2017 Ford Super Duty Review: First Drive

[patriotgrunt]

pickuptrucks.com

Nice review of the new Ford Super Duty. I wish Ford used a heavier trailer for testing but overall this looks like a solid upgrade over the previous model. The looks are slowly growing on me.

[OH48Lt]

Sure are a bunch of back yard automotive engineers on this site that know so much more the the Ford engineers. To read some of the tripe the trollers in this thread spew forth, it seems Ford must be hiring only the last 2-3 guys in the graduating classes of some third-world community college.

Go ahead and bash that now, it's your turn......

[spoon059]

patriotgrunt wrote:
After thinking about your comments, its occurs to me why you're so emotional. You have a personal vendetta against Fish and you can't stand it if another poster takes his side. Let it go and try talking about trucks instead. You've got some thin skin. Do you spend 30 minutes typing up these responses? It takes a lot to time to quote all those different threads.

Yea... good thoughts, but you're wrong... again.

I'm not really emotional at all about this... we are discussing hunks of metal that don't really have an emotional effect upon me. I just find it humorous that you think you know me, I prove that you don't and you then resort to personal attacks because you know you have nothing else to offer and nothing upon which to stand.

I don't have thin skin, I have the intelligence and facts to back up my argument and am having an enjoyable time proving you wrong. That's not think skinned, that's called an intelligent rebuttal.

It doesn't take me too long to write up these responses... again, intelligence and facts make my responses a little faster than you and your name calling and internet psychiatric evaluations. Also, it was about 100 degrees outside today and high humidity. While my kids were napping I had plenty of time to rip apart your lackluster "argument". Its raining and even more humid out now, so I have a couple of spare minutes to point out that you still have no legitimate argument and point out that you are just doing finger pointing and name calling to try to change the topic. By the way, I just quoted from ONE thread...this one. Its pretty easy... all you do is open TWO tabs of the same thread. Copy and paste, copy and paste, copy and paste. I'm sure you can do it too :W.

I don't have a personal vendetta against Fishie, I'm just getting tired of reading his rants against anything non-Ford. On the rarest of occasions he actually provides a smart comment, so I don't want to block him and miss his 3 relevant posts a year.

[patriotgrunt]

spoon059 wrote:

patriotgrunt wrote:
:B You're like arguing with a women. Why are you all emotional right now? This is just an internet chat! 😉

Ha, yes... I'm the one being emotional right?

patriotgrunt wrote:
I'm glad you are this butt hurt over my comments. However, you do see how Fish's comments can be viewed as a response to others comments? It doesn't make it better that others come on here and start placing emoticons to flame the responses.

patriotgrunt wrote:
And by the 2nd post the Ram mafia showed up talk **** about Ford. It's amazing you point fingers because you're one of the worst brand bashers on this site. Why are you here to discuss Ford trucks when clearly you favor Ram and will always favor Ram? Are you adding to the discussion and simply trolling?

patriotgrunt wrote:
If you take a look at the posts, the Ram mafia and/or other brand owners are the first to start slinging mud. Take a look at the third post. Fish simply came on here and offered his perspective after the shooting war had begun. I honestly don't know your history or even care but don't act like the Ram mafia is the virgin Mary in here.

As for the CP4 issues, again this is very over blown. It's not a prevalent of an issue as many people on this site make it out to be. In fact the same crowd always starts this argument anytime someone talks about Chevy/GMC or Ford.

You are one funny guy... I'm the emotional one and this is just a friendly "chat"...

After thinking about your comments, its occurs to me why you're so emotional. You have a personal vendetta against Fish and you can't stand it if another poster takes his side. Let it go and try talking about trucks instead. You've got some thin skin. Do you spend 30 minutes typing up these responses? It takes a lot to time to quote all those different threads.

[spoon059]

patriotgrunt wrote:
:B You're like arguing with a women. Why are you all emotional right now? This is just an internet chat! 😉

Ha, yes... I'm the one being emotional right?

patriotgrunt wrote:
I'm glad you are this butt hurt over my comments. However, you do see how Fish's comments can be viewed as a response to others comments? It doesn't make it better that others come on here and start placing emoticons to flame the responses.

patriotgrunt wrote:
And by the 2nd post the Ram mafia showed up talk **** about Ford. It's amazing you point fingers because you're one of the worst brand bashers on this site. Why are you here to discuss Ford trucks when clearly you favor Ram and will always favor Ram? Are you adding to the discussion and simply trolling?

patriotgrunt wrote:
If you take a look at the posts, the Ram mafia and/or other brand owners are the first to start slinging mud. Take a look at the third post. Fish simply came on here and offered his perspective after the shooting war had begun. I honestly don't know your history or even care but don't act like the Ram mafia is the virgin Mary in here.

