F-150 3.0 diesel Pictures

ShinerBock wrote:

rjstractor wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:
So you are saying people want more performance and other amenities over better fuel economy like I have been saying why people go for other engines?

No. My point was about value, and the Ram 1500 Ecodiesel is more truck for the money than the Colorado diesel. More capability, virtually same mpg, virtually same price. That's it.

The Colorado diesel isn't "virtually the same price". The Colorado diesel is about $8,000-$9,000 cheaper for a trim level with simalar content. Capability doesn't matter since we are talking about people that don't tow. The Colorado 4x4 also gets 2 mpg more that the 4x4 Ecodiesel. Again, I was talking about those who are more concerned about fuel economy that anything else. If you care more about performance, than that omits you from opining.

2016 Chevrolet Colorado Z71 2.8L Diesel 4WD Crew Cab Long Box/MPG
20 city / 29 highway and my 1500 Laramie 4X4 with 3.92 was making 29 highway before the tune and 23 combined so not sure how 20/29 beats it. As for price I haven't checked them and will have to take your word on that.

rjstractor wrote:

drittal wrote:
DMAX has a 3.0l diesel.

Do you mean the 2.8l 4 cylinder used in the Colorado? The 5 cylinder 3.2l that Ford uses in the Transit is also called a Powerstroke. I imagine they will use the Powerstroke name for the F150.

No.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMAX_V6_engine

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:


Well maybe that is a Texas thing but the ordering window for the Ecodiesel closes in 7 to 14 days each month. When I ordered my truck you had 1 to 3 days to get your order in or you would have to wait for the next months order window to open up. My dealer had me come in at 8 to put the truck together so he could put the order in. So I don't know why your dealer is tell you something different.

Please show me the article or other evidence backing this statement up. I have not scene one solitary article stating that Ecodiesel sales are limited due to demand besides in 2014 when they first came out.

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:
Sorry you feel that way because I do not have any "disdain for Ford owners" as you put it. I do however have disdain for Ford owners that feel they need to get on every Ram post and talk their smack. You might notice I never go on Ford posts and post anything negative UNTIL they start their BS. And I no longer do that, those people are not worth the time.

Uh, if you don't like "Ford owners" talking negative than quit posting threads like these that purposely call them out. You purposely put "Let the spinning begin boys lol" to get a reaction. So don't get mad when that reaction proves you incorrect.

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:
As for the engine,
I was just going by what was written in the article Blah blah blah......

FYI, you do know that Ford owned Jaguar and Land Rover when they developed the 3.0L Lion and the 3.6L right?

Sorry, but I still think that the 3.0L diesel is a weak and underpowered engine. I would think the same of a 3.0L diesel F150 too. You see, unlike you, it doesn't matter the brand to me. I like what I like and don't like what I don't regardless of what a brand tries to sell me, and I don't like weak little under powered diesels especially in a half ton. I will gladly pay for more performance any day of the week and twice on Sundays. Give me a big powerful diesel, a V6 Ecoboost, or a V8 over an Ecodiesel any day. Hell, I would even take a Pentatstar 3.6L over an Ecodiesel if I didn't tow over 5,000 lbs. It has roughly the same cost per mile and a lot better performance unloaded. Like I said in other threads, the weak little diesels should stay in the midsized trucks. A half ton deserves a 300-350 hp and 450-550 lb-ft diesel if it wants to compete for my money.

rjstractor wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:
So you are saying people want more performance and other amenities over better fuel economy like I have been saying why people go for other engines?

No. My point was about value, and the Ram 1500 Ecodiesel is more truck for the money than the Colorado diesel. More capability, virtually same mpg, virtually same price. That's it.

The Colorado diesel isn't "virtually the same price". The Colorado diesel is about $8,000-$9,000 cheaper for a trim level with simalar content. Capability doesn't matter since we are talking about people that don't tow. The Colorado 4x4 also gets 2 mpg more that the 4x4 Ecodiesel. Again, I was talking about those who are more concerned about fuel economy that anything else. If you care more about performance, than that omits you from opining.

drittal wrote:
DMAX has a 3.0l diesel.

Do you mean the 2.8l 4 cylinder used in the Colorado? The 5 cylinder 3.2l that Ford uses in the Transit is also called a Powerstroke. I imagine they will use the Powerstroke name for the F150.

DMAX has a 3.0l diesel.

Don that is interesting ,with so many builders going to 'in house ' engines what will become of cummins?

Over the road class 8 trucks are doing the same.
freightliner - mercedes
volvo /mack - volvo
PACCAR might the only one with a selection?

Very good points dirttal, there was talk of bring two VM engines state side and my plant was being looked at as we have plenty of white space right now. We are still making the Mercedes-Benz WA580 converter not sure what that is going in but we build a lot of them every week.

As for the Iveco 6.7 diesel ever making it in a Ram HD I don't think so. But with Ford now making their 6.7 in house Ford has no reason to pick the Cummins contract if FCA/Ram were to drop the Cummins. GM sure is not going to dump the DMax so who knows what the future holds.

Don

Perrysburg Dodgeboy wrote:

That kinda makes you ask why are they buying engines when they have their own in house small diesel??? Must be they don't have any confidence in their baby diesels? Remember boys, that is what some of you say is why Chrysler buys engines from Cummins right? Looks like the crows are coming home to roost for some of you guys.

The difference now with Ram and cummins connection is Cummins has a long history of proven engine performance and reliability. Ram could switch to their in house Iveco 6.7l diesel that has a strong tie with cummins used in Europe but it doesn't has the history here and likely would cause a dip in sales until the Iveco diesel proves itself reliable and garners a positive reputaion, IF it can. IMO, the best Ram could do IF they want to switch is offer their Iveco with deep discounts alongside the Cummins and let them prove themselves as a an equal with less expense.

In the half ton market, non of the manufacturers have that kind of reputation to replace or compete against.

Ford or RAM really have/had nothing to lose by going with motors in the 150/1500 market with no history stateside. The same can't be said now with the history of Duramax and Cummins in the 2500/3500 segment. FORD went away from International/Navistar engines with the 6.7, but didn't drop the Powerstroke moniker.