Sweet, take a look at the 2013 RAM truck..

[farmerbyron]

I'd say Ford's torture test is better than your wild speculation based on nothing.

Ha! My wild speculation is based on multiple ford vehicles I have owned. There is a reason ford didn't need to be bailed out. Their service and parts division keeps them afloat.

 

[Shadowrider]

I can't pull the video up on my phone but I imagine you are referring to the one where they simulated 150,000 mi then put in up against the competition. Simulations are great and all but there is no substitute for real world miles and a large number of trucks on the road. Keep in mind it is a marketing video after all. Just looks like a train wreck of an engine to me.

FWIW I own a 2004 f-150 and the reliability is not the best. Cam phaser/engine ticking, spark plugs breaking off in the heads, rear end going out at 70,000 mi. are all common issues with the 2004-2008 fords.

Deep freezing an engine and it's fluids and then firing it and immediately pulling a full throttle/full load long duration run on it repeatedly over and over and over is not a simulation. It's pure hell on an engine and a real good way to ruin one. I know it's a marketing video but time will tell if there is any truth to it.

1Shott, I have a friend that just bought a 2012 3/4 4X4 Dodge with the hemi. He says it pulls his 32ft gooseneck just as good as his Ford Powerstroke. But I refuse to believe that it will over 200 or 300K. It is a damn nice truck though.

 

[PUMPKIN]

Ha! My wild speculation is based on multiple ford vehicles I have owned. There is a reason ford didn't need to be bailed out. Their service and parts division keeps them afloat.

you are correct, every diesel ive sent in cost a minimum of 4 grand to fix. 6.4 Ford = very expensive pos.

 

[farmerbyron]

Deep freezing an engine and it's fluids and then firing it and immediately pulling a full throttle/full load long duration run on it repeatedly over and over and over is not a simulation. It's pure hell on an engine and a real good way to ruin one. I know it's a marketing video but time will tell if there is any truth to it.

1Shott, I have a friend that just bought a 2012 3/4 4X4 Dodge with the hemi. He says it pulls his 32ft gooseneck just as good as his Ford Powerstroke. But I refuse to believe that it will over 200 or 300K. It is a damn nice truck though.

^^ Very true.


IDK about the hemi and longevity but the cummins will keep on trucking well past 200-300k miles. Nothing but good experiences with that motor.

 

[NikatKimber]

At some point I think the law of diminishing returns is going to kick in. So you're going 75mph in 8th gear at 1500 rpm. The MDS kicks in and four of the 8 cylinders stop producing power and become parasitic drag on the engine. The .38 Drag Coefficient kicks in and with the reduced available torque, speed drops off and the engine starts to lug. The cruise control (or your foot) compensates by pushing more fuel to the engine. This reduces fuel efficiency and at some point, either the transmission hunts a lower gear or the MDS shuts off to get more torque, possibly both.

My GS 460 in contrast has an ultra low .27 drag coefficient. All 8 cylinders produce power full time and it has 339 lb ft of torque at a relatively low 3600 RPM. The transmission never hunts and will hold 8th gear with gentle acceleration and all but the steepest inclines, even in a headwind. The result is actual real world MPG figures that exceed the EPA highway rating on a routine basis.

I had an 86' F-150 with a 302 and the AOD 4 speed auto trans. With the anemic torque produced by that engine, the transmission was constantly hunting and shifting. That led to terrible fuel economy and early transmission failure. I would've gotten better fuel economy and longer transmission life out of a C-6 three speed auto in that case. I think Ford tried to overdo it with a 0.67:1 overdrive ratio. They would've made a far better trans if they'd have been more conservative on the ratio, say 0.87:1 instead. The Dodge ZF unit will have a 0.667:1 ratio in 8th gear and a final drive ratio of 2.81. Coupled with a .38 drag coefficient and MDS, the 2013 Ram 1500 may wind up having great EPA numbers but poor real world observed mileage. I'd hold off on purchasing one until some real world figures start showing up. This may wind up being a paper Ram, but real world lamb.

I have one of those! '90 F150 4x4 5.0L with the AOD 4spd. 12mpg.

Have you not seen this torture test?
The initial dyno regimen is very impressive. What they did to it is pure torture on an engine. I'd venture that few normally aspirated engines would live through thermal shock like that.

But I'd still like to see a 3.6 to 4.0L turbo diesel in a half ton truck.

A-friggin-men to that!

I'd love to see something the size of the the Y2k-era Tundras and Dakotas with a small turbo diesel in them.

 

[inactive]

There is a reason ford didn't need to be bailed out. Their service and parts division keeps them afloat.

That reason is because they borrowed a megaton of private debt before the liquidity crisis hit. Honestly had far less to do with comparative quality.

 

[AllOut]

The real answer is that most people can get by with a midsize truck (Tacoma, Frontier) or dare I say, compact (Colorado) but feel the need to get a big 1/2 ton or larger. People buy trucks on the whole for the occasional furniture haul, or bags of soil and mulch. I am speaking nationally here; Oklahomans use their trucks a good bit more.

Ya us okies use a truck like it's supposed to be used.
I would destroy a mid sized truck, hell the last 1/2 ton I had held up ok but didn't like what I put it through.