F150 Diesel

[nthach]

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp

My understanding is Ford and Toyota still have some agreement regarding competition in the pickup segment.

Basically, Ford agreed not to knock on their door in one segment, and Toyota plays it cool in the pickup segment.

I would be totally open to Toyo diesel though. Love their engines in the Hino trucks.

Toyota and Ford have an IP sharing agreement in place - it covers hybrid drivetrains and emissions control. I wouldn't be surprised if the new port/direct injection system in the newest Ford engines was licensed from Toyota.

I would love to see a diesel 4Runner or Tacoma/Tundra in the US - and Toyota can offer that same engine in the Lexus GX or LX to offer an counterpoint against Range Rover and BMW in the luxury mid/full size segment. Toyota does have an 4.5L diesel V8 in Japan and Australia they can use, but it will have to have SCR on it to meet EPA/CARB/Euro 6 regulations. Toyota was sourcing BMW diesels for the Euro-spec Lexus IS and RAV4.

 

[nthach]

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp


Tough call. When I got my Navigator, I was deeply concerned with the fact that it had a German transmission, but it, and it's descendant the 6R80 are just magic.


From what I've read, ZF was open to Ford and Mopar tweaking their designs for their use and Ford was pretty happy with the 6HP26 to use it as a base for their own efforts. Mopar builds a version of the 8HP at their plant with ZF's blessing. Rumor had it the 5R110 TorqShift was also ZF-based and technically a 6-speed but behaves like a 5-speed, the PCM will choose which "set" of ratios to use?

Maybe ZF isn't as bad as people think they are - but for some reason the BMW/VAG units don't hold up well and Honda isn't too happy either.

 

[DoubleWasp]

Shame. I hope Ford rolls out the good stuff.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: nthach
I think the mechanical core of Ford/GM/Toyota trucks will last a decently long time. I have my doubts with Dodge, especially when the newer Ram 1500s share transmissions with Audi/BMW/Land Rover(ZF 8HP series).


Don't forget Bentley and Jaguar who also have been running the ZF slushbox for a LONG time. Very high output engines, plus the Bentleys are AWD which really works a trans.

Both the New Gen Hemi and the ZF 8 speed have excellent reliability comparable to anyone in the market.

 

[RooflessVW]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Both the New Gen Hemi and the ZF 8 speed have excellent reliability comparable to anyone in the market.

100%

The 8HP is the best gearbox on the market right now. Probably the best auto trans ever made, and the current crop of Hemi engines are sweet. Do they have any issues? I don't know of any.

 

[SubLGT]

Is the timing belt on this diesel engine a weakness, or a superior choice over a timing chain?

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted By: SubLGT
Is the timing belt on this diesel engine a weakness, or a superior choice over a timing chain?


It's a very poor choice for a Diesel engine.

 

[itguy08]

Still don't get why there is a woodie for these Diesels. They have high acquisition costs, high maintenance costs, and lots of stuff to go wrong (EGR, DPF, HPFP, etc).

At the local Pump:
Regular 87 is $2.61
Diesel is $3.55

You get better fuel economy but is it really much of a savings? One emissions issue and you wipe out all the savings. Ford has excellent Turbo gas engines that run on that 87 and have been proven to be reliable.

I still don't get it.

 

[CKN]

Originally Posted By: itguy08
Still don't get why there is a woodie for these Diesels. They have high acquisition costs, high maintenance costs, and lots of stuff to go wrong (EGR, DPF, HPFP, etc).

At the local Pump:
Regular 87 is $2.61
Diesel is $3.55

You get better fuel economy but is it really much of a savings? One emissions issue and you wipe out all the savings. Ford has excellent Turbo gas engines that run on that 87 and have been proven to be reliable.

I still don't get it.


I have read of many company fleets (vans/pickups) switching over their vehicles from diesel to gas powered at replacement time. I agree with you.

