Ford Delays Diesel for F-150

[jpvbs]

In the perpetual 4.4 diesel thread in the Ford Rumors forum below, there is an article cited that claims the 4.4 is still slated for production, but for use in Jaguar/Land Rover applications. It wouldn't be surprising if Ford would continue to supply engines for Tata. So if it will be produced on a limited scale, maybe there is still hope for the F150, although I am sure it is easier to bury the costs in a J/LR.

 

And related, Cummins has stated that still plan on producing their 5.0 diesel V8. Pickuptrucks.com has a recent article stating that even though Dodge isn't interested anymore, they may sell it to another truck manufacturer, like Nissan or Toyota. The Cummins engine has helped sell a lot of Dodge trucks. I'm sure a lot of buyers might give Toyota or Nissan a second look if they were "powered by Cummins."

[rmc523]

In the perpetual 4.4 diesel thread in the Ford Rumors forum below, there is an article cited that claims the 4.4 is still slated for production, but for use in Jaguar/Land Rover applications. It wouldn't be surprising if Ford would continue to supply engines for Tata. So if it will be produced on a limited scale, maybe there is still hope for the F150, although I am sure it is easier to bury the costs in a J/LR.

 

And related, Cummins has stated that still plan on producing their 5.0 diesel V8. Pickuptrucks.com has a recent article stating that even though Dodge isn't interested anymore, they may sell it to another truck manufacturer, like Nissan or Toyota. The Cummins engine has helped sell a lot of Dodge trucks. I'm sure a lot of buyers might give Toyota or Nissan a second look if they were "powered by Cummins."

 

Well the next Titan was supposed to be built by Chrysler (if that deal is still on....)

[F250]

In the perpetual 4.4 diesel thread in the Ford Rumors forum below, there is an article cited that claims the 4.4 is still slated for production, but for use in Jaguar/Land Rover applications. It wouldn't be surprising if Ford would continue to supply engines for Tata. So if it will be produced on a limited scale, maybe there is still hope for the F150, although I am sure it is easier to bury the costs in a J/LR.

 

And related, Cummins has stated that still plan on producing their 5.0 diesel V8. Pickuptrucks.com has a recent article stating that even though Dodge isn't interested anymore, they may sell it to another truck manufacturer, like Nissan or Toyota. The Cummins engine has helped sell a lot of Dodge trucks. I'm sure a lot of buyers might give Toyota or Nissan a second look if they were "powered by Cummins."

 

Sounds like even Ford isn't confident in their new diesel. They want to put it on the road first in the Land Rover by supplying them to Tata. If it's a failure then the F-150 doesn't get the engine and a bad reputation, if it's a success Ford offers it in the F-series in a couple of years and the magazines assume Ford is buying the 4.4 from Tata since they had it first. All the while the competition gets to introduce 1/2 ton diesels ahead of Ford.

[F250]

And how much different is the current F-150 then the older gen? Not much...

 

VS

 

Edited May 9, 2009 by F250

[twintornados]

 

VS

 

 

Just for fun... a 1976 F-150 with Ranger trim

[rmc523]

Sounds like even Ford isn't confident in their new diesel. They want to put it on the road first in the Land Rover by supplying them to Tata. If it's a failure then the F-150 doesn't get the engine and a bad reputation, if it's a success Ford offers it in the F-series in a couple of years and the magazines assume Ford is buying the 4.4 from Tata since they had it first. All the while the competition gets to introduce 1/2 ton diesels ahead of Ford.

 

Everybody else has cancelled their 1/2 ton diesels too...

[battyr]

Sounds like even Ford isn't confident in their new diesel. They want to put it on the road first in the Land Rover by supplying them to Tata. If it's a failure then the F-150 doesn't get the engine and a bad reputation, if it's a success Ford offers it in the F-series in a couple of years and the magazines assume Ford is buying the 4.4 from Tata since they had it first. All the while the competition gets to introduce 1/2 ton diesels ahead of Ford.

 

That is only speculation. I have full confidence in Fords ability to design a quality diesel. They know how to design a high quality truck engine. They have high quality diesels in Europe.

