Jump to content

Ram 1/2 ton Diesel a hit...did Ford miss the boat?


Recommended Posts

Read the Automotive News article on which the USA Today article is based. It's pretty clear that they're asking for more VM Motori diesels for the Ram trucks.

 

Article is behind a pay wall. If you have access to it, please post a fair use excerpt of relevant passage.

 

Edit: the article mentioned dealers have orders 10,000 Ram diesel, which is likely the planned production run for 2014. No mention of how many are actually sold. It is a drop in the bucket compare to the number of light duty pickup trucks sold annually in North America. Ford can sell that many 2.7 Ecoboost in a few weeks in 2015.

 

The article also mentions that it will take VM 18 months to ramp up production to meet the additional demand... still no mention that it is intended for Ram. Could easily be for the rumored 2017 US-market Wrangler diesel.

 

Kind of making a mountain out of mole hill. It would be something quite different if FCA actually delivered 10,000 diesel pickups to customers in 3 months.

Edited by bzcat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT thats not the prime purpose for an SUV, one is more likely to tow with a Truck....twist on perception....crafty

 

As I recall, your whole point is that the diesel Ram is superb for towing. It is not. And that is probably why Ford has not put a diesel in the F150: any diesel powerful enough to provide gas-equivalent towing is probably going to be far too expensive to be economical in an F150.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very legitimate points..however Dodge can offer something at a price point that customers want. The "I want a Diesel" crowd is perhaps larger than many think. A whole lot of customers do not buy based on logic.

 

There is demand...now Dodge may not be able to meet demand,and that can create a perception of success...and hence, breed more demand.

A friend of mine just bought a Porsche Cayenne diesel. With his money he should have bought a performance Cayenne. He falls into the I want a diesel crowd. He just left GMC after 5 Denalis for Porsche because he was done with trucks. He's thrilled that he'll be getting 20 mpg instead of 15. He wanted a diesel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A friend of mine just bought a Porsche Cayenne diesel. With his money he should have bought a performance Cayenne. He falls into the I want a diesel crowd. He just left GMC after 5 Denalis for Porsche because he was done with trucks. He's thrilled that he'll be getting 20 mpg instead of 15. He wanted a diesel.

 

By any chance, does your friend also sport a big thick beard? Because going from trucks to a less trucky truck with a diesel is a total hipster move.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article also mentions that it will take VM 18 months to ramp up production to meet the additional demand... still no mention that it is intended for Ram. Could easily be for the rumored 2017 US-market Wrangler diesel.

Fair Use quote:

Ram brand head Reid Bigland said dealers have experienced "overwhelming demand" for EcoDiesel-powered Ram 1500s since the trucks arrived at dealerships.

 

"We got well in excess of 10,000 orders in just the first few days that we opened this thing up, and that ordering and demand has really sustained itself," Bigland said at a press event here. "We've sent word over to VM Motori and they're in the process of ramping up, but realistically, nobody can turn a switch to do the things that it takes to get ramped up, but they're in the process of doing it."

-- http://www.autonews.com/article/20140707/OEM01/307079960/chrysler-seeks-more-diesels

I don't know why the head of Ram would be requesting an increase in production for Jeep, particularly when the same article says that GC diesel sales have "leveled off at about 8 percent," and that Bigland "wouldn't say whether Ram had asked Jeep for any of its EcoDiesel engines." That sure sounds like Ram is trying to get increased production for Ram trucks.

 

I do agree that it's a drop in the bucket--even if they maxed out VM Motori's NA-targeted production and hit 50K sales, I seriously doubt that it's enough to justify the investment, from Ford's perspective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

lol, thats actually funny, JPD80, how does that compare with the Aussie Ranger with a diesel????....

Payload for a T6 Ranger is around 2500 lbs, they can tow up to 7,000 lbs.

The gross vehicle mass maxes out at 7,000 lbs so it probably overlaps F150 right at the bottom end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know all the debate about Ford going into the diesel 1/2 ton arena...its pros and cons,but I really think Ford missed the boat on this one. There is demand for a 1/2 ton diesel,Dodge saw it and acted on it, Ford didn't. I think it was a missed opportunity for the Blue Oval.