As for the CP4 issues, again this is very over blown. It's not a prevalent of an issue as many people on this site make it out to be. In fact the same crowd always starts this argument anytime someone talks about Chevy/GMC or Ford.

You are one funny guy... I'm the emotional one and this is just a friendly "chat"...

[patriotgrunt]

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

patriotgrunt wrote:

LimogesMan wrote:
I'm with many of you that like and understand the physics behind body flex by design.

Repost from Patriot's:

Explained

I think that's the main issue here. Ford designed it to flex for certain reasons. It's not a weakness like the commercials featuring Howie Long make it out to be. Due to negative ads and market pressure Ford is changing its design but the original reasons for using a C-Channel are still valid.

Not a weakness? Really?
Tell that to these people that have to shuck out $1,600 to 2 grand. Sometimes over and over and over.

Again, why not be happy? Ford saw a problem with frame flex and fixed it. Much like their twin wheel turbo. Nothing but problems so they fixed it. No more turbo problems.

Good for them!

You're comparing two issues that may not be related. Ford can design a better radiator with their current frame. Semi trucks today have the same frame and their radiators seem to last. Besides Ford's frame is boxed towards the front.

Again C-channel frames exist for a reason and have worked well for the last 50-75 years or so? I'm glad Ford is pushing the envelop and I hope it works for them. I'm a conservative individual who waited awhile before embracing eco-boost, aluminum, etc. Like others have stated, the boxed frame will work well if they use thick enough frames.

[patriotgrunt]

spoon059 wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:
LOL... Spoon is just another mafia member who used to be more civil when he drove a Tundra. Darn mafia ruined another one.

Look at the bright side patriotgrunt... at least you have someone your age to play with at the playground. I have to hand it to you Fishie... you claim that I changed, but you have stayed remarkably consistent.

:B You're like arguing with a women. Why are you all emotional right now? This is just an internet chat! 😉

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

patriotgrunt wrote:

LimogesMan wrote:
I'm with many of you that like and understand the physics behind body flex by design.

Repost from Patriot's:

Explained

I think that's the main issue here. Ford designed it to flex for certain reasons. It's not a weakness like the commercials featuring Howie Long make it out to be. Due to negative ads and market pressure Ford is changing its design but the original reasons for using a C-Channel are still valid.

Not a weakness? Really?
Tell that to these people that have to shuck out $1,600 to 2 grand. Sometimes over and over and over.

Again, why not be happy? Ford saw a problem with frame flex and fixed it. Much like their twin wheel turbo. Nothing but problems so they fixed it. No more turbo problems.

Good for them!

[spoon059]

FishOnOne wrote:
LOL... Spoon is just another mafia member who used to be more civil when he drove a Tundra. Darn mafia ruined another one.

Look at the bright side patriotgrunt... at least you have someone your age to play with at the playground. I have to hand it to you Fishie... you claim that I changed, but you have stayed remarkably consistent.

[womps]

I wonder how many buyers of heavy duty pickups give a rats behind or know the difference in how the frames are manufactured. When half the people think a C channel frame is the best and the other half think a boxed frame is the best, then the best frame is under the truck they are driving!

[spoon059]

patriotgrunt wrote:
I'm glad you are this butt hurt over my comments. However, you do see how Fish's comments can be viewed as a response to others comments? It doesn't make it better that others come on here and start placing emoticons to flame the responses.

That's mature... you have ZERO defense to what you wrote, so you act like my 4 year old. Thanks, I've already got one kid to take care of, I don't need to take care of you.

So you can see how Fish's comments came be viewed, but you can't understand how any of the other comments can be viewed as part of a mature conversation?

Its been good* talking to you...

[FishOnOne]

patriotgrunt wrote:

spoon059 wrote:

patriotgrunt wrote:
If you take a look at the posts, the Ram mafia and/or other brand owners are the first to start slinging mud. Take a look at the third post. Fish simply came on here and offered his perspective after the shooting war had begun. I honestly don't know your history or even care but don't act like the Ram mafia is the virgin Mary in here.

As for the CP4 issues, again this is very over blown. It's not a prevalent of an issue as many people on this site make it out to be. In fact the same crowd always starts this argument anytime someone talks about Chevy/GMC or Ford.

