RichardJensen Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) No, I didn't. I asked would 40k a year justify it? You as usual took it to be an assertion of fact. So you talk about a diesel upgrade on the King Ranch and then immediately toss out 40k units, and we are supposed to treat those items as being wholly unrelated? Maybe you'd spend less time explaining yourself if you would express yourself more cogently the first time around. Edited February 5, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 glancing across the road at Valero, it the same price as Premium...$3.85..... Here it's 3.09 for regular and midgrade (87 & 89), 3.29 for premium (91), and 3.69 for diesel. Gas is actually up .10 and diesel is down .20. I guess it's 20% now vs. the 30% it had been. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted February 5, 2014 Author Share Posted February 5, 2014 I very sincerely mean this when I say it: feel free to never read or comment on anything I say Richard. You have exceptionally poor reading comprehension in general: to take this statement (part of a response) as a factual assertion, and blame me for then making it unclear is a little bizarre even for you. Original statement: "If Ford did charge an extra 5k for a power stroke king ranch f150, with a target of 40k a year, would the bof brain trust endorse the idea? Isn't the king ranch really a brand/prestige up charge anyway?" Follow up now would be that ram isn't just putting it as an option at the top end trims (and of course Mercedes at the other end is using diesel in North America as their entry engines). And btw aren't most f250 king ranches diesel already? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
351cid Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Sadly though, the Ram diesels numbers will KILL any powertrain from anyone....under load....diesels forte... Not 100%. My buddy has a 2000 Excursion with a 7.3L with 3.73 gears. He has a chip, a 5" exhaust and a wastegate modification. We figured he upped his factory torque rating from 540 to around 580 lb ft. I have a 2004 Superduty with a 2V V-10 and 4.30 gears. I have a chip, modified exhaust, and all fluids were changed to synthetic. We both run Michelin 285-75-16 tires. When we were scrapping out old cars, we ended up pulling a hill nearby. It's 4% for about 1.25 miles. I actually passed him (not quickly). When we weighed the two units, he was only 280 lbs heavier than I was. We both were stunned...until we calculated the rpm of the engines (I was spinning 3800 rpm to his 2100) and the difference of gear multiplication. Making a lot of educated guesses, we figured I was putting 30 lb ft more torque to the ground. My fuel usage was more, but $$'s were close. Everything being equal (weight, gears, etc.), you're are correct about the diesel. But not everything is always equal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chester Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 So, as you said, you spent (plan to spend) 50k on a trophy truck with bragging rights, what is the reason to make you prefer a half ton over a 3/4 ton? Can't be mileage, doesn't seem to be capability, either. There are plenty of reasons to pick a 1/2 ton over a 3/4 ton. The ride and handling is better in a half over a 3/4 ton truck. And believe it or not, mileage is looked at even if you can afford it. I could afford either gas or diesel, don't mind spending more on the diesel, but something just seems wrong not trying to get a little better mileage when possible. The trailer I pull is only about 8,000 pounds fully loaded with three big horses, and it is a gooseneck trailer. It is seldom pulled fully loaded. If it wasn't live animals moving around and was a bumper tow model instead of a goosneck, I'd say the 9,000 lb tow capacity of the Ram diesel 1/2 ton would be perfect. There are a million trailers out on the road that are bumper pull trailers and weight 5-7 thousand pounds loaded. A half ton is perfect for these, and for day in day out driving, I'd rather do it in a half ton. We used to have a 2 horse pumper pull, and I pulled it just fine for years with F150's. Never felt the need for a 3/4 ton truck unitl we got the gooseneck, but if a diesel option were avaialble on the F150's, that is what I would have had to pull my two horse pumper pull. Now my daily driver is a Ford Fusion. The 3/4 ton truck is parked most of the time, weekend use most of the time. If Ford comes out with a F150 diesel, I may get one for my daily driver. Other than that, the gas trucks just don't interest me. I'll stick with a Fusion or like vehicle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 You have exceptionally poor reading comprehension in general "If Ford did charge an extra 5k for a power stroke king ranch f150, with a target of 40k a year, would the bof brain trust endorse the idea? Isn't the king ranch really a brand/prestige up charge anyway?" Yes. I can't possibly figure out where I would've gotten the idea that you think 40k diesel King Ranch F150s is a reasonable number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) Sadly though, the Ram diesels numbers will KILL any powertrain from anyone....under load....diesels forte... And as you know, the issue with a diesel half ton has never been it capability or fuel economy, the problem has always been buyer resistance to paying +$4,000 the diesel premium. Horsepower is addictive, many new a half ton buyers will find any number of good excuses not to buy the diesel Ram, Some will definitly sign up but the majority of buyers will be looking for balanced fuel economy - performance and that's why increasing main stream fuel economy is paramount - reach as many buyers as possible.. If the majority of Ford's new '15 F150 models achieve between 24 and 26 mpg, then I think the case for diesel lessens and if the 10-speed arives at MCE and pushes that range to 25 to 27 mpg, then I think Ford will have achieved it goals and diesel half ton will be "off the books". I wonder if half