F150 Ecoboost Forum banner
1 - 20 of 20 Posts

·
Premium Member
2021 Powerboost Platinum FX4 Kodiak Brown
Joined
·
9,442 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I'm sure it's not surprising, and I get that it's probably a good business decision, but still I kinda wish the Era wasn't over so soon.

Also goes to show that sometimes manufacturers SHOULDN'T listen TOO closely to the shout/demands of what turns out to represent far fewer legitimate consumers than the shouts implied.


Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: eeore39648

·
Premium Member
2021 Powerboost Platinum FX4 Kodiak Brown
Joined
·
9,442 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
It's a shame the epa has ruined diesel motors.

Add to it the increased cost over a gas engine with less power and it was a lose/lose proposition from the start.
I gotta admit that pre-Ecoboost I was a diehard diesel truck man. To me it was win/win/win on so many fronts. And yes, around 2004 the erosion of the advantages began, only to continue until almost EVERY advantage, other than just raw torque, was eliminated. It still stings because it was self-inflicted by people with enormous influence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eeore39648

·
Registered
Joined
·
338 Posts
They missed an opportunity for a diesel hybrid. Huge torque and great fuel economy. Can’t wait for the HD segment to come up with one with onboard power for tools, RV etc.
 

·
Premium Member
2021 Powerboost Platinum FX4 Kodiak Brown
Joined
·
9,442 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
They missed an opportunity for a diesel hybrid. Huge torque and great fuel economy. Can’t wait for the HD segment to come up with one with onboard power for tools, RV etc.
Excellent point!

Now with a few thousand miles under my belt in the Hybrid, it's become more obvious why Ford picked the 3.5EB as the platform to introduce Hybrid technology to for various reasons. Admittedly with a dose of conjecture.

Using the flagship motor already guaranteed plenty of performance, so they could get away with small high-voltage battery pack, (by EV standards) and a smaller less powerful electric motor that could be packaged very cleverly in the existing 10r80. Nobody is ever going to complain that Fords Hybrid F150 was enemic. That little motor adds a jolt of instant torque to what already was a strong torque platform.

Then by evading the word Hybrid, substituted with "Powerboost", they brilliantly leveraged the small battery/motor as power grid on wheels! I say brilliant because without that amazing feature the focus in the media world would have been all Hybrid focus. You know, fuel mileage. It's just not a big enough battery to freak the world out with 3xmpg. But it does get you a 20% increase over what already was a pretty fuel efficient motor considering how powerful it is.
So you get MORE power, better fuel efficiency, and the rolling grid. All for a ridiculously low cost. (no way the Powerboost portion of the truck is profitable. I just don't see how)

So back to the comment on adding the Hybrid package to the 3.0 PowerStroke instead...... It would make one heck of a truck! Although Cargo Capacity was already a disappointment, so THAT would be even worse unless Ford did something about it.

But honestly, now that the Hybrid portion has been packaged and deployed in one available drivetrain, I would not be shocked to see it adapted to others, including the SuperDuty.

Without a crystal ball, nobody knows. But I wouldn't put anything past Ford right now on their truck strategy. Starting around 10 years ago they got suddenly bold! And they haven't let up one bit.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: eeore39648

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,529 Posts
There is more to this story than the dropping of diesels by most manufacturers except except in the truck segment. Even the Europeans are dumping diesels (the largest market).

Also, manufacturers are dumping hybrids in favour of "pure electric". The Governments DO NOT want ANY gas/diesel hybrids. They are planning on banning all petroleum products, just like they did when they abolished lead in gasoline.

During our recent hot spell, the utility company was screaming about how much electricity was being consumed and asked everyone to conserve. So what the hell are they going to do, if everyone has an electric vehicle. The irony, most of the electricity in North America is not from renewable energy. Most is from fossil fuels.

The biggest irony - we can do whatever the environmentalists want in North America. BUT, as long as China and India are growing economies with high energy demands, and their primary source of electrical power comes from coal. Nothing we do in North America will matter. Other than put us on an economic disadvantage to China and India.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,587 Posts
Yeah they really only dropped it because of emissions and low consumer volume. Diesel emissions are VERY strict now. Ford barely passed with the 3.0 Powerstroke.
 

·
Premium Member
2021 Powerboost Platinum FX4 Kodiak Brown
Joined
·
9,442 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Yeah they really only dropped it because of emissions and low consumer volume. Diesel emissions are VERY strict now. Ford barely passed with the 3.0 Powerstroke.
I agree that the sales volume is DISMAL. But imagine if you could go back to diesel regulations pre-2007 (Ford was just beating the deadline in 2004 with the 2007-regulations-passing 6.0)

An F150 diesel without the insane complexity of the current modern diesel, combined with the historical ~50% co$t of diesel VS gasoline, and the fuel efficiency and long engine life. They would sell like pancakes.