 

Link:

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/07/07/chrysler-ram-jeep-diesel/12300971/

 

The US Today piece is misleading.

 

Ram is still talking about the dealer inventory orders.

 

Quote from the linked AutoNews piece:

"We got well in excess of 10,000 orders in just the first few days that we opened this thing up, and that ordering and demand has really sustained itself," Bigland said at a press event here.

 

How many times is Ram going to cite these dealer "orders" as sales? Several months ago these were dealers ordering inventory for the lots. 400 were to actual buyers. How many have actually sold to buyers since then?

 

http://www.autonews.com/article/20140707/OEM01/307079960/chrysler-seeks-more-diesels

Edited by Bryan1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do agree that it's a drop in the bucket--even if they maxed out VM Motori's NA-targeted production and hit 50K sales, I seriously doubt that it's enough to justify the investment, from Ford's perspective.

 

What investment? The 3.2 I5 is already in production for the Transit. It's already been federalized and engineered for the F-150. It would only be a variable cost at this point.The heavy lifting has already been done.

 

Where engine choice is concerned, Ford has done a great deal to streamline their engine offerings across all models. If anything, adding the 3.2 to multiple NA vehicles would make some financial sense for that engine.

 

You might also see a case where the take rate on the 3.2 exceeds the take rate on the 6.2 V8. Would they then discontinue the 6.2 because it doesn't surpass a certain sales threshold? Likewise, do they discontinue the 6.8 because it doesn't pass a certain sales threshold?

 

 

As far as number of engine offerings, how many F150s are sold in a year with 3 engine choices? Now let's compare that to the Mustang which will also have 3 engine choices on far less volume. Increasing to 4 engine choices wont be the catastophic event some are painting this out to be.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody said it was catastrophic or even very difficult. The question is whether or how much it would benefit Ford to do it and the answer seems to be "not much" so it's not a priority.

 

For a company in Dodge's market position and given their current engine lineup it makes perfect sense for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

probably reflective of the rear suspension more than anything else...

The old 7.3L PowerStroke was probably one of the best engines that Ford ever put into an F350.

 

The development engineers could easily smoke the tires on a dually by reving the engine up to about 2,000 rpm and sidestepping the clutch. When the vehicle was loaded up to it maximum weight, sidestepping the clutch would sometimes have catastrophic results, Axles, u-joints, driveshafts, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many times is Ram going to cite these dealer "orders" as sales? Several months ago these were dealers ordering inventory for the lots. 400 were to actual buyers. How many have actually sold to buyers since then?

The AN article also says that the EcoDiesels only spend 13 days on the lot, compared to 90+ days for other Ram models. It sounds like they're having more trouble getting the mills than moving the trucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What investment? The 3.2 I5 is already in production for the Transit. It's already been federalized and engineered for the F-150. It would only be a variable cost at this point.The heavy lifting has already been done.

 

Where engine choice is concerned, Ford has done a great deal to streamline their engine offerings across all models. If anything, adding the 3.2 to multiple NA vehicles would make some financial sense for that engine.

 

You might also see a case where the take rate on the 3.2 exceeds the take rate on the 6.2 V8. Would they then discontinue the 6.2 because it doesn't surpass a certain sales threshold? Likewise, do they discontinue the 6.8 because it doesn't pass a certain sales threshold?

 

 

As far as number of engine offerings, how many F150s are sold in a year with 3 engine choices? Now let's compare that to the Mustang which will also have 3 engine choices on far less volume. Increasing to 4 engine choices wont be the catastophic event some are painting this out to be.

Isn't the 6.2 a lame duck engine in the F150 anyway? It's not going to be offered in the 2015... four other engines are. Now, does the F150 need five engines? You decide.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What investment?

There are costs for adding an engine line to the F150. It's more complexity on the assembly line, more complexity in the supply chain, more logistical complexity--and every 3.2PSD that goes into an F150 (which doesn't need the increased volume) is a 3.2PSD that can't go into a Transit (which very well might need the volume). I'm not saying that these are necessarily big expenses, but they are not free (even free stuff ain't free at these scales), regardless of what work has already been done. At this time, Ford apparently believes that the juice isn't worth the squeeze.

