Jump to content

Welcome to TheMalibuCrew!

As a guest, you are welcome to poke around and view the majority of the content that we have to offer, but in order to post, search, contact members, and get full use out of the website you will need to Register for an Account. It's free and it's easy, so don't hesitate to join the TheMalibuCrew Family today!

Sign in to follow this  
nyryan2001

2018 F150 Diesel - Ike Gauntlet 8700lbs

Recommended Posts

bamaboy

Can you summarize the results?  I'm too lazy to watch the video. 

Edited by bamaboy

Share this post


Link to post
RyanB

Slow going up hill.  Total failure going down.  Check engine light came on, went into limp mode.  They ran it twice.  Same going down both times.

Share this post


Link to post
bamaboy
22 minutes ago, RyanB said:

Slow going up hill.  Total failure going down.  Check engine light came on, went into limp mode.  They ran it twice.  Same going down both times.

I like how in the notes below the video it says Ford claimed they just needed to fix the calibration.  They must have had the check engine light threshold set too low.  

Edited by bamaboy

Share this post


Link to post
nyryan2001

I’d happily come off that 30mpg down to 20-23 mpg for 350hp+ and 500+ft lb tq.

But Fords 3.0 diesel performs about the same as Nissan’s weak 5.0 Cummins and Ram’s Fiat diesel.

Edited by nyryan2001

Share this post


Link to post
ahopkinsVTX

So what are you guys expecting out of these half ton diesels? Full super / heavy duty power and towing? That’s not going to happen. That’s not what these trucks are designed and marketed for. They are designed for higher fuel economy in a half ton with as good or slightly better towing then their gas option. I think they said it performed best out of all of the half ton trucks going up? So I would say it performed fairly well going up. Obviously there are some kinks to still be worked out in calibration or programming. But they so also a very extreme test. I’d think 99% of the country will never tow like that. 

Share this post


Link to post
bamabonners

$68k+ f150!!!  

Did it in 9.40 minutes at 5.4 mpg

Couple questions:

Why would you pick this over the 2.7 ecoboost, which did it in 7+ minutes and over 4 mpg?

How much mileage would it take to break even on the upgrade to diesel?   Is it really worth it to get a diesel in a half ton?  Is DEF required on these smaller diesels?

looking at the ram ecodiesel, it’s price as tested as like 44k Msrp.  That’s a huge chunk of change cheaper.  For reference, Ram did the test in 9.03 at 6.1 mpg.   Also, they noted how quiet it was.   

Edited by bamabonners

Share this post


Link to post
RyanB

Actually the lack of HP makes its towing performance significantly slower than the gas versions of a half ton. 

When these guys have tested a Hemi or EcoBoost, it will hold the speed limit going up Eisenhower. Neither of the little diesels come close to doing that. 

I believe what the manufacturers were going for was significantly higher mpg than gas with acceptable performance for someone buying a half ton that will almost never tow with it. 

Share this post


Link to post
bamabonners
10 minutes ago, RyanB said:

Actually the lack of HP makes its towing performance significantly slower than the gas versions of a half ton. 

When these guys have tested a Hemi or EcoBoost, it will hold the speed limit going up Eisenhower. Neither of the little diesels come close to doing that. 

I believe what the manufacturers were going for was significantly higher mpg than gas with acceptable performance for someone buying a half ton that will almost never tow with it. 

I agree.  These are not your typical rolling coal diesels.   

They can’t polish that performance.  It just isn’t for towing that size load.

Edited by bamabonners

Share this post


Link to post
ahopkinsVTX

I still don’t get why you guys are so hung up on how it towed up a 7% grade over 3000 feet. How many of us actually do that? I get that it shows it isn’t the best compared to the ecoboost, but just over two more minutes and still getting better fuel mileage? That means that it’s still going to tow quite well for 99% of what the county will be doing while getting way better mileage. I don’t know, maybe I’m just looking at this completely differently but I get what the manufacturers are trying to do. 

When I pick up my VTX, I won’t be expecting it to ski like my TXi and surf like a 25LSV. That would be amazing... but it’s not realistic.

Edited by ahopkinsTXi
Spelling...

Share this post


Link to post
RyanB
8 minutes ago, ahopkinsTXi said:

I still don’t get why you guys are so hung up on how it towed up a 7% grade over 3000 feet. How many of us actually do that? I get that it shows it isn’t the best compared to the ecoboost, but just over two more minutes and still getting better fuel mileage? That means that it’s still going to tow quite well for 99% of what the county will be doing while getting way better mileage. I don’t know, maybe I’m just looking at this completely differently but I get what the manufacturers are trying to do. 