ton buyers would be more open to a hybrid....... Edited February 5, 2014 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Not 100%. My buddy has a 2000 Excursion with a 7.3L with 3.73 gears. He has a chip, a 5" exhaust and a wastegate modification. We figured he upped his factory torque rating from 540 to around 580 lb ft. I have a 2004 Superduty with a 2V V-10 and 4.30 gears. I have a chip, modified exhaust, and all fluids were changed to synthetic. We both run Michelin 285-75-16 tires. When we were scrapping out old cars, we ended up pulling a hill nearby. It's 4% for about 1.25 miles. I actually passed him (not quickly). When we weighed the two units, he was only 280 lbs heavier than I was. We both were stunned...until we calculated the rpm of the engines (I was spinning 3800 rpm to his 2100) and the difference of gear multiplication. Making a lot of educated guesses, we figured I was putting 30 lb ft more torque to the ground. My fuel usage was more, but $$'s were close. Everything being equal (weight, gears, etc.), you're are correct about the diesel. But not everything is always equal. now add a 10000lb trailer and re-evaluate....I stand by what I said...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 And as you know, the issue with a diesel half ton has never been it capability or fuel economy, the problem has always been buyer resistance to paying +$4,000 the diesel premium. Horsepower is addictive, many new a half ton buyers will find any number of good excuses not to buy the diesel Ram, Some will definitly sign up but the majority of buyers will be looking for balanced fuel economy - performance. I think it comes down to the same gamble that Ford showed when they introduced the new Explorer.....What % DO actually tow...it will obviously be somewhat higher with pickups, but what % of Pickup owners tow, and what % of the time?.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 And as you know, the issue with a diesel half ton has never been it capability or fuel economy, the problem has always been buyer resistance to paying +$4,000 the diesel premium. Horsepower is addictive, many new a half ton buyers will find any number of good excuses not to buy the diesel Ram, Some will definitly sign up but the majority of buyers will be looking for balanced fuel economy - performance. speaking of HP...first Tremor just showed up....not sure Tremor is a good namein So Cal..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
351cid Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 now add a 10000lb trailer and re-evaluate....I stand by what I said...... Um...he was at 15,600 & I was at 15,300. I was pulling a 9000 lb trailer & he was pulling a 8000 lb trailer (his Ex weighs 1300 lbs more than my F-250). You don't have to sell me on diesel performance. I've logged 1.8 million miles in diesel engines. I'm just saying that an F-150 EB could be configured to stay with a diesel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92merc Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 I wonder if half ton buyers would be more open to a hybrid....... I don't think they flocked to the GM hybrid they had for a few years on the previous generation Silverado. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (his Ex weighs 1300 lbs more than my F-250) Good lord. She must be huge. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Um...he was at 15,600 & I was at 15,300. I was pulling a 9000 lb trailer & he was pulling a 8000 lb trailer (his Ex weighs 1300 lbs more than my F-250). You don't have to sell me on diesel performance. I've logged 1.8 million miles in diesel engines. I'm just saying that an F-150 EB could be configured to stay with a diesel. sorry, didnt see any mention of trailers....and your case is exceptionally unusual, an eco 2.7 or 3.5 towing a trailer wont get anywhere near what a loafing diesel will, a case can be made yes, but backed up with similar MPG numbers...I would have a FIELD day at Vegas...th 3.5 eco in the F-150 towing 10k doesnt get what a 6.7 f250 gets towing the same....things may have been different 10 years ago, but I also raise to the fore that BOTH the engines you were comparing were not stock...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chester Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 And as you know, the issue with a diesel half ton has never been it capability or fuel economy, the problem has always been buyer resistance to paying +$4,000 the diesel premium. Horsepower is addictive, many new a half ton buyers will find any number of good excuses not to buy the diesel Ram, Some will definitly sign up but the majority of buyers will be looking for balanced fuel economy - performance and that's why increasing main stream fuel economy is paramount - reach as many buyers as possible.. If the majority of Ford's new '15 F150 models achieve between 24 and 26 mpg, then I think the case for diesel lessens and if the 10-speed arives at MCE and pushes that range to 25 to 27 mpg, then I think Ford will have achieved it goals and diesel half ton will be "off the books". I wonder if half ton buyers would be more open to a hybrid....... From what I observe in a rural environment, you couldn't be more wrong. For example, a young coworker in my office drives 100 miles a day in a GMC 3/4 diesel. It is used as a car. Cost 50k plus (loaded with leather etc.). He said he would have gotten a half ton if he could get one with a diesel. Guy is single in his early thirties. Makes 30-40k per year. A Prius would have suited him better the way he uses it. I doubt he would ever buy the new Ram as he is a big GM guy, but you get the picture. He is a dime a dozen around these parts (North Florida). A hybrid maybe more practical, but guys I know in the country (everyone drives a truck) wouldn't be caught dead driving a hybrid truck. 4k more on a truck costing 40K+ is chicken feed. I can see the penny pinchers giving up the leather to get the diesel, but that is about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Good lord. She must be huge. big gals need loving too Rich... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 True. Just read fiat is predicting up to forty percent of ram half ton as diesel. I thought 40k was an outlandish number earlier. Do you have a link for that? This article from yesterday indicates they expect a take rate of 10-15% http://www.edmunds.com/car-news/2014-ram-1500-ecodiesel-delivers-28-mpg-on-the-highway.html Chrysler will not disclose volume numbers on the EcoDiesel model, but it expects the take rate to be about 10-15 percent of total Ram volume. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