 

You might also see a case where the take rate on the 3.2 exceeds the take rate on the 6.2 V8. Would they then discontinue the 6.2 because it doesn't surpass a certain sales threshold? Likewise, do they discontinue the 6.8 because it doesn't pass a certain sales threshold?

The 6.2 is Dead Man Walking in the F150, so that pretty well undercuts your point. It's apparently only staying in production to supply the SuperDuty lines.

Edited by SoonerLS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody said it was catastrophic or even very difficult. The question is whether or how much it would benefit Ford to do it and the answer seems to be "not much" so it's not a priority.

 

For a company in Dodge's market position and given their current engine lineup it makes perfect sense for them.

where is the benefit to offering an ecoboost in the Mustang? How many more cars will they sell because this engine is being offered?

Edited by J-150
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are costs for adding an engine line to the F150. It's more complexity on the assembly line, more complexity in the supply chain, more logistical complexity--and every 3.2PSD that goes into an F150 (which doesn't need the increased volume) is a 3.2PSD that can't go into a Transit (which very well might need the volume). I'm not saying that these are necessarily big expenses, but they are not free (even free stuff ain't free at these scales), regardless of what work has already been done. At this time, Ford apparently believes that the juice isn't worth the squeeze.

 

The 6.2 is Dead Man Walking in the F150, so that pretty well undercuts your point. It's apparently only staying in production to supply the SuperDuty lines.

 

 

6.2 volume in the Superduty will be how many engines?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the 6.2 a lame duck engine in the F150 anyway? It's not going to be offered in the 2015... four other engines are. Now, does the F150 need five engines? You decide.

 

 

My mistake, I neglected to include the 2.7 in my count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

where is the benefit to offering an ecoboost in the Mustang? How many more cars will they sell because this engine is being offered?

 

It will probably replace the NA 3.7L within a year or two. It helps with CAFE. Same reason they added a 2.7L EB to the F150.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody said it was catastrophic or even very difficult. The question is whether or how much it would benefit Ford to do it and the answer seems to be "not much" so it's not a priority.

 

For a company in Dodge's market position and given their current engine lineup it makes perfect sense for them.

 

 

IMO, there is no immediate benefit I can see other than a small number of conquest sales of Chevy guys that don't want to buy a Dodge to get a small diesel. What would that number be? Maybe a few thousand. Remaining volume would just be from another F150 model.

 

That said, If Dodge does see success with this engine, including large numbers of conquest sales, then I think Ford should get into the arena. Many HD Dodge buyers will tell you they didn't buy a truck, they bought an engine. We all know how well the Dodge HDs are doing. If this is something they can duplicate in 1/2 tons, Ford better have that defense plan ready to go inside of a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Ford better have that defense plan ready to go inside of a year.

 

No car company spends more on truck research and development than Ford, and as a general rule, no company has spent that money more wisely. If Ford's extremely competent pickup team does not see a profitable market for a diesel engine that they have ready to go, then there probably isn't one.

 

As another poster pointed out a few pages back, this post should be titled:

 

"Half of all F150s are Ecoboosts. Did GM and Chrysler Miss the Boat?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the 6.2 a lame duck engine in the F150 anyway? It's not going to be offered in the 2015... four other engines are. Now, does the F150 need five engines? You decide.

well in that light, does the F-150 need 4 body styles, 4 wheelbases, 21( YES 21 ) trim packages, X amount of wheel and tire packaghes, X amout of axle ratio, captains chairs, bench seats etc etc etc ...it seems they think market dominance is a direct reflection of catering to EVERYONES wish lists....so why would adding a diesel be any different?.......

Edited by Deanh
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That said, If Dodge does see success with this engine, including large numbers of conquest sales,

Again, if they max out VM Motori's ability to supply them, you're still only talking about 50K units. That's not going to be a lot of sales, conquest or otherwise, in the light truck arena.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...