 

Until the cost of gasoline goes up, the market for the diesels are limited in the US. Technology may make the EcoBoost a good alternative to a diesel. International had the sales volume from making engines for themselves and Ford. Ford does not have this advantage for their own engine. You know that diesels will sell in Europe in Land Rovers. It only makes sense to try to sell it in both Land Rovers and Ford Trucks.

[jpd80]

Ecoboost provides a here and now answer to the need for good bottom end torque.

It's strange that people still think they need diesels when gasoline power can be almost as efficient.

[toyboxrv]

Ecoboost provides a here and now answer to the need for good bottom end torque.

It's strange that people still think they need diesels when gasoline power can be almost as efficient.

 

I'm guessing you have not had the opportunity to pull a trailer with a diesel. There is no way an Ecoboost 3.5L V6 is going to be close to a 4.4L diesel. Better fuel economy than some of the larger diesels have been showing would be helpful, but it is so annoying to drive a tow vehicle not up to the task.

[jpd80]

I'm guessing you have not had the opportunity to pull a trailer with a diesel. There is no way an Ecoboost 3.5L V6 is going to be close to a 4.4L diesel. Better fuel economy than some of the larger diesels have been showing would be helpful, but it is so annoying to drive a tow vehicle not up to the task.

Even Ford's new 3.0 V6 diesel would out tow some of your week kneed V8s,

it has near 450 lb ft of torque down low - matching the 6.2 liter gasoline V8.

 

Maybe Ford does an Ecoboost 4.6 V8 instead of the 4.4 Turbodiesel?

Something like that would have 480 lb ft from 1800 to 5000, that would be good too.

 

I've done plenty of towing in vehicles, some you don't see in North America.

Diesel Rangers and Hilux (Tacomas), F250 diesel and Sliverado (Duramax) amongst a few.

Gasoline isn't my first choice, I think the way US emission regs are you're stuck with Ecoboost.

Edited May 10, 2009 by jpd80

[theoldwizard]

Sounds like even Ford isn't confident in their new diesel. ...

They have "no confidence" that there is adequate demand to make this a profitable venture.

[theoldwizard]

I'm guessing you have not had the opportunity to pull a trailer with a diesel. There is no way an Ecoboost 3.5L V6 is going to be close to a 4.4L diesel.

I concur. Even the new 5.0L would not tow as well as a 4.4L. But then again, how much towing to F150s owners do.

 

As someone else pointed out that perhaps Ford was concerned that the 4.4L F150 would be "too good" and steal sales from from the F250 Diesel.

 

The real question I have is why is Ford giving up the the diesel van market ? They have had the Super Duty van and cutaway market locked up for years. Now they have no diesel for any van.

 

The new Transit has been delayed in Europe (I suspect it did not meet all of the US customer "requirements") so it will have an even later introduction in the US (2012-2014MY?) I still can not imagine Transit replacing all of the E series applications when the biggest engine is a turbo I4 diesel. Then again, maybe they are reworking the engine compartment to hold a 4.4L ? We can only hope.

[theoldwizard]

...Gasoline isn't my first choice, I think the way US emission regs are you're stuck with Ecoboost.

If government wanted to do something truly helpful, they would come up with a plan to somehow "merge" US and EU emissions standards and light duty diesels would be good starting place.

 

This "too logical" to ever happen, especially with California leading the "green states" back to the days horse and buggy. Then again, maybe not. Horse "emissions" are pretty bad !

[ironhorse]

Guys,a huge ammount of diesel customers buy a diesel for the "status" of it. Believe it or not, I sell F250 diesels to folks that at most might tow a small boat or just go to Lowes or Home Depot for some Mulch..most just "drive them around". That is the market the 150 diesel would cater to. There would be a huge market for that...I think one of Ford's reasons is the diesel 150 could canibalize Super Duty sales.

Edited May 10, 2009 by ironhorse

[twintornados]

Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Twin I Beam blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah

It is all I hear now whenever theoldwizzer opens his mouth.....I used to listen to what he said, until wiz decided to banish the Twin I Beam from Econoline, except...he never told Ford of his plans.......admit you were wrong wizzer.....

[theoldwizard]

It is all I hear now whenever theoldwizzer opens his mouth.....I used to listen to what he said, until wiz decided to banish the Twin I Beam from Econoline, except...he never told Ford of his plans.......admit you were wrong wizzer.....