351cid Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Good lord. She must be huge. When they went to the movies she takes up 2 seats...and never feels the arm rest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
351cid Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) sorry, didnt see any mention of trailers....and your case is exceptionally unusual, an eco 2.7 or 3.5 towing a trailer wont get anywhere near what a loafing diesel will, a case can be made yes, but backed up with similar MPG numbers...I would have a FIELD day at Vegas...th 3.5 eco in the F-150 towing 10k doesnt get what a 6.7 f250 gets towing the same....things may have been different 10 years ago, but I also raise to the fore that BOTH the engines you were comparing were not stock...... You are correct; they're not stock. Fuel mileage is not nearly as close. I get 7.0-7.5 where he gets 12.0 pulling. My whole point is: if you pull a load everyday, by all means look at a diesel...but if that's you're case then a 3/4 ton is what you should be buying. If you occasionally pull a load, then the diesel will do it better, but at what expense? A truck pulling air 80% of the time will be better suited to a gas engine. What you give up pulling will be more than compensated by lower costs on the fuel and maintenance costs. You ever seen what happens to diesel engines that are started and driven 5 miles then shut down on a regular basis? It's not pretty. Edited February 5, 2014 by 351cid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LSFan00 Posted February 5, 2014 Author Share Posted February 5, 2014 I lost the link I had earlier. This says thirty per Reid bigland (what a name). http://www.autonews.com/article/20140204/OEM04/140209948/ram-ecodiesel-receives-28-mpg-highway-rating# Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 sorry, didnt see any mention of trailers....and your case is exceptionally unusual, an eco 2.7 or 3.5 towing a trailer wont get anywhere near what a loafing diesel will, a case can be made yes, but backed up with similar MPG numbers...I would have a FIELD day at Vegas...th 3.5 eco in the F-150 towing 10k doesnt get what a 6.7 f250 gets towing the same....things may have been different 10 years ago, but I also raise to the fore that BOTH the engines you were comparing were not stock...... Remember, the diesel in the Ram is only a 3.0L. It won't be loafing towing a trailer any more than a 3.5 EB would. The 6.7 is a whole 'nother animal, and you can't compare its fuel economy numbers to the 3.5 when under load. It makes twice the torque as either the Ram diesel or the EB! Smaller engines (comparable...say, a NA V6 compared to a NA V8) typically get worse fuel economy than larger engines when towing heavy, so I would expect a 6.7L to get better fuel economy towing 11k than a 3.5L EB would. But a 3.0L diesel compared to a 3.5L EB would be a different story. I would expect slightly better out of the Ram diesel than the EB, but not drastically different numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 Remember, the diesel in the Ram is only a 3.0L. It won't be loafing towing a trailer any more than a 3.5 EB would. The 6.7 is a whole 'nother animal, and you can't compare its fuel economy numbers to the 3.5 when under load. It makes twice the torque as either the Ram diesel or the EB! Smaller engines (comparable...say, a NA V6 compared to a NA V8) typically get worse fuel economy than larger engines when towing heavy, so I would expect a 6.7L to get better fuel economy towing 11k than a 3.5L EB would. But a 3.0L diesel compared to a 3.5L EB would be a different story. I would expect slightly better out of the Ram diesel than the EB, but not drastically different numbers. will be interesting, but my $ is on an 8-10 mpg difference when towing anything of significance....tests and time will tell.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 You are correct; they're not stock. Fuel mileage is not nearly as close. I get 7.0-7.5 where he gets 12.0 pulling. My whole point is: if you pull a load everyday, by all means look at a diesel...but if that's you're case then a 3/4 ton is what you should be buying. If you occasionally pull a load, then the diesel will do it better, but at what expense? A truck pulling air 80% of the time will be better suited to a gas engine. What you give up pulling will be more than compensated by lower costs on the fuel and maintenance costs. You ever seen what happens to diesel engines that are started and driven 5 miles then shut down on a regular basis? It's not pretty. explains why tow truck companies leave the diesels idling for extended periods of time rather than shutting off... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 will be interesting, but my $ is on an 8-10 mpg difference when towing anything of significance....tests and time will tell.... I will take that bet all day long, and twice on Sunday! My guess is about 2-3 MPG better when towing 6k+. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
351cid Posted February 5, 2014 Share Posted February 5, 2014 (edited) I will take that bet all day long, and twice on Sunday! My guess is about 2-3 MPG better when towing 6k+. I'm gonna split the middle based on my experience with my buddy. 5 mpg difference. Don't forget to add in the cost of DEF. Edited February 5, 2014 by 351cid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.