FishOnOne wrote:
ricatic wrote:
FishOnOne wrote:
jus2shy wrote:
Hybrid,
You obviously have an axe to grind for some un-founded reason. Motortrend's RealMPG test showed quite a larger difference. 4mpg difference comparing 4x4 crew cab RAM versus 4x4 extended cab Ford. The 2.7 seems to shine in a 4x2 configuration but performance seems to drop fairly hard once switched to a 4x4 configuration
The RAM ecodiesel on Fuelly, you get a similar story as well. The meat of the bell curve for the Ecodiesel is from 23mpg to 26mpg. So combined ratings are being beaten for the most part on the Ecodiesel.
I personally think it will be interesting to compare the 2.7 against the 3.5 motor on Fuelly when they become more commonplace in the new F-150. See if there is any real reason to select a 2.7 over the 3.5 for superior fuel economy. I'm sure that the real tale of the tape will be made there. I know the 3.5 didn't deliver superior fuel economy compared to the 5.4 on the average for the 2011-2014 F-150, the bell curve's peak is between 15 and 17mpg for a crew cab vehicle. Pretty much no real improvement over the 5.4 for that generation on the fuel economy perspective, but power is much improved.
The mark-up $4,000 mark-up for the RAM Ecodiesel is nearly non existent when comparing a 2.7 Ford against the RAM with nearly the same exact options (You can't be exact as the makes have some distinguishing features.
In your case, the 2.7 seems like it would suit your needs for what you want out of a truck. For me personally, I'd look hard at an Ecodiesel myself and would compare that to a 2.7 F-150 (if they offered it in a crew cab w/ 6.5' bed). However, I'm no longer in the lighter 1500/150 series truck market. I don't floor it everywhere and 240HP would be adequate for my needs when I had my F-150. If I cared about having the fastest rig around and 0-60 times, I would had never owned my 2010 F-150, there were other items that were a priority for me that made me select the 2010 F-150 over the faster Chevy or RAM at the time.
Just2Shy,
I've read many threads from you mentioning the fragile CP4.2 HPFP when it comes to the Ford and GM trucks, but I've yet to see you mention it during a Ecodiesel discussion. Is there a reason?
...maybe because the concerns about a Shameful Ford warranty denial by Ram is much more unlikely...it's so much easier on the stress level when you know, that like GM, Ram will stand behind the truck...
Troy...I do wonder why you go to such lengths to rain on non-Ford buyers parades...your incessant need to provide negativity and derision on any brand being purchased that does not come with Blue Koolaid begs the question...why???
Regards
Perhaps I too call out the fans boys or the sky is falling types like yourself. If you have read earlier I stated I would not own neither 2.7EB or the 3.0 ED but perhaps you filtered that accidently. :W
...no filtering...did not see that post...but that fact is meaningless in the context pf the question I asked...calling me a "sky is falling" type when you know as well as anyone the facts of my story is a bit disingenuous...
I am proud to say though, that in all of my postings, I have refrained from bashing the other brands or trying to kill the joy of anyone's new purchase...IIRC, the worst OB statement I ever made was when I told Surveyor that the then Dodge/Cummins combo was an average truck wrapped around a great drivetrain...
You may be tempted to take the Blue Koolaid Crowd position that I unnecessarily bashed Ford...but that bashing was well earned by Ford...fortunately for the 6.7 owners, the undisclosed running production changes made to the Bosch CP4.xx series HPFP and owner awareness of how delicate it really is have certainly diminished the failure rate...for them, GM and all other users of the pump...and that is good news...
However it does not excuse Ford's deplorable treatment of customers who had issues with the pump...and does not mean other unfortunate Ford owners will not receive the same "Shameful" treatment...
The facts speak for themselves...Ford stands alone in not warranting their CP 4.xx failures...it is undeniable...
Regards