If it will get you to stop wasting disk space and internet bandwidth and make you feel better...

 

I WAS WRONG !

[Hydro]

I'm guessing you have not had the opportunity to pull a trailer with a diesel. There is no way an Ecoboost 3.5L V6 is going to be close to a 4.4L diesel. Better fuel economy than some of the larger diesels have been showing would be helpful, but it is so annoying to drive a tow vehicle not up to the task.

 

Have you towed with a DPF equipped diesel? They FUCKING suck! Granted my F-250 did tow my toyhauler easier than my F-150 (apples to oranges) it did it sucking more fuel than my 5.4L gasser. That's just Pathetic.

I would prefer a boosted gas motor like the EB 3.5L over a DPF/urea 4.4L diesel. The diesel maintenece, price mark-up, higher fuel cost, regens, shitty fuel mileage would NOT make sense in a 1/2 ton. In the 3/4 ton and higher, fine because you can utilise the higher tow ratings. Those trucks were made to work and higher maintenence is a given. With a 1/2 ton you're limited on how much you can tow and all those negatives don't add up.

I would guaranty the EB would beat a 4.4L diesel in MPG especially towing. Plus being boosted, the 3.5L would get on the torque curve pretty quickly almost matching a diesel. Granted it wouldn't make as much power, but as said earlier, you're limited on much you can tow anyway. If it were a non DPF equipped 4.4L then it would make sense because the fuel mileage would be great and it might help with all the extra maintence and headaches involved with owning a diesel.

Another thing is the grocery getter truck. I'm betting 95% of 1/2 tons are peoples everyday drivers. Which means lots of stop and go, quick trips to the market & multiple errands. That puts a HUGE taxing on the DPF. Your talking regens every week, which means sucking and wasting precious diesel fuel. Or how about the person who keeps shutting the truck off when a regen is REQUIRED. That means hopping on a freeway for 15 minutes or more just to clean your exhaust. If you don't do that you will completely plug the DPF and get the bill because you didn't obey what the truck was telling you to do. What a joke, the trucks drive you, not the other way around. With every regen it creates soot which shortens the DPF life everytime. I can imagine how many upset, non-educated everyday drivers there will be when they get a bill for $3,500 to replace the DPF (not covered under warranty). Also the bill for Urea refills along with the higher oil change cost.

So, unless you are towing heavy and often diesels are not worth it especially in a 1/2 ton. I have no tears for Ford dropping the 4.4L. Bring on the user friendly gasser.

Edited May 10, 2009 by Hydro

[twintornados]

It is all I hear now whenever theoldwizzer opens his mouth.....I used to listen to what he said, until wiz decided to banish the Twin I Beam from Econoline, except...he never told Ford of his plans.......admit you were wrong wizzer.....

 

 

If it will get you to stop wasting disk space and internet bandwidth and make you feel better...

 

I WAS WRONG !

Thank you.

[silvrsvt]

 

VS

 

 

And how much more opening behind the grill is there over the '10 F-150 vs the 09 F-150? It doesnt look to me that there has been a huge change (besides shape) that would make the '10 more diesel friendly for cooling...

[toyboxrv]

Have you towed with a DPF equipped diesel? They FUCKING suck! Granted my F-250 did tow my toyhauler easier than my F-150 (apples to oranges) it did it sucking more fuel than my 5.4L gasser. That's just Pathetic.

I would prefer a boosted gas motor like the EB 3.5L over a DPF/urea 4.4L diesel. The diesel maintenece, price mark-up, higher fuel cost, regens, shitty fuel mileage would NOT make sense in a 1/2 ton. In the 3/4 ton and higher, fine because you can utilise the higher tow ratings. Those trucks were made to work and higher maintenence is a given. With a 1/2 ton you're limited on how much you can tow and all those negatives don't add up.

I would guaranty the EB would beat a 4.4L diesel in MPG especially towing. Plus being boosted, the 3.5L would get on the torque curve pretty quickly almost matching a diesel. Granted it wouldn't make as much power, but as said earlier, you're limited on much you can tow anyway. If it were a non DPF equipped 4.4L then it would make sense because the fuel mileage would be great and it might help with all the extra maintence and headaches involved with owning a diesel.

