Let me preface this with saying, I am a long time diesel engine fan. I, like many, looked forward to Ford offering a diesel engine option in the F-150.

The specs:
3.5L EcoBoost - 375 HP, 470 lb-ft Torque - EPA rated fuel economy: 17 City, 23 Hwy, 19 MPG AVG
3.0L PowerStroke - 250 HP, 440 lb-ft Torque (max torque achieved at 1,750 rpm) - EPA rated fuel economy: 20 City, 25 Hwy, 22 MPG AVG

From the standpoint of power output the EcoBoost beats the PowerStroke in both power and torque. The only caveat may be that the PowerStoke may "feel" better towing, with torque peaking at a lower RPM... however the "proof will be in the pudding" as they say.

The initial knee jerk reaction will be that the PowerStroke has a fuel economy advantage... but is there an actual realized savings? The PowerStroke option is a $2,400 upgrade over the 3.5L EcoBoost and diesel fuel is approximately $0.36 more per gallon of gasoline (of course this varies by region). Let's assume that the PowerStroke equipped truck, *on average* bests the EcoBoost by 3 MPG. For a vehicle driven 15,000 miles a year, you're looking at annual savings of ~$45 in fuel to run the Ecoboost. But wait, how many gallons of DEF is the PowerStroke going to require in 15,000 miles? For arguement's sake, lets say about $45 worth... so much for that touted fuel cost savings.

With that said.... Why would you opt for the 3.0L PowerStroke? Less power and basically zero realizable fuel economy advantage....

 

LOL Im a big diesel fan too and was looking forward to the diesel F-150...until I saw the "upgrade" scam they were pulling.
Def Fluid probably wont be a big enough cost to worry about.....I dont know how fast that 3.0 will burn it up while towing, but I would guesstimate about 6-7 gallons in 15,000 miles.
Dont be fooled by the engine cost upgrade being only 2400, If you were going with an XLT expectation or budget, your engine upgrade from a 3.5 ecoboost to a 3.0 diesel will be about 15-20k more.
LOL you can payoff an ecoboost and still have half the cash on hand to buy another new ecoboost for the cost of one 3.0 diesel...and still have more power.

I guess some folks will think about putting a tuner on a 3.0 ......with a timing belt.... on a 70k truck that just let go and with a voided warranty.

 

FTR, I was basing the $2,400 upgrade off of an apples to apples truck (Lariat Trim or better).... but you make a good point about the 3.0L only being offered in Lariat or better.

 

So I can put my 85-gal aux tank in the back and run for about 2,500 miles between fill-ups!

A Lariat+ F-150 is a glorified towncar anyway, I'll likely end up trading away 3-5mpg to just stay in the much stronger Super Duty platform, likely an XL-XLT that's cheaper than a fancy F-150 but with a mill that turns out 450HP/935 lb-ft.

 

That is essentially what I did, I jumped over to the dark side and got a Ram 2500 6.7 cummins 2017 which sat on the dealers lot for a year because it was yellow and no takers, brand new 25 miles on it and got it for 39999 ...40k I get 19.5 mpg unloaded. with 800ftbs of torque lurking under the hood, yet Ford's wants almost double for about 1/2 less capable truck
I have been a Ford guy all my life... and was truly interested in that 3.0 until, the timing belt....upgrade pimp my ride crap scam ford was trying to pull....its a Fiero-150, in other words what is it really good for, it is not a practical vehicle at any endeavor with that type of price

 

 

The question still remains, is it worth 65-70k when far more capable trucks ( 2500/F-250 class) are out there for far less money? That decision coupled basic intuitive skills can easily be made without even being in it. However If you find it a reasonable price then go snap one up and put it to real good use and enjoy yourself! Yet for most buyers it will still remain a first rate price for a second rate truck.

