Topic: Test Drive: 2012 Ford F-150 FX4 EcoBoost

[Autos_Editor]

Peter put the F-150 to work on some seasonal spring cleaning, and the EcoBoost V6 was up to the task and didn't break the bank.

Read More...

[mrthompson]

I'm curious what rear end ratio the FX4 option uses.

[nlm]

I love this truck. 8.0 financing though when the competitors are offering cash discounts AND 0% financing can be tough to swallow.

[greengs]

I have owned a 2011 F150 4x4 Supercrew XLT Ecoboost with 3.31 rear gears for over 6 months.  I have put about 6500 kms on it.  I have never once returned fuel economy as poor what was reported in this review (even with Blizzaks installed). 

The review reports 14.5 l / 100 km during "mostly highway" driving.  For me, this would have to involve highway cruising at 140 + km/h.  The worst I have ever done in all city driving was 15.5 l / 100 km (compared to the high teens / low 20s reported in the review).

With the cruise set at 110 km/h, I consistently achieve approx 9.6 l / 100 km.

Even my 2010 F150 with the 5.4 V8 achieved better fuel economy than was reported in this review.

All this likely means is that with the 5.0L and you driving you'd likely achieve similar numbers to the ecoboost numbers as you drive very efficiently. 

[redman]

This could all be solved with the addition of a small 3L or < diesel.
I'm floored at the reluctance of any pickup manufacturer in Canada/U.S. market to offer what seems like the simplest and best solution.
New diesels meet emission standards, give you gobs of low end torque and offer improved fuel economy.
Manufactures here deter buyers into the diesel pickup market here by either over displacing the engine or over pricing it beyond and savings for most drivers.
There clearly is a written or unwritten agreement here that prevents the simplest and best solution here (small diesel) while promoting over massaged ICE engines with little gain in fuel savings.

http://www.thecarconnection.com/news/1050522_all-new-2012-ford-ranger-not-coming-to-the-u-s-heres-why

[Ex-airbalancer]

This could all be solved with the addition of a small 3L or < diesel.
I'm floored at the reluctance of any pickup manufacturer in Canada/U.S. market to offer what seems like the simplest and best solution.
New diesels meet emission standards, give you gobs of low end torque and offer improved fuel economy.
Manufactures here deter buyers into the diesel pickup market here by either over displacing the engine or over pricing it beyond and savings for most drivers.
There clearly is a written or unwritten agreement here that prevents the simplest and best solution here (small diesel) while promoting over massaged ICE engines with little gain in fuel savings.

All the manufactures have looked at small diesel engines for a pick up but yet they cannot make a business case for it.
No pint building something that you can not make money at

[redman]

This could all be solved with the addition of a small 3L or < diesel.
I'm floored at the reluctance of any pickup manufacturer in Canada/U.S. market to offer what seems like the simplest and best solution.
New diesels meet emission standards, give you gobs of low end torque and offer improved fuel economy.
Manufactures here deter buyers into the diesel pickup market here by either over displacing the engine or over pricing it beyond and savings for most drivers.
There clearly is a written or unwritten agreement here that prevents the simplest and best solution here (small diesel) while promoting over massaged ICE engines with little gain in fuel savings.

All the manufactures have looked at small diesel engines for a pick up but yet they cannot make a business case for it.
No pint building something that you can not make money at

Do you really believe this ? Just read the comments on the link I've attached above or do some reading on forums devoted to pickup trucks such as
http://forums.pickuptrucks.com/ubbthreads.php

[Ex-airbalancer]

This could all be solved with the addition of a small 3L or < diesel.
I'm floored at the reluctance of any pickup manufacturer in Canada/U.S. market to offer what seems like the simplest and best solution.
New diesels meet emission standards, give you gobs of low end torque and offer improved fuel economy.
Manufactures here deter buyers into the diesel pickup market here by either over displacing the engine or over pricing it beyond and savings for most drivers.
There clearly is a written or unwritten agreement here that prevents the simplest and best solution here (small diesel) while promoting over massaged ICE engines with little gain in fuel savings.