You start off by attacking the "Ram Mafia", but Roy owns Fords...how is that another brand owner??? Then you tell me that I "clearly and always favor Ram" then you admit that you know NOTHING about me or my history of brand ownership. That kinda blows your ENTIRE ARGUMENT about me and about other people slinging mud out of the water. I don't see an apology, even though you appear to have completely retracted your allegations against me...

As for the CP4 issues, I have to admit that it caused me enough concern that I wasn't willing to buy a Ford 6.7 diesel at this time. From my understanding the fuel pump has been modified some and is less likely to have catastrophic failures... but time will tell. I think it is still a valid concern to bring up, until such a time that Ford shows a willingness to stand behind their customer or Bosch shows that the pump is reliable for the long term. The CP4 issues are rarely brought up in GM threads, because GM has the reputation of covering the issues under warranty.

Yes, some people brought up negative issues (bringing up established problems isn't "bashing"... it's being truthful) with the Ford... but it sure was not me. I enjoy seeing new innovations and succesfull redesigns in trucks. That means that Ford raised the bar with this redesign and everyone else will have to step up their game to stay competitive. That is great for everyone, regardless of what brand you own.

The fact is that there is always ONE PARTICULAR PERSON who takes every available opportunity to talk about Ram... even if the thread doesn't have anything to do with Ram. That immaturity and insecurity is petty, and that is what I was pointing out when you came at me. Again... I encourage you to read through some of my old posts and some of Fishies old posts, see who is the instigator.

I'm glad you are this butt hurt over my comments. However, you do see how Fish's comments can be viewed as a response to others comments? It doesn't make it better that others come on here and start placing emoticons to flame the responses.

LOL... Spoon is just another mafia member who used to be more civil when he drove a Tundra. Darn mafia ruined another one.

[patriotgrunt]

LimogesMan wrote:
I'm with many of you that like and understand the physics behind body flex by design.

Repost from Patriot's:

Explained

I think that's the main issue here. Ford designed it to flex for certain reasons. It's not a weakness like the commercials featuring Howie Long make it out to be. Due to negative ads and market pressure Ford is changing its design but the original reasons for using a C-Channel are still valid.

[patriotgrunt]

spoon059 wrote:

patriotgrunt wrote:
If you take a look at the posts, the Ram mafia and/or other brand owners are the first to start slinging mud. Take a look at the third post. Fish simply came on here and offered his perspective after the shooting war had begun. I honestly don't know your history or even care but don't act like the Ram mafia is the virgin Mary in here.

As for the CP4 issues, again this is very over blown. It's not a prevalent of an issue as many people on this site make it out to be. In fact the same crowd always starts this argument anytime someone talks about Chevy/GMC or Ford.

You start off by attacking the "Ram Mafia", but Roy owns Fords...how is that another brand owner??? Then you tell me that I "clearly and always favor Ram" then you admit that you know NOTHING about me or my history of brand ownership. That kinda blows your ENTIRE ARGUMENT about me and about other people slinging mud out of the water. I don't see an apology, even though you appear to have completely retracted your allegations against me...

As for the CP4 issues, I have to admit that it caused me enough concern that I wasn't willing to buy a Ford 6.7 diesel at this time. From my understanding the fuel pump has been modified some and is less likely to have catastrophic failures... but time will tell. I think it is still a valid concern to bring up, until such a time that Ford shows a willingness to stand behind their customer or Bosch shows that the pump is reliable for the long term. The CP4 issues are rarely brought up in GM threads, because GM has the reputation of covering the issues under warranty.

Yes, some people brought up negative issues (bringing up established problems isn't "bashing"... it's being truthful) with the Ford... but it sure was not me. I enjoy seeing new innovations and succesfull redesigns in trucks. That means that Ford raised the bar with this redesign and everyone else will have to step up their game to stay competitive. That is great for everyone, regardless of what brand you own.

The fact is that there is always ONE PARTICULAR PERSON who takes every available opportunity to talk about Ram... even if the thread doesn't have anything to do with Ram. That immaturity and insecurity is petty, and that is what I was pointing out when you came at me. Again... I encourage you to read through some of my old posts and some of Fishies old posts, see who is the instigator.

I'm glad you are this butt hurt over my comments. However, you do see how Fish's comments can be viewed as a response to others comments? It doesn't make it better that others come on here and start placing emoticons to flame the responses.

[LimogesMan]

I'm with many of you that like and understand the physics behind body flex by design.

Repost from Patriot's:

Explained