 

 

 

Based on the 3.0 power and torque numbers, I predict it will run out of breath when trying to accelerate to pass on average hills when pulling say 8K. It will pull it and move it fine (70mph on flat and 65 on inclines) on every interstate I've ever traveled. It just won't be able to accelerate on average inclines without redlining. Not really a big deal unless caught behind a heavy semi in the slow lane with flashers on. Might also be a nuisance on those long inclines through the heartland where it won't be able to do more than 65 on what looks like a relatively small incline while everyone else is passing. This may frustrate some customers, especially if someone in a 3.5 ecoboost also with an 8K trailer pulls around and passes the 3.0 owner. Meanwhile the 3.0 is trailing the slow semi unable to pull around and pass without redlining or has the feeling of crawling on mile long inclines. That may leave the 3.0 owner wondering why they purchased the 3.0. I could be wrong but don't want to spend the kind of money it would take to find out when to me it looks like 3.5 can leave it behind in these scenarios.

Anyone know why the 3.0 has a timing belt instead of gears or chain?

 

What does that even mean?

 

I dont need to pick up chicks, happily married... nor something flashy to overcompensate for a lack thereof. I hated that you had that much trouble out of it considering it cost way less than 70k...even after the repairs...now if that 3.0 give trouble and needs repairs how much will that 3.0 Fiero-150 cost you then?....what maybe 80k you will be up too?....yep a good lol for you....wow Im up to 40k on a truck that can out perform that 3.0 just about double in any category and its only 40k...I still have 30 k to possibly spare to spend on repairs before I even approach 70k...chick magnet, put you a tuner on that 3.0 and see how deep it digs into that inexperienced pocket...its ok to be blinded by brand loyalty but at least logically think through things.... women like guys who use their head for something other than a hat rack

 

65 Ford, Im pretty sure they copied that Land Rover "Lion" type engine, the engine is British made from my understanding. It might had to do with the engine already in use and didnt require any expensive R&D. Some speculate the reason for the belt transitioning into diesel motors is because it helps smooth out diesel clatter noise...apparently nobody wants to hear a diesel clatter anymore.
I know that TFL uses the ike gauntlet as an extreme test but the 3.0 was pretty much "skinny pedal" to the floor and turned out about the worst time...it simply does not have the ability to climb and overtake to pass while pulling some weight.Your scenarios nail it. The truck is simply not worth what they are asking for, especially when the 3.5 ecoboost does so much better.
I almost bought the 3.5 ecoboost, while it would have handled the camper I was towing, it would have been approaching a limitation and there was no sense in being in a situation of going down a mountain grade with smaller brake calipers and no exhaust brake with 8k behind it.
I still predict that chevy will win the diesel 1500/F-150 class (IF) and I say "if" cautiously they use timing gears instead of a belt, since they are making it in an inline 6.
Ford has flopped in the category and Dodge's 1500 slipped a few timing shafts thus trashing a few engines, but if Chevy plays this thing right they will set the benchmark for a classic "half ton" diesel. Yet, if they wrap a rubber band timing belt around that motor because people are becoming "sensitive" to diesel noise clatter, then it too will be a dismal flop.
Historically and for the most part, inline 6's have been fantastic engines.... probably the best gasser was ford's 4.9 inline 6 with timing gears, it was tough as nails. Thus, it would be a crying out shame if chevy R&D's a completely new inline 6 diesel engine only to wrap a belt around that timing....groan.

 

Nissan is winning currently. The little Cummins mill is pretty sweet, gear driven timing. I don't like the wrapper, but if we could get a stand-alone drivetrain it would be interesting for older 70-90s rebuilds. Smaller 5.0 V8 package will fit in the old big block engine bays and it'll outpull any of those gassers.

 

Texas Tech, I think you re right, Nissan has that truck in a nice niche the stats on that truck makes it more than a "half ton" but less than a "3/4 Ton" ...I heard someone sum it up as a "5/8 ton". Yes that engine and drive train would make a nice setup in some older Fords