The deck (worldwide) is just so artificially Stacked against it.

I guess the small diesel Era is coming to an end.

Sent from my SM-G988U using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: SrpRacing

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,020 Posts
Wasn't the 3.0 pulled from a 10-15 year old land Rover?
It feels very Nissan Titan 5.0 Cummins, trying to shoehorn old architecture into new regulations.

The appeal was there, then you look at ram or GM and Ford's baby PS looks just OK. Reviews have also suggested it was not a tow beast or mpg king.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,414 Posts
There was a few thing wrong with this whole situation. I really dont think it was lack of demand for a 1/2 ton diesel.

1. Ford half assed this diesel. Its dates back to like 2004 or something.
2. Ford charged a lot of money for a half assed diesel.
3. Ford already had two other motors that provide diesel like torque with way more HP. One of those motors, the 2.7, might challenge the diesel on mpg's, burns cheaper fuel, and costs $4000 less.

Fuelly.com for the diesel:

173412


Fuelly.com for the 2.7:

173413


4. Ford produced like 10 of them by my estimation. It's not like you could easily find one. I looked.
5. The competitors have more powerful, cheaper diesels that get better MPG's. The 3.0 Duramax blows the 3.0 PSD out of the water and only cost likw $1200 more than the 5.3L V8 and is cheaper than the 6.2L. If you buy a GM 1500, and don't buy the 6.2L, you should get the 3.0.

Here is Fuelly for the 278 hp Duramax 3.0:

173414


It was a crappy motor that they tossed in the F150 because they had it laying around. I literally know of 1 PSD around my area. I see Ram 1500 Ecodiesels, 3.0 Duramax's, and 2.8L Colorado Duramax's literally daily. GM has done a really good job positioning the 3.0 Duramax to be something you don't even need to think twice about buying. Its so cheap that you don't even need to break out the spreadsheet to calculate if you will ever get your money back in fuel savings. You will.
 

·
Registered
2018 F-150 XLT SCAB 4x4 3.55:1
Joined
·
189 Posts
They missed an opportunity for a diesel hybrid. Huge torque and great fuel economy. Can’t wait for the HD segment to come up with one with onboard power for tools, RV etc.
Diesel is an awful choice for diesel/electric hybrid. That is why the engineers who know what they are doing do not go that route. Only sounds good to the armchair engineer who never builds anything.

Diesel/electric locomotives work because they never turn the engine off. The locomotive is electric not for economy but because a geared transmission is grossly impractical.

I believe the emissions controls on my (former) Powerstroke were more complex than the entire hybrid powertrain in my (former) Prius.

Diesel equivalent thermal efficiencies can be had when a gasoline engine is no longer directly connected to the driver's right foot and immediate power to the wheels can be buffered through battery and electric motors. But with relatively easy to achieve gasoline emissions, and at gasoline low prices.

Did you know the Prius gasoline engine has a 13.5:1 compression ratio and runs happily on 87 AKI? It will illuminate the CEL if run on 93 AKI.
 

·
Registered
2018 F-150 XLT SCAB 4x4 3.55:1
Joined
·
189 Posts
An F150 diesel without the insane complexity of the current modern diesel, combined with the historical ~50% co$t of diesel VS gasoline, and the fuel efficiency and long engine life. They would sell like pancakes.

The deck (worldwide) is just so artificially Stacked against it.
Physics and chemistry is stacked against the diesel.

To the EPA's defense, European cities and Mexico City were diesel exhaust stink pits. Unburned carbon soot covered buildings and monuments. Rain turned the soot acidic. Diesel exhaust is one of the worst carcinogens we are exposed to.

DPF gets contaminated with high sulfur so ULSD was mandated for 2007. The required investment and added refining costs added 50% to the cost of diesel. Previously diesel and heating oil was practically a waste product produced when refining gasoline. But about the same time growth in gasoline sales was slowing, growth in diesel demand growing. There is a natural ratio of gasoline/diesel to be had from a barrel of crude oil. The ratio can be fudged a little but at great cost. Cheaper to buy more crude oil and dump the other product cheap. Diesel was that cheap byproduct, then it changed and gasoline was now the byproduct of producing diesel.

Diesel proponents conveniently forget one can not use crude oil to make only diesel.

