to my advantage. Given the current choice between a known Ford, an improved and quite capable GM and a Ford with mystery specs I'm in a bit of a quandary.

I also fear the new Ford will be taller than the old one and the damned things are already too tall.

 

Yes Ford did benefit, but the 5.9 billion was a loan, as stated, at the request of Ford to not become unfairly behind in research and development. But don't forget the 45 billion dollar tax credit GM enjoyed, which though not a direct bailout is surely appreciated by the GM financials. GM and Dodge both also enjoyed reneging on retirement and health benefits to salaried workers while the unions were granted huge blocks of shares and ultimately maintenance of inordinately high wage and benefit contracts. Restructuring mandated by the government is redistribution of wealth. And thus the new starting wage for hourly UAW was just increased from $25 to $29 plus a host of benefit increases. And not that Ford is completely innocent, at onset to the bailouts they flatly refused any assistance and only agreed to the loan to remain competitive. And through all of this comes a sticker of $74,000 plus tax for a King Ranch duelly.

 

Are political discussions allowed on this forum? I don't like politics on hobbyist forums--it makes me dislike people I'd otherwise feel no hostility towards.

 

My apologies, to you and anyone not wishing to read these comments. I quite agree with your statement. Oftentimes forums are like the proverbial rabbit-hole.

 

Politics are for the club. Sign up for its use.

 

I dislike political discussion and I detest politicians.

That said, I understand many folks' feelings regarding the auto bailouts. Let's leave those discussions for Club FTE though.

Now....where in the heck are the 2017 order guides???

I'm in a tough spot on this one too. I'd love to have a 2017 F-350 but I'm really leery of first year runs of anything anymore. My 2011 caused me a lot of grief and while I miss it, I don't miss the issues it had. It's a good time to buy a 2015 or 2016 and there are a lot of them out there I like. Decisions, decisions.....