My son who works for a compressor company is in the process of doing this very thing. The Mercedes Sprinter vans that are diesel are EXTREMELY costly to repair and maintain. AND THEY DO NEED REPAIR OFTEN.

As a matter of fact...since this is a national company-all the branches are doing the same thing.

 

[nthach]

Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Still don't get why there is a woodie for these Diesels. They have high acquisition costs, high maintenance costs, and lots of stuff to go wrong (EGR, DPF, HPFP, etc).

At the local Pump:
Regular 87 is $2.61
Diesel is $3.55

You get better fuel economy but is it really much of a savings? One emissions issue and you wipe out all the savings. Ford has excellent Turbo gas engines that run on that 87 and have been proven to be reliable.

I still don't get it.


I have read of many company fleets (vans/pickups) switching over their vehicles from diesel to gas powered at replacement time. I agree with you.

My son who works for a compressor company is in the process of doing this very thing. The Mercedes Sprinter vans that are diesel are EXTREMELY costly to repair and maintain. AND THEY DO NEED REPAIR OFTEN.

As a matter of fact...since this is a national company-all the branches are doing the same thing.

(low-end)Torque and fuel economy are the main selling points for diesel, granted a pickup truck ain't going to be as miserly as a Prius but not everyone needs a big V8 to haul around most things. Now with direct injection and turbos a gas engine can have the same low-end grunt as a diesel. Diesel engines are for the most part are strong like bull(except for the GM diesels of the 1980s). An Ecoboost with a light foot can provide the same torque and MPG benefits as a diesel, if you don't pretend a F150 Ecoboost is a Supra Turbo or 300ZX TT. There are somethings that are more cut out for diesels like heavy towing, snow plows and going to remote sites.

But with the emissions controls that new diesels come with - especially SCR some government and construction fleets are going back to gas. One of the transit authorities here is using gas E350 cutaways for paratransit vans, San Francisco is using regular F250/350s for DPW trucks. Just the fact that a fleet doesn't have to keep DEF around or worry about DPFs clogging(from what a bus mechanic told me, they're seeing this happen much less with EPA2010 engines with SCR) is a big selling point.

 

[CKN]

Originally Posted By: nthach
Originally Posted By: CKN
Originally Posted By: itguy08
Still don't get why there is a woodie for these Diesels. They have high acquisition costs, high maintenance costs, and lots of stuff to go wrong (EGR, DPF, HPFP, etc).

At the local Pump:
Regular 87 is $2.61
Diesel is $3.55

You get better fuel economy but is it really much of a savings? One emissions issue and you wipe out all the savings. Ford has excellent Turbo gas engines that run on that 87 and have been proven to be reliable.

I still don't get it.


I have read of many company fleets (vans/pickups) switching over their vehicles from diesel to gas powered at replacement time. I agree with you.

My son who works for a compressor company is in the process of doing this very thing. The Mercedes Sprinter vans that are diesel are EXTREMELY costly to repair and maintain. AND THEY DO NEED REPAIR OFTEN.

As a matter of fact...since this is a national company-all the branches are doing the same thing.

(low-end)Torque and fuel economy are the main selling points for diesel, granted a pickup truck ain't going to be as miserly as a Prius but not everyone needs a big V8 to haul around most things. Now with direct injection and turbos a gas engine can have the same low-end grunt as a diesel. Diesel engines are for the most part are strong like bull(except for the GM diesels of the 1980s). An Ecoboost with a light foot can provide the same torque and MPG benefits as a diesel, if you don't pretend a F150 Ecoboost is a Supra Turbo or 300ZX TT. There are somethings that are more cut out for diesels like heavy towing, snow plows and going to remote sites.

But with the emissions controls that new diesels come with - especially SCR some government and construction fleets are going back to gas. One of the transit authorities here is using gas E350 cutaways for paratransit vans, San Francisco is using regular F250/350s for DPW trucks. Just the fact that a fleet doesn't have to keep DEF around or worry about DPFs clogging(from what a bus mechanic told me, they're seeing this happen much less with EPA2010 engines with SCR) is a big selling point.