I owned diesels for 8 years. It was interesting. My 2.7EB is a much better solution. My tractor is a different story.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,587 Posts
I owned diesels for 8 years. It was interesting. My 2.7EB is a much better solution. My tractor is a different story.
I do remember seeing you on the Powerstroke forum. Man has it been a long time since I’ve gone on there lol.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,414 Posts
Physics and chemistry is stacked against the diesel.

To the EPA's defense, European cities and Mexico City were diesel exhaust stink pits. Unburned carbon soot covered buildings and monuments. Rain turned the soot acidic. Diesel exhaust is one of the worst carcinogens we are exposed to.

DPF gets contaminated with high sulfur so ULSD was mandated for 2007. The required investment and added refining costs added 50% to the cost of diesel. Previously diesel and heating oil was practically a waste product produced when refining gasoline. But about the same time growth in gasoline sales was slowing, growth in diesel demand growing. There is a natural ratio of gasoline/diesel to be had from a barrel of crude oil. The ratio can be fudged a little but at great cost. Cheaper to buy more crude oil and dump the other product cheap. Diesel was that cheap byproduct, then it changed and gasoline was now the byproduct of producing diesel.

Diesel proponents conveniently forget one can not use crude oil to make only diesel.

I owned diesels for 8 years. It was interesting. My 2.7EB is a much better solution. My tractor is a different story.
Yes, all this became a serious issue when Covid hit and people stopped flying. Suddenly Jet fuel was at a standstill and the refineries had no where to put it all. They started to just shut units down.

I am actually impressed it took as long as it did for prices to rise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,274 Posts
The only way we're going to meet the electric demand on a worldwide scale for EVs is nuclear power. It's the most power with the least pollution but comes with a very high risk of long term environmental consequences. If we can learn to deal with the waste in better ways, it's the only future I see outside of fossil fuels. The whole point of EVs isn't to substitute the burning of petroleum products from gasoline to ethanol/coal/gas power plants to generate power. You'd still be polluting carbon into the air at a fairly high rate defeating the purpose of the EVs for transportation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grim Reaper

·
Registered
Joined
·
751 Posts
The only way we're going to meet the electric demand on a worldwide scale for EVs is nuclear power. It's the most power with the least pollution but comes with a very high risk of long term environmental consequences. If we can learn to deal with the waste in better ways, it's the only future I see outside of fossil fuels. The whole point of EVs isn't to substitute the burning of petroleum products from gasoline to ethanol/coal/gas power plants to generate power. You'd still be polluting carbon into the air at a fairly high rate defeating the purpose of the EVs for transportation.
Not to mention the environmental impact of mining lithium and disposal of batteries.

Something tells me it isn't the environment the gov't truly cares about...
 

·
Registered
2017 F150 XLT, 3.5 ecoBoost, 4 door, Super Crew, Stock
Joined
·
73 Posts
The only way we're going to meet the electric demand on a worldwide scale for EVs is nuclear power. It's the most power with the least pollution but comes with a very high risk of long term environmental consequences. If we can learn to deal with the waste in better ways, it's the only future I see outside of fossil fuels. The whole point of EVs isn't to substitute the burning of petroleum products from gasoline to ethanol/coal/gas power plants to generate power. You'd still be polluting carbon into the air at a fairly high rate defeating the purpose of the EVs for transportation.
I agree.
My thought is: If we get away from fossil fueled vehicles, yes you are stopping the pollution produced be them, but the power plant has to produce more electricity, which in turn has to use more fossil fuel to do so. All we are doing is shifting pollution output from one industry to another. Oh, and also. Killing the auto industry in some ways, but creating research and jobs in the auto industry in other ways.:unsure:
 

·
Registered
2017 F150 XLT, 3.5 ecoBoost, 4 door, Super Crew, Stock
Joined
·
73 Posts
Just a thought, the wrong forum, I know.
Could you imagine our military using all hybrid or electric vehicles!?!
🤬
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,121 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,414 Posts
The only way we're going to meet the electric demand on a worldwide scale for EVs is nuclear power. It's the most power with the least pollution but comes with a very high risk of long term environmental consequences. If we can learn to deal with the waste in better ways, it's the only future I see outside of fossil fuels. The whole point of EVs isn't to substitute the burning of petroleum products from gasoline to ethanol/coal/gas power plants to generate power. You'd still be polluting carbon into the air at a fairly high rate defeating the purpose of the EVs for transportation.
I just finished a book on Chernobyl(for some reason I started to read lately, I have no idea the last time I read a book). But yeah the author was basically like, we need to invest and start using Gen IV nuclear reactors since the are inherently safe. Not a stack of flammable graphite with massive safety flaws.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eeore39648
1 - 20 of 20 Posts
Top