Ford finally releases specs for F-150 3.0L diesel

Allamakee1 wrote:

I didn’t cherry pick anything, I used the data you provided. You were the one who all the sudden argued with the data you provided. More people are putting pens to paper and making the efficient decisions, amazing that 4 individual auto makers are now making 1/2 ton diesels. I’m getting tired of arguing with you but I’ll respond if you continue to question my honesty and integrity. I explained my situation and my personal opinion, you are the one projecting your opinion on what the masses would prefer even though you don’t know their individual situation.

Yes, you did. You cherry picked the fuel prices with the diesel and gas being the same price in your calculations even though it is much higher in most places and then you cherry picked the percentages of engines sold leaving out the 5.0L to make it look like more people preferred the economy engine.

Yes, you explained your situation and personal opinion just as I have explained mine which is that most would probably not be willing to give up that much power and capability for such little monetary gain. If the gain was greater(ie increase in fuel prices) then I can see it, but not if it remains less than $50 a month in savings.

So essentially, if you drive the average 16,550 miles most American male drives a year(LINK) and the gasoline prices in your area is the $2.50(current US average) and diesel was $2.99(current US average)(LINK). Then you to the average fuel mileage of the current 3.5L Ecoboost on fuelly which is 16.2 mpg(LINK) and then took the average for the Ecodiesel which is 22.4 mpg(LINK). That would give the average person a savings of $344.88 a year or just $28.74 a month on fuel alone.

Then add in the maintenance costs for both with the oil being about $120 for the Ecodiesel and $45 for an Ecoboost owner then that drops the savings down to $269.88 a year or $22.49 a month. Then you add in the DEF which is generally at a rate of 2% of 1 gallon of diesel consumed. An average fuel economy of 22.4 over 16,550 miles is 739 gallons which brings you to 14.78 gallons of DEF used. At Walmart's current price of $11.97 for a 2.5 gallon jug, that comes out to $70.77 cents for 14.78 gallons. This drops your savings down to $199.11 a year or just $16.59 a month. The $30 fuel filter will drop the savings to $169.11 a year($14.09 a month), but that is at a longer than 16.5k mile interval.

These calculations are based on the average person with the links provided for the data and not some small percentage of people like you and I who drive a lot more per year. I will bet you $1000 that if you go ask an Ecoboost owner or any other V8 truck owner that you can save them less than $17 a month if they switch to a truck engine with over 130 less horsepower, less capability, and less performance a vast majority will go tell you to pound sand and they will keep their truck.

ShinerBock wrote:


A lot of what I stated wasn't opinions. They were facts based on actual numbers that most(not just small percentages) truck customers experience. When one puts pen to paper the savings are not as big as they seem for most truck owners. This may not be the case since a small percentage of truck owners like you and I who drive a lot annually, but for most it isn't. I also did not use false or cherry picked data to make my point seem better like you did either. Most are comfortable paying an extra $25 or so dollars a month to have their 100+ hp, better performance, and better towing power. It is jut not that big of a gap to warrant it most.

I didn’t cherry pick anything, I used the data you provided. You were the one who all the sudden argued with the data you provided. More people are putting pens to paper and making the efficient decisions, amazing that 4 individual auto makers are now making 1/2 ton diesels. I’m getting tired of arguing with you but I’ll respond if you continue to question my honesty and integrity. I explained my situation and my personal opinion, you are the one projecting your opinion on what the masses would prefer even though you don’t know their individual situation.

VernDiesel wrote:
I don’t think anyone will or at least should pick a 3.0 1/2 ton diesel over a half ton gasser or a 3/4 diesel purely on the cost differences in fuel expenses as you say. Most don’t pick their wife purely on looks. There had better be more put into that buying decision.

I didn’t say that was the only reason. I seem to put more thought than some into my vehicle purchases. I needed a vehicle that got as good of mileage possible do to my commute, but also be able to pull my TT comfortably. It also would need space for my family and two bird hunting dogs. I also do a lot of deer hunting so a truck bed is a must. I did all of the figures over and over and came to this conclusion. Honestly the choice was too easy, because there wasn’t anything close. I spent the most time researching the reliability and possible problems with the Ram in general over picking the engine. Another factor I took into account is duration. I sold my old 05 Chevy with 200k so I tend to keep them for a while and the Diesel engine premium would make sense. I also purchased it very slightly used to reduce that initial depreciation hit and still have lots of time left on the factory warranty. I don’t think I need to explain my decision to you, but there it is anyway.

Allamakee1 wrote:


I’ve stated what I intended to in regards to a 3.0 and to address your options from an actual 3.0 diesel owner for anyone interested in this situation. Obviously people can display data points to fit their agenda, but since there are no more valuable points to discuss/debate let’s let our debate die to get this back on topic. People can go back and read both of our opinions and let them make up their own minds for their own situations.