I can tell you the diesel Sprinter vans have been a disaster for my son's company.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: rooflessVW
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Both the New Gen Hemi and the ZF 8 speed have excellent reliability comparable to anyone in the market.

100%

The 8HP is the best gearbox on the market right now. Probably the best auto trans ever made, and the current crop of Hemi engines are sweet. Do they have any issues? I don't know of any.


The new gen Hemis are extremely reliable. I have heard of a few failures but very few. And remember they get excellent economy. My wifey has a lead foot and routinely gets 18 mpg!

And if that ZF slushbox can hold up to a Bentley's extreme torque with AWD I guarantee it's tough!

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: 02SE
Originally Posted By: SubLGT
Is the timing belt on this diesel engine a weakness, or a superior choice over a timing chain?


It's a very poor choice for a Diesel engine.


How is that? My understanding is that for gasoline variable valve timing engines, the engines are interference also. Since everything is VVT these days, no drawback there.

I get not wanting to mess with the belt, and the downside, but a good number of engines manage just fine. Just build the cost of the TB job into the amortization cost at vehicle purchase time, and be prepared for it.

[I had a VW TDi, and had the belt replaced thrice. I managed just fine.]

 

[supton]

Originally Posted By: itguy08
Still don't get why there is a woodie for these Diesels. They have high acquisition costs, high maintenance costs, and lots of stuff to go wrong (EGR, DPF, HPFP, etc).

At the local Pump:
Regular 87 is $2.61
Diesel is $3.55

You get better fuel economy but is it really much of a savings? One emissions issue and you wipe out all the savings. Ford has excellent Turbo gas engines that run on that 87 and have been proven to be reliable.

I still don't get it.


Until Ford came out with the EB there just wasn't much (any?) low rpm gas torque monsters. Who wants to listen to a gas motor at high rpm while climbing hills? Fun for a few seconds, but eventually... My TDi was one of the last diesel mills without DPF, and it was a motor I liked to drive--all the torque right where I wanted it.

Today, given the emissions controls, and the EB motor, yeah I'd agree: not a good justification for the diesel mills. Maybe this batch will undo the problems the last few years have had for diesels.

 

[A_A_G]

I'll take the Coyote version. The diesel would be boring to drive with that amount of horsepower.

 

[02SE]

Originally Posted By: supton
Originally Posted By: 02SE
Originally Posted By: SubLGT
Is the timing belt on this diesel engine a weakness, or a superior choice over a timing chain?


It's a very poor choice for a Diesel engine.


How is that? My understanding is that for gasoline variable valve timing engines, the engines are interference also. Since everything is VVT these days, no drawback there.

I get not wanting to mess with the belt, and the downside, but a good number of engines manage just fine. Just build the cost of the TB job into the amortization cost at vehicle purchase time, and be prepared for it.

[I had a VW TDi, and had the belt replaced thrice. I managed just fine.]



It's stupid to design any engine with a timing belt, which is also an interference engine. I fixed plenty of interference engines back in my consumer car repair days, where the Timing Belt failed. Sometimes it was preventive maintenance neglect, other times the belt failed early. Either way, in the case of an interference engine that has a T-belt failure, it makes for a costly repair.

Bottom line: On an interference engine, a Timing Belt is a stupid design.

 

[DoubleWasp]

Originally Posted By: itguy08
Still don't get why there is a woodie for these Diesels. They have high acquisition costs, high maintenance costs, and lots of stuff to go wrong (EGR, DPF, HPFP, etc).

At the local Pump:
Regular 87 is $2.61
Diesel is $3.55

You get better fuel economy but is it really much of a savings? One emissions issue and you wipe out all the savings. Ford has excellent Turbo gas engines that run on that 87 and have been proven to be reliable.

I still don't get it.