All the manufactures have looked at small diesel engines for a pick up but yet they cannot make a business case for it.
No pint building something that you can not make money at

Do you really believe this ? Just read the comments on the link I've attached above or do some reading on forums devoted to pickup trucks such as
http://forums.pickuptrucks.com/ubbthreads.php

I think you need a reality check
If they thought there was money to be made, they would do it

[Sir Osis of Liver]

Do you really believe this ? Just read the comments on the link I've attached above or do some reading on forums devoted to pickup trucks such as

Airbalancer is correct.

Toyota, Nissan, GM, Dodge, Ford have all looked at small diesels for their pickups and have come to the same conclusion. They have all shelved or cancelled their programs in just the last 4-5 years.

The Ford 4.4L diesel originally intended for the F150 is currently produced alongside the 6.7L Scorpion diesel in Mexico, and is used in the Range Rover in the rest of the world, but not used in NA because they can't make a case for it.

Diesel engines are expensive to produce. There's a reason why the heavy duty pickups have diesels as a $9k option. Smaller versions aren't significantly cheaper to produce.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

From a previous thread:

The 4.4L that Ford was going to use in the F150 is currently in production for Range Rover along side the 6.7L diesel engine in Chihuahua Mexico. Like the 6.7L they can meet emissions standards, but they cancelled the engine for the F150. It boiled down to the fact that it wasn't much cheaper to produce than the 6.7L. How many people are going to pony up an additional $8-9k to get a diesel in a light duty truck?

For the rest of the manufacturers, their programs were really far along when the plug was pulled. The 5L Cummins was to be used in the Ram and Nissan, Isuzu had completed the design for the Toyota. GM even had the 4.5L Duramax at SEMA back in 2007.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7J4wFwIXC7U

It wasn't an issue of R&D costs in the least. That part of the respective programs had already concluded.

The projected fuel economy numbers were supposed to be 25% better than the old 5.4. The Ecoboost gains about 18% better fuel economy with better power delivery than the 5.4, and is much cheaper to produce [than a diesel]. Combine that with diesel prices that typically run 5-10% higher than gas in much of the US it's pretty difficult to make the case for it.

[Frontier1]

By far the Ford and the Silverado, best looking pick ups in the business, and proven to boot.

[Fobroader]

I'm curious what rear end ratio the FX4 option uses.

Thats a 3.73, but still, I thought this truck was supposed to get better mileage than the V8s with the same power. 15+L/100Km.....I can do that in a GMC Sierra with a 6.2 Max Tow package and have a much better looking truck with a better interior IMO. This is kind of high from what Ive read on a lot of forums, most owners are reporting 13-15L/100 in the city and 9-11L/100 on the hwy. Did you guys have the turbos spooled the whole time??? Im really interested in hearing about this truck, I am looking to get a new truck in two years and am undecided to go with an Eco Boost F150 or a Sierra Tow Max......or maybe just say the hell with it and get an older 12V Cummins and enjoy reliability, fuel mileage but not have that much power.

[redman]

Mahindra attempted to bring a small diesel pickup to the U.S. market but failed when they were unable to meet mileage promises. They had many pre-orders. The market for a small diesel is there even if the rational is not.
Ordering a diesel pickup is not a 9k option overseas, why is it the case in N/A ? With a 9K option failure is bound to happen.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/12/mahindra-pickup-future-remains-in-liimbo.html

As far as "reality checks". I've sold pickups and spoke to many customers. How many one to one conversations with buyers have you spoke to ?

[Fobroader]

Mahindra attempted to bring a small diesel pickup to the U.S. market but failed when they were unable to meet mileage promises. They had many pre-orders. The market for a small diesel is there even if the rational is not.
Ordering a diesel pickup is not a 9k option overseas, why is it the case in N/A ? At 9K failure is bound to happen.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/12/mahindra-pickup-future-remains-in-liimbo.html

I was actually very excited about the Mahindra coming here, I thought great, I can permanently attach the trailer to my 3/4 ton and just use it for that and use the Mahindra for the other 98% of the time and get at worst case scenario twice the gas mileage. I think that Toyota should bring the hilux and the Land Cruiser truck, Mitsubishi should bring the L200, Nissan the Navara....all the smaller diesels here just to show the big 3 that a decent, smaller diesel truck will sell.

