Jump to content

None






Sign in to follow this  
7Mary3

F Series Going Back To Steel

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

I have a feeling that the switch to aluminum on the F series cost Ford quite a bit of money.  Aluminum is substantially more expensive than steel, you have to use more of it to get comparable strength, all those rivets and glue, and a bit more labor to get it all lined up right.  For the consumer the benefits are not too clear.  I think aluminum made the F-150 lighter, but didn't do much for the Super Duty.  The weigh close to what the GM and Ram HD's weigh and don't have any substantial advantage in fuel economy, towing capacity, or payload (in fact certain Super Duty configurations have laughably low payloads).  The aluminum bodies are a bit more prone to damage and are more expensive to repair. 

 

Yes sir 7Mary3, you are correct that the overuse of aluminum for F Series is not beneficial for either Ford as a business or F-Series customers. Ford used this strategy as a relatively easy way to achieve weight reduction targets, but of course there are downsides as you mentioned. 

 

In 2018, NYT wrote this article.

Ford Bet on Aluminum Trucks, but Is Still Looking for Payoff: Conceived for an era of high gasoline prices, the F-150 has lost its fuel-efficiency selling point, while its key material has gotten costlier. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/01/business/ford-f150-aluminum-trucks.html

 

Since then, Ford switched to a "mixed materials" strategy. For example, it originally considered an all aluminum body for 2020 Explorer, but wisely decided to go with a "carefully targeted selection of materials with characteristics and costs tailored to different types of vehicles" as Mark Phelan from Detroit Free Press said. https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/mark-phelan/2019/07/06/2020-ford-explorer/1631153001/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does Aluminum contribute to Ford's huge advantage in F150 payload vs. Ram and Silvererra?  It's roughly 3K to 2K lbs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, akirby said:

Does Aluminum contribute to Ford's huge advantage in F150 payload vs. Ram and Silvererra?  It's roughly 3K to 2K lbs.

 

This advantage for F-150 is due to the availability of "Heavy Duty Payload Package" with certain configurations, not the use of aluminum. The package (option code 627 in the 2021 F-150 order guide) includes upgraded springs, tires, and wheels, as well as a heavier duty leaf suspension. GM and FCA LD full size pickup trucks don't offer a similar package.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rperez817 said:

 

This advantage for F-150 is due to the availability of "Heavy Duty Payload Package" with certain configurations, not the use of aluminum. The package (option code 627 in the 2021 F-150 order guide) includes upgraded springs, tires, and wheels, as well as a heavier duty leaf suspension. GM and FCA LD full size pickup trucks don't offer a similar package.

 

huh? Reduce the unladen weight of the vehicle and assuming it has the right specs, the payload goes up

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, akirby said:

Does Aluminum contribute to Ford's huge advantage in F150 payload vs. Ram and Silvererra?  It's roughly 3K to 2K lbs.

 

I think aluminum is a factor, but the F-150 payload package is probably more of one.  Nonetheless, I think aluminum is more of a benefit for the F-150 than the Super Duty.  BTW- that F-150 payload package reminds me of the old '7700' package on the F-150's back in 2000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Payload is still 250-300 lbs higher than GM and RAM even without the heavy duty payload package.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Reduce the unladen weight of the vehicle and assuming it has the right specs, the payload goes up

 

Yes sir Bob Rosadini. Unladen weight (curb weight) of F-150 is close to that for comparable GM and FCA full size LD pickup trucks. Payload for F-150 without "Heavy Duty Payload Package" is very close to a comparable Silverado or Sierra. Ram 1500 has lower payload primarily due to the use of rear coil spring or air suspension. 

 

Examples.

  • 2021 F-150 SuperCrew 4x4 5.0L V8 6.5 ft bed. Curb weight 5,014 lbs., payload 2,135 lbs.
  • 2021 Silverado Crew Cab 4x4 5.3L V8 with DFM 6.6 ft bed. Curb weight 5,140 lbs, payload 2,120 lbs.
  • 2021 Ram 1500 Crew Cab 4x4 5.7L V8 6.4 ft bed. Curb weight 4,989 lbs, payload 1,810 lbs. 
Edited by rperez817

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

 

I think aluminum is a factor, but the F-150 payload package is probably more of one.  Nonetheless, I think aluminum is more of a benefit for the F-150 than the Super Duty.  BTW- that F-150 payload package reminds me of the old '7700' package on the F-150's back in 2000.

