J-150 Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 I guess I was speaking for what I see around here. The big loads are towed with 3/4 ton trucks. Even the travel trailers and fifth wheels that I see in campgrounds (except the lighter ones) are normally towed by 3/4 ton and larger trucks. And if you have to spend that extra 4-5k bump for the diesel, now you can only afford $15k for toys instead of $20k. Unless you have unlimited income, which most folks don't. Here is my scenario. When I purchased my '08 F250, I went used because I couldn't swing a new truck (not couldn't, but didn't want to spend the extra). If Ford offered an EB in the F250 for $7k less than the diesel option, I would have bought new instead of used. you will spend $4-5,000 on a gasser rebuild when you blow it from towing too much weight. Mileage aside, some engines are just not meant to tow/haul sustained loads over a certain weight. Doesn't matter what it says on paper. We can armchair CEO all we want. Let's talk to the people that actually work their trucks and see what their experiences are with downtime for engine /suspension repairs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J-150 Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Bad article with no facts, it says its a hit, what do THEY define as a "hit? To me if it's not 25% of your unit sales, then its not a hit to me. Also, Chevy should be the one worrying nipping at it's feet, not so much on Ford...Ford should just look and glare over like a trophy wife would look at the help, but not as if she were a college aged nanny either. But wait... Chevy is looking to pick up lost Silverado volume with the Canyonado... which will have an optional diesel. We also know GM has a light diesel ready for placement in the Silverado/Sieera should they need to. In all honesty, I think both GM and FCA have been waiting to see the long term, success or failure of the eco-boost. The fact that it's successful might cause GM to go the turboed gas route as well and shelve any 1/2ton diesel plans. FCA just doesn't have an engine or engine program that can take the 3.5 EB or 2.7 EB on directly, so they came up with a marketing alternative. Will it work for them? Sure it will. But not enough to dethrone the F150. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 But wait... Chevy is looking to pick up lost Silverado volume with the Canyonado... which will have an optional diesel. We also know GM has a light diesel ready for placement in the Silverado/Sieera should they need to. In all honesty, I think both GM and FCA have been waiting to see the long term, success or failure of the eco-boost. The fact that it's successful might cause GM to go the turboed gas route as well and shelve any 1/2ton diesel plans. FCA just doesn't have an engine or engine program that can take the 3.5 EB or 2.7 EB on directly, so they came up with a marketing alternative. Will it work for them? Sure it will. But not enough to dethrone the F150. agreed...Im not poo pooing Fords decision to go the eco-boost route, the sales numbers speak for themselves....but there IS that niche market of people that actually utilize their triucks towing on a daily basis, and thats where diesel engines display their mileage strength...under load...my bet is we WILL eventually see a revised version of the Transits diesel in the f-150, not for volume, but a superior towing alternative mileage wise. And it makes sense, as the engine is already federalized and would compliment Fords ongoing trusk superiority.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 I guess I was speaking for what I see around here. The big loads are towed with 3/4 ton trucks. Even the travel trailers and fifth wheels that I see in campgrounds (except the lighter ones) are normally towed by 3/4 ton and larger trucks. And if you have to spend that extra 4-5k bump for the diesel, now you can only afford $15k for toys instead of $20k. Unless you have unlimited income, which most folks don't. Here is my scenario. When I purchased my '08 F250, I went used because I couldn't swing a new truck (not couldn't, but didn't want to spend the extra). If Ford offered an EB in the F250 for $7k less than the diesel option, I would have bought new instead of used. now....think what your decisons would have been if you didnt tow any more than 10000lbs and there was a 1/2 ton diesel with that capacity for about the same price as a gasser 250/ 350/ Ram diesel.....hmmmmm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 thats where diesel engines display their mileage strength...under load You're aware that the payload & tow rating on the Ram diesel are well below the maximums for that truck, and are a bit iffy for many applications (i.e. RV towing, powersports towing, etc.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 You're aware that the payload & tow rating on the Ram diesel are well below the maximums for that truck, and are a bit iffy for many applications (i.e. RV towing, powersports towing, etc.) probably reflective of the rear suspension more than anything else...but Im quite sure the people buying the vehicle are fully aware of its capacities...lets face it, the fact the F-150 is now rated to 11500 to a MAJORITY is probably overkill.....good to have maybe, necessary? not sure except for a small %....reality is , you tow 11500 with an Ecoboost in a 150 on a day to day basis, your fuel costs will be outrageous....heck, Id go as far to say anything over 6000lbs will have you cussing at Fuel consumption.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