[tpl]

I would think that taking the basic world market Toyota p/u with a small diesel, doing the emission thing to get with the benighted EPA regs and then selling it here would not be a big investment. Try to do no other changes although I suppose it would have to have an automatic transmission and available a/c.

 Start here where there is no chicken tax and if it sells then try it in the USA...it would be good to have a vehicle here cheaper than in the US.

On 2nd thoughts. Bring it in with the gas and the diesel at as close a price as possible.   I suggest Toyota as they showed willing to supposedly sell Prius' at a loss to establish the hybrid market.

[Ex-airbalancer]

Mahindra attempted to bring a small diesel pickup to the U.S. market but failed when they were unable to meet mileage promises. They had many pre-orders. The market for a small diesel is there even if the rational is not.
Ordering a diesel pickup is not a 9k option overseas, why is it the case in N/A ? With a 9K option failure is bound to happen.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/12/mahindra-pickup-future-remains-in-liimbo.html

Why would want this truck ?
Disappointing Mileage
 
The first occurred in February. After a long and costly effort to win emissions certification from the EPA for the four-cylinder 2.2L mHawk diesel engine, the truck’s gas mileage figures ended up, shall we say, disappointing at 19/21 mpg city/highway, falling short of Mahindra’s promise that the company would bring a pickup truck to the U.S. that delivered around 30 mpg.

There could be a number of reasons for this discrepancy (mandated U.S.-spec exhaust gas recirculation systems come to mind), but one that stands out is the fact that the test vehicle the EPA evaluated was Mahindra’s biggest and heaviest truck: a four-door four-wheel-drive T40 with an automatic transmission.

While prospective buyer reaction seemed mixed online,  one wonders if such mediocre mileage didn’t convince some Mahindra executives that a truck of unproven reliability in the North American market would be a hard sell compared to, say, the segment-leading Toyota Tacoma, which delivers better highway mileage with a V-6 gas engine and has a proven track record with consumers.

[aquadorhj]

at the risk of derailing the thread, i have to ask, WHY is it significantly more expensive to get diesel engine? 

you may be right that even small diesels are more expensive to produce, but in EU,i heard(may be hearsay) almost 50% of passenger cars sold are diesel.  ...

yeah, diesel engine needs stronger block for high compression, but is it purely that? .. it can't be much more expensive to cast thicker iron block instead of thin walled ones (like i have in mine) for petrol.

[dkaz]

Is the need to turbocharge the engine to get respectable HP numbers adding to the cost? I test drove a naturally aspirated diesel Jetta last year. Acceptable in the city, hard to get up to speed on the highway.

[Cord]

Regarding the fuel economy issue, NRC makes no differentiation as to what type of F-150 the ratings apply to. And it would only make sense that manufacturers would certify the most fuel efficient version. The ratings only apply to an F-150 with the powertrain in question - a basic regular cab 2WD XL with a 3.15 axle can be had with the Ecoboost V6. I can assure you that this truck will get significantly better fuel economy than the as-tested truck - a fully loaded crew cab 4x4 with 3.73 axle and off-road tires.

[Danno001]

at the risk of derailing the thread, i have to ask, WHY is it significantly more expensive to get diesel engine? 

you may be right that even small diesels are more expensive to produce, but in EU,i heard(may be hearsay) almost 50% of passenger cars sold are diesel.  ...

yeah, diesel engine needs stronger block for high compression, but is it purely that? .. it can't be much more expensive to cast thicker iron block instead of thin walled ones (like i have in mine) for petrol.

I'll give it  a shot with some thoughts on why it is more expensive:
1. Because they can (charge more)
2. Everthing in the engine needs to be upgraded - block, heads, valves, crank, rods, pistons. The torque out of the 2.2L Mazda diesel is double that of the 2.0 L Skyactiv gas motor.
3. Diesel fuel injectors and fuel pump have become much more expensive as working pressures are up to 26,000 lbs/sq in to meet emissions. Standard gas is <100lbs.
4. Turbos and intercoolers are required on diesels for decent performance