Before that it was the non-super duty F250.  Then it became the 7700GVW f150 and now the heavy duty payload package.  The payload numbers went up across the board when the aluminum ‘15 was introduced.  Ford was 300-400 lbs heavier than the competition and went to several hundred pounds lighter.  It paid off in better payload, fuel economy, and performance.  Combined with the ecoboost engines, Ford has been able to beat the cafe requirements even with high volumes of 4x4s including raptors.  Aluminum and ecoboost changed the game for Ford.  No more convincing customers to take 4x2 n/a 6 cyl or 4.6l v8 to ward off buying credits from Tesla.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, rperez817 said:

 

Yes sir Bob Rosadini. Unladen weight (curb weight) of F-150 is close to that for comparable GM and FCA full size LD pickup trucks. Payload for F-150 without "Heavy Duty Payload Package" is very close to a comparable Silverado or Sierra. Ram 1500 has lower payload primarily due to the use of rear coil spring or air suspension. 

 

Examples.

  • 2021 F-150 SuperCrew 4x4 5.0L V8 6.5 ft bed. Curb weight 5,014 lbs., payload 2,135 lbs.
  • 2021 Silverado Crew Cab 4x4 5.3L V8 with DFM 6.6 ft bed. Curb weight 5,140 lbs, payload 2,120 lbs.
  • 2021 Ram 1500 Crew Cab 4x4 5.7L V8 6.4 ft bed. Curb weight 4,989 lbs, payload 1,810 lbs. 

that’s after GM and Ram did extensive weight reductions.  Keep in mind Ford started out several hundred pounds heavier back in 2014.  Ford needed big gains to leap ahead and aluminum provided the answer at the time.  Options can make a substantial difference in curb weight.  Without knowing what was compared, it is hard to tell how Ford stands from your examples.  Certainly seems closer than it was in 2015.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting sidebar, Navistar has dropped all aluminum cabs on International trucks for 2021.  I am told they did this because their old aluminum cab was expensive to manufacture and didn't offer a weight advantage over their high strength steel cab.  Supposedly they also feel their steel cab is just as resistant to corrosion as their aluminum cab was.  Rumor is Line-X will be supplying an undercoat for the steel cab.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/6/2021 at 12:58 PM, 7Mary3 said:

 

I think aluminum is a factor, but the F-150 payload package is probably more of one.  Nonetheless, I think aluminum is more of a benefit for the F-150 than the Super Duty.  BTW- that F-150 payload package reminds me of the old '7700' package on the F-150's back in 2000.

I think the aluminum Superduty is not very attractive...actually, it killed my desire to buy a new truck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm hoping my 2021 Superduty body will be less prone to corrosion vs.  my 2014 Superduty which did not hold up well to rust on both frame & underside of the body & pickup bed.  I took real care to keep clean but its a loosing battle in winters here the northeast ...  

I also own a 2016 Peterbilt 579 which has an aluminum cab.  335,000 miles on the truck , no corrosion on cab and the body integrity has held up as well as any all steel truck I have owned ..

Edited by usedboxman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2021 at 11:21 AM, 7Mary3 said:

Interesting sidebar, Navistar has dropped all aluminum cabs on International trucks for 2021.  I am told they did this because their old aluminum cab was expensive to manufacture and didn't offer a weight advantage over their high strength steel cab.  Supposedly they also feel their steel cab is just as resistant to corrosion as their aluminum cab was.  Rumor is Line-X will be supplying an undercoat for the steel cab.  

 

That's probably how Navistar pays for their outrageously high warranty costs vs. every other OTR tractor manufacturer.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/7/2021 at 8:24 PM, 351cid said:

I think the aluminum Superduty is not very attractive...actually, it killed my desire to buy a new truck.

 

I think you're in the minority, most people I know consider the Aluma-duty the best looking HD on the market.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding material, if they to steel or a mixed material strategy, all steel should be 2 side galvanized. It works.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ESP08 said:

 

That's probably how Navistar pays for their outrageously high warranty costs vs. every other OTR tractor manufacturer.  

