Hypothetical Build - F150 hybrid or Diesel?

[jpd80]

 

It was - the 2.7EB V6.

And now Ford announcing it will build two new diesel engines in Mexico.

 

Something is definitely up...

 

Given the weight of F150 crew cab is now very close to that of Ranger Crew cab, the 3.2 I-5 diesel may be within reach.

The whole package would be something like 700-800 lbs lighter than the ram EcoDiesel.

The Ranger's fuel economy works out to be Urban: 20mpg, Extra urban 31 mpg, Combined 25.6 mpg.

So getting 20mpg / 28mpg in a 4x2 F150 Crew cab should be entirely doable....with a 6-speed auto no less.

Edited April 15, 2015 by jpd80

[chucky2]

As another poster pointed out in the new thread on Ford expanding a plant in Southern California South, that doesn't mean that engine is for US/Canada...could be RoTW.

[RichardJensen]

I think it's fair to conclude that:

 

- The F150 is going to get a small diesel within the mid term (3-5 years)

- The 3.2L diesel is going to be replaced within a similar term

- The Transit+F150 volume likely merit a NA based assembly plant for this new diesel.

 

Therefore, I could envision this plant producing the new midsize commercial diesel and the 1.5L EB after the expansion.

 

I don't think there is going to be a dramatic shift to diesel in the passenger car market stateside. US emissions regs are far to stringent for current generation diesels to meet cost and profitability targets at prices the US customer is willing to pay.

Edited April 15, 2015 by RichardJensen

[akirby]

The only way it makes sense for Ford to do diesels in passenger cars is if they have tapped out the sales potential of the EB and hybrid drivetrains, have the spare plant capacity to add a few incremental sales and they believe there are enough buyers out there willing to pay a premium for a diesel option to cover the costs. And there are no other better projects to spend money on.

[fordmantpw]

There was a station about an hour from me that had diesel fuel for 6 cents/gallon less than regular gas. I have owned my diesel for 4 years and this is the first time I have ever seen that. If the costs were to come in around even, then the argument for diesel could be much stronger.

[akirby]

There was a station about an hour from me that had diesel fuel for 6 cents/gallon less than regular gas. I have owned my diesel for 4 years and this is the first time I have ever seen that. If the costs were to come in around even, then the argument for diesel could be much stronger.

 

That's still nowhere near enough to offset the added upfront cost though.

[fordmantpw]

 

That's still nowhere near enough to offset the added upfront cost though.

 

No, it's not, but it's a lot better than the 20-40% higher cost of diesel lately

With diesel fuel running 20-40% higher than gas, you just can't make an argument for diesel unless you are towing heavy regularly. If the costs are equal, then you can mount an argument that has some merit.

 

Let's take the Transit for instance. I can't find the fuel economy numbers for the diesel for some reason, but the 3.5L EB is 14/16/19. Let's assume 20% improvement for the diesel, and we will use the combined numbers, so 16/19.2 gasser/diesel. At the current $2.50/gallon, then there is a 150k mile breakeven point to recoup the additional $4k cost of diesel over the EB. Now, I realize there are extra maintenance costs associated with the diesel, but it will also have more resale as well, essentially making up for the extra maintenance cost. Also, I'm assuming comparable capabilities to take that out of the equation.

 

So, while the difference isn't made up in fuel economy, if the costs of the fuels were the same, the difference is much closer. Now, if the cost to clean up the emissions of the diesels would come down, maybe drop the cost of the diesel by $1k, then things would get even more interesting.

[jpd80]

The only way it makes sense for Ford to do diesels in passenger cars is if they have tapped out the sales potential of the EB and hybrid drivetrains, have the spare plant capacity to add a few incremental sales and they believe there are enough buyers out there willing to pay a premium for a diesel option to cover the costs. And there are no other better projects to spend money on.

Even then, supplying a more affordable hybrid gas version would be heads and shoulders more popular than a diesel car.

GM can give away its Volt or diesel Cruze at the moment, so the attraction of diesel is very patchy indeed.

[Donaldo]

 

No, it's not, but it's a lot better than the 20-40% higher cost of diesel lately

With diesel fuel running 20-40% higher than gas, you just can't make an argument for diesel unless you are towing heavy regularly. If the costs are equal, then you can mount an argument that has some merit.

 

Is CA the only state where diesel is now 10-15% less than unleaded gas? The trend reverses in winter, but during the spring/summer diesel is definitely cheaper.

Edited April 15, 2015 by Donaldo

[fordmantpw]

Is CA the only state where diesel is now 10-15% less than unleaded gas? The trend reverses in winter, but during the spring/summer diesel is definitely cheaper.

 

The station closest to me is 2.29/2.59 for gas/diesel. Diesel has been running 40-60 cents/gallon more than gas for the last couple years here, winter and summer.

[jpd80]

Could Ford NA be readying a next generation diesel engine but waiting for Ford Europe do do all the ground work

on development and emission compliance. Perhaps something with much higher power density?

Edited April 17, 2015 by jpd80

[GT-Keith]

I think a Hybrid 2.7L Ecoboost is the best option with a 10-speed auto. Mileage would be in the low 30MPG range, beating the Ecoduddiesel and vastly outperforming it at the same curb weight.

 

It seems like Ford has positioned themselves for this already.

 

A cheaper N/A V6 Ecoboost will be possible as well.

[Biker16]

Could Ford NA be readying a next generation diesel engine but waiting for Ford Europe do do all the ground work

on development and emission compliance. Perhaps something with much higher power density?

 

NOOO..... Ford NA would have FoE do all the work then come in a label it "global".