03 LS Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Bad article with no facts, it says its a hit, what do THEY define as a "hit? To me if it's not 25% of your unit sales, then its not a hit to me. Also, Chevy should be the one worrying nipping at it's feet, not so much on Ford...Ford should just look and glare over like a trophy wife would look at the help, but not as if she were a college aged nanny either.Since FCA wants to marketing it as success without facts, I digged out their sales releases for Apr - June, '14, the 3 months after Ram 1500 diesel went on sale:04/14: Ram pickup truck were up 17 percent in April,with Light Duty sales increased 7 percent, while Heavy Duty pickups were up 32 percent. (Ram total up 22%) 05/14: Ram pickup truck were up 17 percent in May, with Light Duty sales increased 14 percent, while Heavy Duty pickups were up 34 percent. (Ram total up 19%) 06/14: Ram pickup truck were up 12 percent in June, with Light Duty sales increased 4 percent, while Heavy Duty pickups were up 31 percent. (Ram total up 14%) So, for 3 straight months, Ram 1500's (inc. ecodiesel) increase lagged not only Ram HD, but Ram brand as a whole! Did the diesel take away gasser 1500 sales, or pushed buyers to Ram HD, or both? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 you will spend $4-5,000 on a gasser rebuild when you blow it from towing too much weight. Mileage aside, some engines are just not meant to tow/haul sustained loads over a certain weight. Doesn't matter what it says on paper. We can armchair CEO all we want. Let's talk to the people that actually work their trucks and see what their experiences are with downtime for engine /suspension repairs. Come on now. I don't see anyone towing enough with an F150 that it's going to cause an engine rebuild. If so, well, that's their own stupidity. agreed...Im not poo pooing Fords decision to go the eco-boost route, the sales numbers speak for themselves....but there IS that niche market of people that actually utilize their triucks towing on a daily basis, and thats where diesel engines display their mileage strength...under load...my bet is we WILL eventually see a revised version of the Transits diesel in the f-150, not for volume, but a superior towing alternative mileage wise. And it makes sense, as the engine is already federalized and would compliment Fords ongoing trusk superiority.... We may very well see a diesel in the F150. I'm not sure it is necessary, but Ford may feel they need it just to "keep up" with the competition. Let's see how the Ram diesel sales are in 2 years once the newness of the diesel wears off and it has some fuel economy competition from the F150 with the 2.7L EB. Say all you want about towing, the Ram diesel is going to those that want good MPG numbers, not those that want to tow lots of weight regularly. See RJ's comment on weight. now....think what your decisons would have been if you didnt tow any more than 10000lbs and there was a 1/2 ton diesel with that capacity for about the same price as a gasser 250/ 350/ Ram diesel.....hmmmmm I don't tow more than 10k (roughly 9-9.5k) and I don't tow regularly. I could tow my fifth wheel with an F150, and I have considered going with the F150 for my replacement. For me, though, I just feel with that much weight, and the 12'+ height of my fiver, I like the stability of the heavier Super Duty over the F150. If I were going F150, and I had the choice, I would more than likely go EB over diesel, especially if the diesel is $3-4k more than the EB! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 probably reflective of the rear suspension more than anything else...but Im quite sure the people buying the vehicle are fully aware of its capacities...lets face it, the fact the F-150 is now rated to 11500 to a MAJORITY is probably overkill.....good to have maybe, necessary? not sure except for a small %....reality is , you tow 11500 with an Ecoboost in a 150 on a day to day basis, your fuel costs will be outrageous....heck, Id go as far to say anything over 6000lbs will have you cussing at Fuel consumption.... No, it's not reflective of the rear suspension. The max tow/payload for the Ram diesel are considerably less than the max tow/payload for the largest V8 available in the same trim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 No, it's not reflective of the rear suspension. The max tow/payload for the Ram diesel are considerably less than the max tow/payload for the largest V8 available in the same trim. That's definitely an issue. I've seen stickers as low as 800 lbs of payload. Try pulling a properly loaded trailer of significant weight with that and see if you can get it within your payload ratings. Hint: you can't! Example: A 6000 lb trailer should have (at a bare minimum) 600 lbs of tongue weight. Add in a hitch and you are at 650 lbs. Want to take a passenger? OK, you've reached your limit. Leave the 2.3 kids, the firewood, the coolers and the kids' bikes at home because you don't have the capability to haul them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 The "I want a Diesel" crowd is perhaps larger than many think. Hopefully, no more than 50K per year... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 No, it's not reflective of the rear suspension. The max tow/payload for the Ram diesel are considerably less than the max tow/payload for the largest V8 available in the same trim. so, is it engine based?...and saving me from Google, what is the diesels capacities...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Doesn't FCA own VM outright now? According to Wikipedia, Fiat bought out GM's remaining stake in late 2013, and now own VM Motori, lock, stock, and barrel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 so, is it engine based?...and saving me from Google, what is the diesels capacities...? Without looking at the specs, it's likely because the diesel mill is much heavier than the gasser. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironhorse Posted July 8, 2014 Author Share Posted July 8, 2014 (edited) The article just confirms anecdotally my suspicion that the Ram Diesel will be sucessful for Fiat. The article has really no facts,but Deanh and anyone in the retail side of the business understands that the 1/2 ton diesel has real interest and demand. I think Ford with their ecoboost technology is a viable,and perhaps superior alternative,however I think Ford should watch this niche very closley...I just don't want them to miss the opportunity to increase marketshare. Edited July 8, 2014 by ironhorse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 so, is it engine based?...and saving me from Google, what is the diesels capacities...? See the attached pic. It's about 200 less for the diesel in comparable trucks. Without looking at the specs, it's likely because the diesel mill is much heavier than the gasser. That's my guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 The article is misleading because it doesn't say what FCA plan on doing with the additional diesel V6 it is trying to buy from VM. 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. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 so, is it engine based?...and saving me from Google, what is the diesels capacities...? Yeah. The diesel is not particularly powerful. >1,400 payload, >9,000 towing. If you're going with a duded up Laramie, it can be as low as 880lbs payload, 7,400lbs towing. Effectively, you're limited to less than 5,000lbs towing in that configuration, if you're hauling any luggage/passengers, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 I think Ford should watch this niche very closley...I just don't want them to miss the opportunity to increase marketshare. AFAIK, the 3.2L I-5 diesel would be close to a 'plug-n-play' option for the F150, as I believe the Transit & F150 were engineered to accept the same 'powerpacks' from the engine plants. And I think Ford has done a lot of research into this--and has for several years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 (edited) AFAIK, the 3.2L I-5 diesel would be close to a 'plug-n-play' option for the F150, as I believe the Transit & F150 were engineered to accept the same 'powerpacks' from the engine plants. And I think Ford has done a lot of research into this--and has for several years. This. The scales of economy with using the 3.2 are there, it just depends how the gasoline side fleshes out with V6, V8 and two ecoboost engines. Include a diesel and F150 then has five engine choices, is that necessary? I'm not opposed to a diesel F150, I simply question the depth of sales penetration when a 2.7 Ecoboost is offered. That engine must surely achieve near diesel fuel economy with V8 like performance - that is win-win in my books. The biggest question has to be - does the 2.7 EB suit the needs of half ton truck buyers better than a diesel? Otherwise why would Ford even bother developing it.. Ford knows it F150 buyers and market trends, if there's a buck in F150 diesel then Ford will be in there, I just think that 2.7 EB may end up surprising a lot of people including me. Edited July 8, 2014 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Yeah. The diesel is not particularly powerful. >1,400 payload, >9,000 towing. If you're going with a duded up Laramie, it can be as low as 880lbs payload, 7,400lbs towing. Effectively, you're limited to less than 5,000lbs towing in that configuration, if you're hauling any luggage/passengers, etc. lol, thats actually funny, JPD80, how does that compare with the Aussie Ranger with a diesel????.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 This. The scales of economy with using the 3.2 are there, it just depends how the gasoline side fleshes out with V6, V8 and two ecoboost engines. Include a diesel and F150 then has five engine choices, is that necessary? I'm not opposed to a diesel F150, I simply question the depth of sales penetration when a 2.7 Ecoboost is offered. That engine must surely achieve near diesel fuel economy with V8 like performance - that is win-win in my books. The biggest question has to be - does the 2.7 EB suit the needs of half ton truck buyers better than a diesel? Otherwise why would Ford even bother developing it.. Ford knows it F150 buyers and market trends, if there's a buck in F150 diesel then Ford will be in there, I just think that 2.7 EB may end up surprising a lot of people including me. Im not sure, economies of scale for sure, the diesel take rate wouldnt be significant in comparison to the gassers, just a viable alternative to those with specific needs...as for "do they need all these engines"...well since the ordering guide is over 25 pages, seems having millions of choices has never been a Ford bone of contention...to a fault if you ask me...they STILL need to streamline the ordwering guides significantly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 The 50K annual production slotted to North America will be distributed to both RAM and Grand Cherokee......Ford should include a line of F150's with the 3.2L Power Stroke from Transit.....should be a snap since the power train is already federalized for sale in North America.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mackinaw Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 Pioneer has stated more than once that the engineers have been playing around with diesel-powered F-150's for some time now. All Ford has to do is press the "go" button. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted July 8, 2014 Share Posted July 8, 2014 (edited) The 50K annual production slotted to North America will be distributed to both RAM and Grand Cherokee...... Yes, but the AN article states that diesel GC sales have leveled off. The increase is (apparently) being requested (or considered) for the Rams. Edited July 8, 2014 by SoonerLS 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.