 

That was due to the MaxxForce engine debacle.  they are getting better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What did Ford do with the F150 bodies to prevent aluminum corrosion that they didn't do on the hoods and tailgates of other vehicles referenced here?  I haven't heard any nightmares on F150 panel corrosion.  Also regarding vehicles weights, I remember folks saying that they were able to add additional feature and content to vehicles due to the lower weight of the body shell. i.e large sunroofs, electronics. etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, buddysystem said:

What did Ford do with the F150 bodies to prevent aluminum corrosion that they didn't do on the hoods and tailgates of other vehicles referenced here?  I haven't heard any nightmares on F150 panel corrosion.  Also regarding vehicles weights, I remember folks saying that they were able to add additional feature and content to vehicles due to the lower weight of the body shell. i.e large sunroofs, electronics. etc.

 

I know the Mustang hoods were stamped at a different facility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

 

That was due to the MaxxForce engine debacle.  they are getting better.

 

I work for a company with over 5000 trucks in service with a fairly even mix between International LT (Cummins X15), Freightliner Cascadia (DD15), Volvo VNL760 (D13), and Kenworth T680 (Cummins X15). 

 I can assure you Navistar keeps making sales because of the extended warranty, warranty kickbacks/spiffs and warranty coverage in general.  .

The Internationals operating CPM and down time numbers far and away worst in the fleet, the only reason they make any financial sense is because of warranty and lower purchase price.  

The Internationals are also traded off at a younger age than the other trucks due to their overall lack of quality.  

The quality issues extend far beyond MaxxForce/N13.  

 

My point being that highlighting what Navistar does in their OTR tractors is not the benchmark you want Ford or anyone else to follow.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ESP08 said:

 

I work for a company with over 5000 trucks in service with a fairly even mix between International LT (Cummins X15), Freightliner Cascadia (DD15), Volvo VNL760 (D13), and Kenworth T680 (Cummins X15). 

 I can assure you Navistar keeps making sales because of the extended warranty, warranty kickbacks/spiffs and warranty coverage in general.  .

The Internationals operating CPM and down time numbers far and away worst in the fleet, the only reason they make any financial sense is because of warranty and lower purchase price.  

The Internationals are also traded off at a younger age than the other trucks due to their overall lack of quality.  

The quality issues extend far beyond MaxxForce/N13.  

 

My point being that highlighting what Navistar does in their OTR tractors is not the benchmark you want Ford or anyone else to follow.  

So Internationals are X15's same as KW's but much higher CPM.  Safe to conclude then it is the rest of the truck?  And for sure they are Cummins and not A26?

Guessing the DD15's are the lowest cost?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ESP08 said:

 

I work for a company with over 5000 trucks in service with a fairly even mix between International LT (Cummins X15), Freightliner Cascadia (DD15), Volvo VNL760 (D13), and Kenworth T680 (Cummins X15). 

 I can assure you Navistar keeps making sales because of the extended warranty, warranty kickbacks/spiffs and warranty coverage in general.  .

The Internationals operating CPM and down time numbers far and away worst in the fleet, the only reason they make any financial sense is because of warranty and lower purchase price.  

The Internationals are also traded off at a younger age than the other trucks due to their overall lack of quality.  

The quality issues extend far beyond MaxxForce/N13.  

 

My point being that highlighting what Navistar does in their OTR tractors is not the benchmark you want Ford or anyone else to follow.  

 

Interesting.  Our fleet is pretty much exclusively Freightliner for heavy duty, we have not bought many Internationals lately.  Some of my peers with other fleets have been saying good things about the International HV and HX lately 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

 

Interesting.  Our fleet is pretty much exclusively Freightliner for heavy duty, we have not bought many Internationals lately.  Some of my peers with other fleets have been saying good things about the International HV and HX lately 

I was a life long International/Navistar owner... after being burned by Maxxforce  disaster.  i'll never go back... EGR coolers / valves/ turbo's  every 100,000 miles ... owned the maxxforce for 3 years and it was in the shop for warranty work for 19 months of that time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

So Internationals are X15's same as KW's but much higher CPM.  Safe to conclude then it is the rest of the truck?  And for sure they are Cummins and not A26?

Guessing the DD15's are the lowest cost?

 

Internationals and Kenworth use largely the same Cummins X15 in our fleet with only superficial differences.  We've totally moved away from any Paccar or Navistar engines.   

Yes, the downtime is because of the rest of the truck.  

DD15s indeed have the lowest operating cost and least down time.   

Edited by ESP08

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×