 

I kid,

 

 

I think a Hybrid 2.7L Ecoboost is the best option with a 10-speed auto. Mileage would be in the low 30MPG range, beating the Ecoduddiesel and vastly outperforming it at the same curb weight.

 

It seems like Ford has positioned themselves for this already.

 

A cheaper N/A V6 Ecoboost will be possible as well.

 

The cost of the batteries would drive up the costs on a heavy vehicle like The F-150.

[jpd80]

 

NOOO..... Ford NA would have FoE do all the work then come in a label it "global".

 

I kid,

 

 

 

The cost of the batteries would drive up the costs on a heavy vehicle like The F-150.

But here's a funny thing, if you compare respective Fusion models to their hybrid counterparts,

the cost of the hybrid decrees the higher the model prices:starting at $3,000 for base S model

to as little as $650 with the Titanium models.

 

Perhaps we could expect the same in F150.......

[RichardJensen]

Well, the reason for that is pretty simple: Ford's looking for overall margin, and by the time you're at the Titanium level, you've larded up your Fusion with so many highly profitable options that they can afford to tack on the hybrid package for little extra.

 

You'd expect the same w/the F150: upgrading a Platinum model to a hybrid would probably be cheaper than the XLT.

[papilgee4evaeva]

I didn't even know there was an S hybrid; I thought it started at SE trim. Was this a new change for '16?

[akirby]

No S hybrid - just SE and Titanium. I think S was a typo.

[Havelock]

No S hybrid - just SE and Titanium. I think S was a typo.

S hybrid has been available for about a year now.

[akirby]

S hybrid has been available for about a year now.

 

Oops. Mea Culpa. I totally misread the website. It is available.

[jpd80]

The point I was making is that the hybrid option cost varies with the trim level of the vehicle.

At basic "S" trim, the cost is around $2,500 more than a Titanium trim and no charge in MKZ

 

So how on earth are we able to deduce what the added cost of batteries and hybrid actually is?

Surely manufacturers get their batteries from suppliers way cheaper than we pay for retail..

Maybe we're paying for next gen battery development today?

Edited April 18, 2015 by jpd80

[Biker16]

So how on earth are we able to deduce what the added cost of batteries and hybrid actually is?

Surely manufacturers get their batteries from suppliers way cheaper than we pay for retail..

Maybe we're paying for next gen battery development today?

 

batteries are a commodity item that has a fixed cost per KW/H of capacity.

 

the Cmax hbrid has 1.4Kw/h vs the 7.6Kw/h battery in the Energi., and the pricing of those batteries reflects that difference.

 

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1097446_electric-car-battery-costs-already-cheaper-than-2020-predictions-study

[jpd80]

 

batteries are a commodity item that has a fixed cost per KW/H of capacity.

Maybe so but depending on what model they go in, the hybrid option reduces from $3,000 fro Fusion S to no charge in MKZ

 

Not all so called fixed costs are fixed...Batteries are getting cheaper compared to five years ago, diesels are not.

Edited April 22, 2015 by jpd80

[matthewq4b]

Maybe so but depending on what model they go in, the hybrid option reduces from $3,000 fro Fusion S to no charge in MKZ

 

Not all so called fixed costs are fixed...Batteries are getting cheaper compared to five years ago, diesels are not.

 

 

Ya don't know if I would say that JP. The Diesel Option where available make up a lower percentage of over all vehicle purchase price than they did 5 or 10 years ago and are no cost options in some configurations and even base engine options with some manufactures. Such was not the case 5 years ago. Additionally Diesels have substantially lower emissions and more HP per Liter than 5 years ago. So by that logic of yours Diesel options are getting cheaper too.

We will never really know the true costs as manufactures will charge what ever the market will bear.

 

Matthew

[Biker16]

Maybe so but depending on what model they go in, the hybrid option reduces from $3,000 fro Fusion S to no charge in MKZ

that isn't reflection on the cost of the hybrid system, just how much Ford can charge for it.

 

Not all so called fixed costs are fixed...Batteries are getting cheaper compared to five years ago, diesels are not.

batteries are much cheaper today than they were 5 years ago, but cost reduction cannot fully overcome mass. and the f150 hybrid will add ~750lbs of weight, for the Hybrid or up to 1300lbs for the plug in.

 

the advantage of a Car hybrid is that "buyers" (BONers) will not allow a system in the F-150 simply be efficient it will have to meet alot of "extra Metrics" which will drive up the power and scale of the system. Which will cause costs to balloon.

 

Electric cars have to be small because they have to be light, to reduce the size of the batteries it needs.

 

 

 

[GT-Keith]

It can serve the same purpose. With an already capable combustion engine(2.7L) why would electric motors be burden with other metrics like towing? I disagree, I think cars not only have to be light, but light enough and the F150 certainly is now. The inferences on "extra metrics", which I'm assuming by that you mean towing, is overstated because only a fraction of F150 buyers(particularly Platinum, King Ranch, Raptor, etc.) use fully the capabilities of their trucks. Its a lifestyle vehicle and electrification is a luxury appointment. Besides, electrification has resided in the manufacturing industry for decades now. Electrons can workhorse as well as gasoline can.

 

Since the cost delta decreases with higher margin trucks like in the Platinum, King Ranch, etc. I can see a hybrid system working on these trims like on the MKZ which is the same price as the combustion engine. Then there's the Expedition and Navigator... Also maybe sharing development with Toyota or GM for when either of them eventually go Aluminum to cut weight from their trucks.

 

I would rather a hybrid system than an expensive diesel... An engine that I feel will be so capable that it will be too expensive for the half-ton segment or too weak to be viable against Ford's 2.7L in addition to be too expensive(Ecodiesel $6000+ premium)

Edited April 23, 2015 by GT-Keith