Well F450 would be the 6.8 V10, but yeah, I have several commercial accounts that only deal in gas. Ford offers a the 6.8 all the way up to true medium duty, representing the only gas option for those trucks, and has been getting decent returns on that choice. It's cheaper for Ford since they focus on light trucks and most medium truck makers focus on class 8.

 

From my perspective, while I hope the new diesel F-150 does well, I have no interest in it. Either the 3.5EB or 5.0V8 for me. I have a 2016 KR with the 3.5EB and it is hands down more powerful than my previous 2013 Plat with the 5.0. However, my dad has a 2015 5.0 and it feels almost as powerful as my 3.5EB and has that wonderful V8 sound. Diesels (to me) are noisy, smelly and require more maintenance than gas engines. Also, my KR has the max tow package rated at 12,200lbs...isn't that enough for a 1/2 ton truck? Seriously if I was going to be towing heavier than that, I think I'd be justified looking at the Super duty...


For another thread, but the biggest difference I can feel between my 2016 KR and my 2013 Plat is the "nimbleness" now that the truck is lighter. It drives crisper, handles better, feels less "ponderous" arounbd town, brakes better, basically all the things you expect from shedding 500 - 600 lbs. I'm really surprised more Ford owners don't comment on that when we have to watch those ridiculous commercials about some idiot slamming a skip loader full of concrete blocks into an unprotected 1/2 ton pickup bed. Was talking to a new Silverado owner at the car wash last week and he asked me "what are you going to do about the bed?". I said "use the usual F-150 rubber mat and that was it"...I then asked him if he was planning on dropping a skip loader full of concrete blocks into his new Silverado's bed and his reply "no way would I ever do that"...end of conversation...


Sorry mods for straying...just not sure why more 15+ F-150 owners don't comment on the positive aspects of a significantly lighter truck rather than just responding to smear commercial comments

 

One of the glaring reasons why I don't think it'll do well is because of its timing. Right now gas and diesel are $2.32 and $2.49 respectively, and it's predicted both will be over $3.00 by this summer, right around when this is supposed to launch. It's possible another recession may come again (more extreme pessimism) within the next year.

 

Not sure I understand Tom. We both know that Ford has limited V-8 production and pushed the ecoboost engines real hard. Hence over 50% of the F150 market share since 2011.

Yes sir but, by the time the diesel is available, the Expedition will be aluminum. I don't know about anyone else's Expeditions but my 2004 with the 4.6L is most comfortable on the open road cruising at 70 MPH all day long and all night if need be. It wouldn't be a speedster for sure but it may surprise us.

 

Yes, but you're comparing historical data with speculation. What were we thinking in 2010? This is from an AutoGuide article posted 8/20/2010:

My point was that it hasn't been released yet, and it's possible the new little diesel could be intended as a high-volume engine. We just don't know.

 

I think the Ford diesel will go for the ecodiesel market. Those looking for outstanding fuel economy while commuting and enough truck to tow a small boat or ATV's etc around on the weekend. I also think that if they don't make it such an expensive option they will sell more of them than Dodge does. I believe the ecodiesel is $4500, Ford's had better not be much higher than this.
Currently diesel is cheap probably due to mild winters the last few years but when things return to the norm, diesel will be higher again. Over the last 10 years diesel has even been higher than premium for most of that time frame (which is what I compare it to since I run it in my ecoboost).
Try passing someone pulling a trailer with the ecodiesel and you will think you are in a 4 banger. The ecoboost is the best of both worlds- it has both high hp and high torque where the diesels are low on hp.
From my experience the diesel will get from 15-25% better fuel economy. Add the premium price of the diesel engine over the ecoboost, the added DEF, and maintenance as well as fuel that's higher and you will have to drive a lot to break even. I think Ford has already said some about 25k miles a year to break even.

For me the only way I would even consider it would be if Ford had of chosen to aim for the market that Cummins ISV with 310/555 goes after but they are not doing that

 

We might be waiting a real long time for that. I'm willing to bet that won't happen in our lifetimes.

 

Sure it will as soon as the economy overseas starts booming again. Last time we shipped our diesel, concrete and other building materials overseas because of high demand and we paid for it here because we were in short supply.
Diesel prices also go up and down with the weather. We have had mild winters the last few years, get another bad one and heating oil, diesel, propane and natural gas will go up again.
Once we went to ULSD it will never be as cheap as it once was but it has continued to vary since then

 

Oil companies here and mid east are dictating how much to refine causing prices of both gas and diesel to spike.

back when the EcoDiesel came out it was $4500 for the engine and another $500 for the ZF8 automatic, which was mandatory for it. This was back in 2013/14 when it came out. Now it's $500 cheaper since the ZF8 is now the defecto transmission. We may or may not have to worry about an extra fee like that since the 10 speed is standard. Though I do wonder, with the closer gear ratio Ford chose for the transmission, if they already had the diesel in mind at the time? I'm also wondering if they'll keep the same shift points for it or adjust it accordingly?

 

It's interesting the NA 3.3L V6 is going to only get the 6-speed transmission. I think it is the one engine that would benefit the most from the 10-speed; especially with the right ratios/shift points. The EcoBoost twins are much less RPM-sensitive, with their wide/flat torque bands. We shall see.

 

That was an economical decision...they are using the less costly transmission with the base motor.

 

I understand that... Until the "low cost" transmission becomes the higher cost transmission because of the smaller production numbers.

 

Yeah, I was thinking the exact same thing. The new 10-speed is almost assuredly going to replace the 6R80 in just about everything, so it's only a matter of time before volume goes down. I can see them winding down available production capacity for the '18 base models because fleet operators will care less about performance than they will acquisition cost.

 

10-15% retention of completed assemblies plus replacement components for 10-15% of units shipped is probably a pretty close number to what Ford needs to keep on the shelf for 7 years after the last installed assembly ships.
In other words - Their stock of built 6 speeds is more than likely in excess of what they are projected to ship with the 2017-2018 model years.
The 10 speed is a beast from everything Ive read...
---
Gut feeling follows --

The 3.0 diesel is going to cost Ford more than they will ever make from it...

 

Maybe by relegating the 6R80 to the (probably) low volume NA 3.3L V6, it provides a way to draw down inventory until they can spread the 10-speed across the line.

I can see the 10-speed actually improving the performance of the NA 3.3L enough to make people really question the need/desire for any of the higher performance engines. For people that just need a "work truck" this could be a compelling option.