When I pick up my VTX, I won’t be expecting it to ski like my TXi and sort like a 25LSV. That would be amazing... but it’s not realistic.

I mostly agree with you.  But I do think that the other disadvantage to the 3.0 diesels is the fact that they would make it very difficult to pass on a 2-lane road if you were towing.  Just not enough HP to get the load moving quickly.

I see a place for these 3.0's, but not if you were towing frequently.

Personally, I would like to see someone put one of these engines in a full size SUV like a Suburban.  That is something I would consider purchasing.

Share this post


Link to post
bamabonners

For me, it’s a couple things....

its a truck, bragging about towing and power is just what we do.  In this case, Ford obviously has it overrated.  Second, for 68k, it better do truck things better....this one doesn’t.   Third, I don’t understand the point of buying the small diesels when Ford has proven that a 2.7 turbo has can get the fuel economy and the towing done.  

I rented a mustang with the 2.7 while in Houston. I like it.  Seems like a better option to me than the 3.0 diesel.  

Edited by bamabonners

Share this post


Link to post
ahopkinsVTX
22 minutes ago, RyanB said:

I mostly agree with you.  But I do think that the other disadvantage to the 3.0 diesels is the fact that they would make it very difficult to pass on a 2-lane road if you were towing.  Just not enough HP to get the load moving quickly.

I see a place for these 3.0's, but not if you were towing frequently.

Personally, I would like to see someone put one of these engines in a full size SUV like a Suburban.  That is something I would consider purchasing.

That probably would be a great fit! Can’t imagine the price on a diesel suburban though. 

Share this post


Link to post
shawndoggy
45 minutes ago, ahopkinsTXi said:

I still don’t get why you guys are so hung up on how it towed up a 7% grade over 3000 feet. How many of us actually do that? I get that it shows it isn’t the best compared to the ecoboost, but just over two more minutes and still getting better fuel mileage? That means that it’s still going to tow quite well for 99% of what the county will be doing while getting way better mileage. I don’t know, maybe I’m just looking at this completely differently but I get what the manufacturers are trying to do. 

You raise a great point, hop.

I like the vids for what they are -- semi-identical extreme conditions towing test.  For me (and prolly for @RyanB and everybody in Colorado), my actual tows are closer to the test conditions than the 99%.  For me pulling back from Bullards Bar in the summer it's 5100' of climbing (from 1950 to 7050 albeit over about 50 miles) but on very twisty roads where you are in and out of throttle (and brakes) frequently.  I'd wager it's actually an even tougher torture towing test than the vids because of the heat factor too (105-10 not uncommon in heat of summer).

It took a long time for me to realize that I needed a truck with a significantly higher tow rating than my actual load because of the performance I was expecting.  I have no doubt that if I lived in Florida, any basic 1500-level truck or SUV (gas/diesel/2.7 eco) would perform just fine for my load.

Share this post


Link to post
RyanB

@bamabonners, there is still a pretty significant difference in MPG, at least against the RAM 3.0.

Fuelly consistently puts MPG for the 2.7 at 18.4 MPG.  http://www.fuelly.com/car/ford/f-150?engineconfig_id=49&bodytype_id=&submodel_id=

The RAM 3.0 gets 22 - 23 MPG.  http://www.fuelly.com/car/ram/1500?engineconfig_id=238&bodytype_id=&submodel_id=

Time will tell how the Ford (and GM for that matter) compare.  So far, I don't think Ford is off to a very good start.

Share this post


Link to post
ahopkinsVTX
1 hour ago, shawndoggy said:

You raise a great point, hop.

I like the vids for what they are -- semi-identical extreme conditions towing test.  For me (and prolly for @RyanB and everybody in Colorado), my actual tows are closer to the test conditions than the 99%.  For me pulling back from Bullards Bar in the summer it's 5100' of climbing (from 1950 to 7050 albeit over about 50 miles) but on very twisty roads where you are in and out of throttle (and brakes) frequently.  I'd wager it's actually an even tougher torture towing test than the vids because of the heat factor too (105-10 not uncommon in heat of summer).

It took a long time for me to realize that I needed a truck with a significantly higher tow rating than my actual load because of the performance I was expecting.  I have no doubt that if I lived in Florida, any basic 1500-level truck or SUV (gas/diesel/2.7 eco) would perform just fine for my load.