Another thing is the grocery getter truck. I'm betting 95% of 1/2 tons are peoples everyday drivers. Which means lots of stop and go, quick trips to the market & multiple errands. That puts a HUGE taxing on the DPF. Your talking regens every week, which means sucking and wasting precious diesel fuel. Or how about the person who keeps shutting the truck off when a regen is REQUIRED. That means hopping on a freeway for 15 minutes or more just to clean your exhaust. If you don't do that you will completely plug the DPF and get the bill because you didn't obey what the truck was telling you to do. What a joke, the trucks drive you, not the other way around. With every regen it creates soot which shortens the DPF life everytime. I can imagine how many upset, non-educated everyday drivers there will be when they get a bill for $3,500 to replace the DPF (not covered under warranty). Also the bill for Urea refills along with the higher oil change cost.

So, unless you are towing heavy and often diesels are not worth it especially in a 1/2 ton. I have no tears for Ford dropping the 4.4L. Bring on the user friendly gasser.

 

I have a friend who has a newer Cummins with a DPF and yes he is disappointed in the mileage. There is no way a 5.4L can do what his Cummins can and most likely would be with even lower mileage if it tried.

 

Boosted gas engines have considerably higher exhaust gas temperatures under load than diesels and that leads to shorter engine life. Mazda has an advanced DPF that uses less fuel to regenerate and urea systems are cleaner to begin with. So far I haven't seen any real costs with a diesel using urea, so you're just talking BS. The DPF is an emissions control device so yes it is covered by warranty. Where do you get the higher oil change cost from a downstream emissions device?

 

I don't use my truck as a grocery getter and don't do short trips either. Your assumption is just opinion. If you don't want one then don't buy one. Don't tell me that I don't want one and would rather have a small V6 turbo gasser. I don't. They're not that user friendly.

[Hydro]

"So far I haven't seen any real costs with a diesel using urea, so you're just talking BS. The DPF is an emissions control device so yes it is covered by warranty. Where do you get the higher oil change cost from a downstream emissions device?"

 

So you think they are going to give the urea away for free? The tank will need topped off with every oil change.

A cracked DPF is covered under warranty yes. Show ONE instance where a soot filled DPF will get changed out under warranty. It is like a catalytic converter, when it's spent, it's spent. Fork over some money for a new one.

Diesels have larger oil pan reservoirs so yes, oil changes cost more than a gasser. I never said they cost more from an emission device.

With the SAME 19ft toyhauler my F-150 got better mileage than my 6.4L F-250. The 250 ate up hills and pulled great , but never passed a fuel station.

[7Mary3]

I think the cost and complexity of 2010 and newer diesel emission controls are going to keep diesels out of light trucks for the most part. Urea SCR may allow for less EGR, but you still are required to have a DPF. I don't see diesels as being cost effective in trucks under 8,500# GVW.

[theoldwizard]

Have you towed with a DPF equipped diesel? They FUCKING suck! Granted my F-250 did tow my toyhauler easier than my F-150 (apples to oranges) it did it sucking more fuel than my 5.4L gasser. That's just Pathetic.

I would prefer a boosted gas motor like the EB 3.5L over a DPF/urea 4.4L diesel...

I do know the current 6.4L is NOT the best on fuel economy, but don't condemn a new engine before it gets a chance to prove itself.

 

One of the reason Ford wanted out of the Navistar "deal" was to develop new diesel emission control technology (like urea) WITHOUT having to share the technology with Navistar. Yes, urea is not unique to Ford, but how they use it along with revised regeneration cycles will make a huge difference in both performance and fuel economy.

[theoldwizard]

I think the cost and complexity of 2010 and newer diesel emission controls are going to keep diesels out of light trucks for the most part. Urea SCR may allow for less EGR, but you still are required to have a DPF. I don't see diesels as being cost effective in trucks under 8,500# GVW.

That depends on the cost of diesel fuel (which has been artificially high due to worldwide demand and, until very recently, a worldwide supply shortage) and the amount of driving done annually. For the "average" driver you are correct.

[Noah Harbinger]

It is all I hear now whenever theoldwizzer opens his mouth.....I used to listen to what he said, until wiz decided to banish the Twin I Beam from Econoline, except...he never told Ford of his plans.......admit you were wrong wizzer.....

 

How old are you? 10? 8?