2015 Ford F-150 unveiled

I read a report somewhere that the LED lights light up so much faster that they believe accidents will be reduced because it will allow drivers more time to react (brake lights coming on faster). Wish I still had the article.

In regards to the aluminum, it was almost like Chevy saw that coming. Have been advertising about their steel truck for a while - think about the Silverado commercial with the submarine.

aftermath wrote:

I am also not a fan of LED lights. Why would you want to pay the extra money? The alternator is producing the current to run the lights, there is no "saving" by using LEDs.

Spinning that alternator isn't free. The higher the electrical load, the higher the load on the engine. Regardless, I like LEDs because they produce better light, and for brake lights they also have the benefit of illuminating faster. I have LED aux lights, and the light output is simply amazing.

The lifespan of LED lights is MUCH longer than conventional halogens. Is it worth the investment? Probably not... In my 98 Explorer, I've replaced the halogens twice. It would take a lot to convince me that I need $700 worth of headlamps when I can get by with $30 in replacement bulbs.

I don't see the aluminum repairs being tha tmuch worse than the steel they are replacing. They've been using aluminum for the hoods on the half-ton Fords since '97. Does it cost more to paint them than it does a steel one? Not to my knowledge...

TheGriswolds wrote:
I own a Ford and love the brand but as my friend who owns his own auto body repair shop said "just wait till someone dents one and gets the bill". I think the benefits outweigh the potential downside though.

This was my first reaction to seeing the new Ford PU and hearing how Ford was going to do a little gambling on the all aluminum body. While it is true that body shops are quick to R&R body panels there are cases where fixing a dent or repairing a scrape is still done. Will the cost of the panel go up? Will labor go up when working on aluminum vs steel? Will insurance rates on all aluminum trucks be higher than conventional vehicles? This could be an interesting thing to watch.

I am also not a fan of LED lights. Why would you want to pay the extra money? The alternator is producing the current to run the lights, there is no "saving" by using LEDs.

I like what Ford is doing. They are getting out front of the innovation curve and offering many options for customers. I am a Toyota fan because the Tundra fits my needs. It would be nice to be able to choose a heavier suspension but that isn't an option. I was looking at the Ford website and saw so many ways to configure a PU I became dizzy quickly. Kudos to Ford. Now watch all the others try to follow. This is why having many brands of successful trucks is a good thing for all of us.

akronharry wrote:
I could be blind, but I didn't see what the prices will be. ANybody? Anybody?

Not for 8 months or so ,just before they are introduced

I could be blind, but I didn't see what the prices will be. ANybody? Anybody?

Wes Tausend wrote:
Robert,

If the North American continent constitutes the only sales area (no right hand drive), what are you getting over there? Do you have the previous EB (EcoBoost) models?

Usually we envy the heavier duty version of OEM trucks you get in Australia.

Wes

Wes they do not sell ANY retail US Pickups in Australia, either light duty i.e F150 or HD i.e. F250/F350.
What US Pickups that are here are RHD Converted F250/F350 and RAM Heavy Duty vehicles both small in number. Used by primarily Caravanners to tow a 8000lb plus Caravan or the much less common 5th Wheelers. We have people who just drive around in them as well.
The "trucks" here are the Asian Global versions of the new "midsizers" you are getting but with twice the payload i.e Dual Cab 2,400-2500lb, Single Cab over 3000lb, vastly much better towing capability and economy due to the very capable diesels and a much better off road performance.

rjstractor wrote:

Wes Tausend wrote:
One of the things I personally do not understand well is how automatic start/stop technology can help much, but it obviously does. My question is with pumping losses which would seem to still exist even if a cylinder did not have fuel to fire. A V-8, for instance, would still be "dragging" 4 extra pistons along whether or not they contributed to power. In my mind I finally resolved this by thinking that when only 4 cylinders fire, the thottle must be open further to maintain speed and this therefore reduces vacuum. Under high vacuum, the unequal lack of topside piston pressure as opposed to bottom crankcase atmospheric pressure is part of normal pumping losses, but an open throttle allows closer-to-atmospheric pressure topside, same as nominal crankcase pressure bottomside. I'm guessing perhaps that is the sole thrift gain.

Wes, when you say "stop/start technology", I think you are actually referring to cylinder deactivation, which is something totally different. Start/stop is when the engine actually shuts down when the vehicle is warmed up and the vehicle is stopped, like at a traffic light. My hybrid does this, as do most hybrids. When my defroster is running, the engine doesn't stop. In city driving, I would estimate start/stop adds about 2-3 mpg.

Yes, think gas golf cart.

RobertRyan wrote:
The new F150 will not be going any further than NA. No RHD or Diesel.

Robert,

If the North American continent constitutes the only sales area (no right hand drive), what are you getting over there? Do you have the previous EB (EcoBoost) models?

Usually we envy the heavier duty version of OEM trucks you get in Australia.

Wes
...

rjstractor wrote:

Wes Tausend wrote:
One of the things I personally do not understand well is how automatic start/stop technology can help much, but it obviously does. My question is with pumping losses which would seem to still exist even if a cylinder did not have fuel to fire. A V-8, for instance, would still be "dragging" 4 extra pistons along whether or not they contributed to power. In my mind I finally resolved this by thinking that when only 4 cylinders fire, the thottle must be open further to maintain speed and this therefore reduces vacuum. Under high vacuum, the unequal lack of topside piston pressure as opposed to bottom crankcase atmospheric pressure is part of normal pumping losses, but an open throttle allows closer-to-atmospheric pressure topside, same as nominal crankcase pressure bottomside. I'm guessing perhaps that is the sole thrift gain.

Wes, when you say "stop/start technology", I think you are actually referring to cylinder deactivation, which is something totally different. Start/stop is when the engine actually shuts down when the vehicle is warmed up and the vehicle is stopped, like at a traffic light. My hybrid does this, as do most hybrids. When my defroster is running, the engine doesn't stop. In city driving, I would estimate start/stop adds about 2-3 mpg.

rjstractor,

You are absolutely correct. Good catch, my bad.

That certainly changes Fords status as "having it all" like inclusion of Ram/GM cylinder deactivation. I guess it wouldn't make sense anyway, as I think the deactivation tends to emulate a smaller engine which the EB series already achieves.

Does my description of "deactivation pumping loss" principle otherwise seem correct? I haven't run across a good explanation yet.

I should know better; we use a "start/stop" Prius as a daily driver. It does not have cylinder deactivation, other than the whole engine at once during electric propulsion only mode, such as reverse.

Thanks,
Wes
...

EDIT

I did find a good explanation of cylinder deactivation (variable displacement) on wikipedia.

Thanks again.
Wes
...