Diesel is expensive where you are. It's running 2.69 almost anywhere here.

Why diesel? If you're a person who actually tows a lot, it makes a big difference. I tow both gas and diesel, and diesel just pulls away, while gas engines are screaming to try and keep up. Mileage goes down the toilet with gas too.

For long treks over the road, this becomes even more important.

A Coyote or EB isn't going to ever see 30MPG, and you can imagine the difference under load.

There are definitely some diesels I don't want to touch (sprinter vans being one example), but running a fleet of diesel vehicles has not broken me. My NPRs and UDs have gone the distance with few issues, and use a lot less fuel and carry a lot more than my gas trucks.

I don't even want to know what my refer UDs would use for fuel if they were gas.

For my pickups, they aren't even available in gas to haul what my diesels will take.

If you're a person who is looking at buying a pickup for the occasional trip to HD, or to tow a light camper 5 times a year, or to make local deliveries, diesel doesn't make a lot of sense.

If you are looking for one because you're going to load that mother to the very limits, you'll be hard pressed to find a gas equivalent.

Capacity is not really the target of 1/2 ton diesel here. It's about doing what 1/2 tons do, except better and using less fuel.

 

[CT8]

With the emissions I am not sure about a new diesel. The 7.3 has too many parts.

 

[itguy08]

Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp

Diesel is expensive where you are. It's running 2.69 almost anywhere here.


What is the spread vs gas? One state over in NJ Regular was $2.49 over the weekend - in PA it was higher. Diesel is almost always higher in the NE. In the winter it's very high due to high heating fuel use. But it seems to be running at premium gas levels for the past few years.

Quote:
Why diesel? If you're a person who actually tows a lot, it makes a big difference. I tow both gas and diesel, and diesel just pulls away, while gas engines are screaming to try and keep up. Mileage goes down the toilet with gas too.


Why yes I tow - have 6k miles under the belt since 2015 pulling the 9900lb camper behind an F150 Ecoboost. Not bragging, just stating that I do have a bit of experience. The turbo gas just pulls away loaded or unloaded. Surprised a few cars when I had to get over from a stoplight. The only reason the Diesel gives you that power is the same reason the gas does for me - the turbo. Without them Diesels are SLUGS. Just ask any 80's Diesel owner.

MPG is 18-20 unloaded (4x4, supercrew, 3.73) and 6-10 loaded depending on terrain and wind. I believe the F250/350's Diesels get 10-13 towing a similar load.

Quote:
A Coyote or EB isn't going to ever see 30MPG, and you can imagine the difference under load.


I thought the 2.7 comes in at 27 or 28? Gets you close enough without the fuel cost, maintenance, and higher acquisition costs of Diesel. A fuel injector for the EB 3.5 costs $97, the HPFP is $349. And when the HPFP goes in an EB you don't have to replace the entire fuel system, like a CRD.

I don't know I'd put medium duty trucks like you run in the same league as a light duty F150/250/350.

 

[DoubleWasp]

In comparing the towing economy of an F250 vs. F150, you have to remember that one truck is near its limit, and the other is not even close.

Even comparing two diesel vehicles of different capacities, the same problem exists. I can load my UDs with the same load as my NPRs and the economy will be sorta close, but if I load my NPRs with what my UDs will carry (impossible), things get a lot worse for the NPR.

Just the same as how a Civic carrying two people defeats an F150 carrying two people, but won't beat it hauling your load.

Gas is about 2.40 here right now.

The power of diesel comes from both the turbo, and the drastically different power band. More torque, and lower, even considering turbo and similar displacement.

Certainly a 2.7 Eco can deliver nearly the same fuel economy, but given the specs of both engines, can we really expect it to haul as well as this diesel engine?

Whether it makes any sense or not is going to come down to execution. If it's got a CP4 HPFP, and the same associated issues, I will definitely pass. Rather load up a bicycle than deal with that nonsense.