Oh I totally get that for some people that is their normal tow, but like you said, get a truck that is designed for it :) 

Honestly for me a diesel option would probably be awesome. Not that my truck gets bad mileage (18-21) depending on time of year and type of driving, but I drive 20-25k a year and it’s basically flat here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Sixball

So I have not made that drive now in 20 years but back then it did separate the men from the boys in towing or even cars for that matter. I do know Ford would use that drive on some testing evaluations. Back then in cars one of the better performers was the Mazda rotary vehicles. You would use the brakes on the decline in all the vehicles like they were going out of style. If. Back then you did not like to use a downshift. Vehicles had no way for fuel shutoff.  Its just a standard that is known around the business  and others that tow for a living.  Not any different then even the required government testing for fuel economy. Its a like standard not something that represents all of us.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
nyryan2001

Seems the 5.0 Cummins Titan misses the opportunity to nail it with 375hp, 600ft lbs tq.  20-22mpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
oldjeep

Yeah.  Reinforces my plan to get another hemi

Share this post


Link to post
RyanB
31 minutes ago, nyryan2001 said:

Seems the 5.0 Cummins Titan misses the opportunity to nail it with 375hp, 600ft lbs tq.  20-22mpg

 

 

375/600 with 20 - 22 MPG would be phenomenal numbers, and would sell a ton of trucks for any manufacture.  But no one can currently pull down those numbers.

Titan is 310/555, and averages 14.5 - 15.5 MPG.  And I've seen some Titans in the mountains, and from what I have observed, they don't tow as well as I would expect.

Share this post


Link to post
Brett B
On ‎5‎/‎13‎/‎2018 at 3:34 PM, RyanB said:

375/600 with 20 - 22 MPG would be phenomenal numbers, and would sell a ton of trucks for any manufacture.  But no one can currently pull down those numbers.

Titan is 310/555, and averages 14.5 - 15.5 MPG.  And I've seen some Titans in the mountains, and from what I have observed, they don't tow as well as I would expect.

Do you think the less than stellar Cummins 5.0 performance is due to the transmission it's mated to? I've read some bad reviews of the transmission they used in the Titan. Wondering if mating it to a properly mapped Allison transmission would wake it up. Cummins knows engines pretty darn well...

Share this post


Link to post
1HELLUVALIFE

It also weighs the same as a 2500 with less power.

Share this post


Link to post
spikew919

Drop this in there!  That will either wake it up or blow it up then they can get a real tow rig 😂😂😂 

EBAF957D-C37C-400A-AADA-060247061AF7.jpeg

Share this post


Link to post
RyanB
13 hours ago, Brett B said:

Do you think the less than stellar Cummins 5.0 performance is due to the transmission it's mated to? I've read some bad reviews of the transmission they used in the Titan. Wondering if mating it to a properly mapped Allison transmission would wake it up. Cummins knows engines pretty darn well...

I don't know how much impact the transmission has.  

Two years ago when the Titan first came out, I saw one pulling a 7000ish pound RV up the passes on I70 going the same direction we were going.  I was in my '12 RAM pulling my 13,000 pound 5th wheel so I had nearly double the weight, and significantly more wind resistance.  He passed me going down every hill, and I easily passed him going up every hill.  We ended up at the same campground and the owner told me how disappointed he was in the performance as he was giving it all the truck had.

Personally, I think that truck is just in no-man's land.  310 HP was a powerful engine 15 years ago.  It isn't now.  So, in the 1500 market, they are competing with trucks that have at least 20% more HP.  Even if you had the best transmission ever, you can't compete with a vehicle that has  60 - 80 + HP more than this truck.

And while the engine isn't big enough to really compete with others in its class (not even mentioning going into the 2500 class), it is too big to get MPG to compete with the 3.0 EcoDiesel/PowerStroke or upcoming Duramax.  

It's MPG is actually pretty embarrassing as it can't even best the current bigger diesels.  About the only engine it has an MPG advantage on is the Tundra, which might be known for a lot of things, but economy isn't one of them.

I might be wrong, but I think RAM was very smart to pass on this engine, as was Toyota, as they were slated to add it years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
granddaddy55
On 5/13/2018 at 8:58 AM, bamabonners said:

 

I rented a mustang with the 2.7 while in Houston. I like it.  Seems like a better option to me than the 3.0 diesel.  

No you didn’t , it was a 2.4l 4 cylinder, if they would have put my 2.7 in the eco mustang I might have been able to talk my wife into it , she drove that dog and got into it immediately and came back to dealer immediately and said no thx

she is the proud owner of sn 18 GT premium vert, no pp, but we have a spare tire!

Edited by granddaddy55

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...