A lot of what I stated wasn't opinions. They were facts based on actual numbers that most(not just small percentages) truck customers experience. When one puts pen to paper the savings are not as big as they seem for most truck owners. This may not be the case since a small percentage of truck owners like you and I who drive a lot annually, but for most it isn't. I also did not use false or cherry picked data to make my point seem better like you did either. Most are comfortable paying an extra $25 or so dollars a month to have their 100+ hp, better performance, and better towing power. It is jut not that big of a gap to warrant it for most.

Since the main benefit of the small diesels is fuel mileage, they tend to no do so great when fuel prices are low like they have been and are predicting to be for a while. If they offerd more torque, capability, or pulling power like their HD truck brethren then I would see more being sold outside their small market. Essentially these small diesels are CAFE trucks intended to help the manufacturers meet strict fuel economy requirements by reducing their total fleet mileage numbers, nothing more.

spoon059 wrote:
OP, sorry about your truck. Keep us updated about how the dealer resolves the issue. I can't image the frustration you are dealing with. Brand new truck and this issue. I'm really surprised, I thought the newly redesigned fuel pump would have solved those issues. Truly frustrating.

In regards to those $70K diesel trucks, here is a 2017 Ram 4 door Cummins with a fair amount of options for $44K. I'm sure with less options you could do even better. Not sure where you guys are buying trucks, or how in the world you afford them... but $70K for a TRUCK? Unless I am making a living off that truck, I am not spending that kind of money. You can get a decent MDT hauler and drive commercial for that kind of money... insanity!!!
https://www.dennisdillonchryslerjeepdodge.com/new/Ram/2017-Ram-3500-Caldwell-boise-101762b20a0e0ae76cb81e67492cc902.htm

LMAO... This hater can't even get the right thread. :S

1stgenfarmboy wrote:
I am truly blessed.

You and me both brother!!!

You are correct Vern, I picked my wife for her ability to pull a load, and thank goodness she never gets on here. :B





not really.....if you want to see someone God is trying to set a record for blessing just look at me and the person he gave me.

Looks
singing voice
sandwich making ability
CFO
mother
friend



I am truly blessed.

I don’t think anyone will or at least should pick a 3.0 1/2 ton diesel over a half ton gasser or a 3/4 diesel purely on the cost differences in fuel expenses as you say. Most don’t pick their wife purely on looks. There had better be more put into that buying decision.

I have also been awaiting the release of a diesel in both the Tundra (more specifically I want a diesel 200 series Landcruiser) as well as the F-150. Realistically a F-350 makes more sense for what I plan on doing eventually, but in the interim, I could get by with a F-150 diesel for a few years. However, when I compare a 6.7 F-350 to a 3.0 F-150 on purely the cost difference in fuel expense, it's just not that big of a difference to justify the less capable F-150. Figuring 15,000 miles a year, and 18 mpg vs. 30 mpg for the two vehicles, the F-350 would burn 333 more gallons per year. At $3.50 a gallon, that works out to $1166 a year or roughly $100 more a month to drive the bigger, heavier (safer) and more capable F-350. Unfortunately, at least for me, it just would not make sense to buy a diesel F-150.

Also, with the excellent performance and broad torque curve of the Eco-boost, I'd have to give the nod to that engine if I was going to buy a F-150. It's a great performer.

However, I think these engines will sell well, perhaps very well. Since most people are really bad at math, they will focus on the 30 mpg and not look at the actual cost difference between the Ecoboost and diesel options. The Ecoboost is less expensive and an extremely capable and suitable engine for anything a F-150 is spec'd to do. While there may be some breakeven point to justify a F-150 diesel, unfortunately it is many thousands of miles down the road.

I like Shinerbock’s idea for J2807 of moving that standard from 40 to 55 mph. 9k would also be a much more realistic & practical max tow rating for the suspension etc of an even properly optioned 1/2 ton truck. At least with respects to towing TTs & THs.

Incidentally I tow most grades with most TTs at 55 mph. I’m comfortable with that speed on a grade with a large double axle bumper pull TT. It’s also a sweet spot with my truck for gearing, fuel, & cooling. Same with coming down that grade. Set the cruise and the turbo brake & transmission normally holds the speed. Sometimes a lil supplement with the trailer brake controller for timing the passing of semi or if it’s a really heavy load. Took a 15,800 CVW load down a long 6 percent no drama no foot braking. (I have tune w turbo brake). Flatter terrain I normally set cruise at 65 & occasionally go up to 70 on a pass. Another sweet spot for gearing fuel economy stability & time vs speed. All being with WDH sep up according to Cat scale. Not that I’m a slow grandpa sometimes unloaded on an up to 80 speed limit interstate I’ll set the cruise 80 plus. I just don’t tow that way commercially or not.

I know the tow routine I described above wouldn’t satisfy ShinerBock. Thats fine their are people who will want and continue to buy a faster EB or big diesel. But others will be tickled with the easy no drama no buzzing rpms high fuel economy & reliable experience I described from a 3.0 liter turbo diesel be it Ford or Ram. BTW 370k plus on the lil diesel & no plans of trading it off.