Diesel 1/2 ton announced

Page 1 of 3  
Ford has announced they will offer a diesel option in the F-150 for the 2008 or 2009 model year. All I can say is it's about time and what has taken so
long. And what are Dodge, GM, Toyota and Nissan doing about it? It seems like a diesel 1/2 ton is long overdue and is a no brainer. I personally want a diesel Dakota.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

According to the new issue of Diesel Power, there is a chance that Toyota will be releasing a 3/4 ton version of the Tundra, with a diesel in it. Though it is not in stone there is talk that they may use cat.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Electrician wrote:

What is the purpose of a diesel 1/2 ton? People have been buying the diesels because they want the power to tow or haul heavy loads. 1/2 ton trucks don't need more power for the load they're designed to handle.
Saving on fuel costs isn't an issue today since in most of the country diesel is priced close to what premium gas is.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You're making the assumption that the MPG is equal between a gas and diesel engine of comparable power. That's simply not the case. The diesel can easily outperform a comparable gas engine by 50% in fuel economy, sometimes upwards of 90% (as evidence, a 310hp/450lb.ft. gas V10 gets about 10MPG, whereas a 305hp/555lb.ft. diesel I6 gets about 18MPG in the same vehicle - those are both empty, daily-commuter numbers)
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom Lawrence wrote:

I realize that but the payback isn't there. Diesel here is $.20 higher than regular gas. The diesel engine costs $5000+ more than the gas. People buy it for the power it puts out. It hasn't been a cost saver for many years. I just do not see a use for a diesel in a 1/2 ton unless its cost over a comparable gasser is under $1000.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The Diesel costs more initially, but maintenance is less, it's going to last three or four times as many miles as the gas engine and of course there's the waaaaaaaaay better fuel economy. Plus you have to figure the diesel DC would put in a 1500 would probably be a four cylinder or a much smaller six with correspondingly better economy.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
miles wrote:

You're correct, IMO. Diesel fuel costs more, the engine requires more expensive maint, and it costs more to buy. In routine driving it would take over 100K miles to break even. The only advantage to the current diesel is their towing ability. If you tow a lot - and I do mean a lot - it just doesn't pay. My Dakota gets 14mpg on mid grade fuel, 10-11 when towing my cobra on a flatbed trailer. I can squeeze 17-18 if I can travel the two lane blacktops and keep the speed under 65'ish. It's a pig. It drinks fuel like there's no tomorrow. It's still cheaper to own and drive than a diesel. Easier to park, too. However, I'm waiting for that to change. What we need is a small 4cyl turbo diesel for a light duty truck; like about 2.8-3.0L. Variable vane turbo like a Ford. 300-350 ft/lbs stock. 30mpg highway, 20mpg towing. 6 speed manual trans. And no more than $3K over base cost. Given those general parameters, I would seriously consider a new Dakota. Until that comes along, I'll keep my 360 until it dies. Then I'll rebuild it.
--
.boB
2006 FXDI hot rod
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The numbers don't support those assumptions. When you compare your gas Dakota to the available diesel-powered trucks, then yes - your operating costs are less, but that's not an apples-to-apples comparison, because you can't compare a 3/4-ton full-size truck to a Dakota.

I've shown comparison between my two trucks many times... it certainly DOES pay, even though my gas V10 is lighter (2nd gen club cab vs 3rd gen quad cab) and better aerodynamically, my diesel is STILL cheaper to operate, whether hauling, towing, or shuttling me back and forth to work (which is by far it's primary duty).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom Lawrence wrote:

Well, we're comparing two different things, so I guess I should have qualified that statement a little. My fault. They're going to introduce a light duty truck with a light duty diesel - or so the rumor goes. So I was comparing my light duty truck to the current crop of available diesels - all heavy duty with large diesel engines. So, let me (maybe more clearly) state that a big diesel doesn't make economic sense compared to a light duty gas truck in light duty use. Compared to another heavy duty truck with a V10 gas engine, you're right; I agree with you. I only do a little bit of towing, probably less than 1,500 miles a year, and less than 5,000#. But I drive 15,000 miles a year. For me to step up to a diesel would cost me about $10K in initial purchase cost, based on KBB prices. I can buy a lot of gasoline for $10K. I'm afraid to even calculate the cost of a brand new truck. YEs, a well cared for diesel should easily last 200K miles. But what about the rest of the truck? I'm not that confident.
--
.boB
2006 FXDI hot rod
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom Lawrence wrote:

You are comparing a V10 3/4 ton to a Diesel 3/4 ton. The V10 guzzles gas. My 2004 Hemi Durango 4x4 averages 20mpg highway with the A/C on. Not bad for a vehicle with a base weight of 5200lbs.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
my 318 powered half ton wasn't any better than my v10 powered 3/4. the only 1/2 ton we ever owned that was close to fuel efficiency of what my diesel is unloaded was my old d100 with the 225. but were talking unloaded numbers here. put a trailer behind them just about any trailer and the diesel pulls away from the d100 easy.
--
----------------------------
-Chris
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Chris Thompson wrote:

I got better mpg with my 360 1/2 ton than my 318 1/2 ton. A few friends that have the V10 tell me they are lucky to get 10 or 11mpg city with it. I got better than that with both the 318 and 360.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

yea what 11 or 12? don't really count does it?
at least that's what I was getting. and yes 10 ~ 11 in the 488 v10 to and from work is about right.
--
----------------------------
-Chris
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I've been reading this newsgroup for a long while, and have got some really insightful help from a lot of people ... but I have been reading this thread, an here's the 85% solution to everyone's mileage woes, GET YOUR FOOT OUT OF IT. Driving 65+ MPH is nuts, pulling a trailer at those speeds is INSANE. I think we really all have to reconsider the saying "I can't drive 55", and actually start doing it, take an extra 15 minutes to get to work, or whatever. The savings are quite noticeable ... I routinely used to check my mileage routinely (haven't with my Dodge), but when I owned my GMC 8.1L 6-speed manual, I got between 17-18 MPG hwy, and on one trip, 21 MPG solo!
later,peace -Derek
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Okay.... let's say, $2.299 for gasoline, and $2.499 for diesel. In the 10MPG gas engine, we spend about $11,500 for fuel to go 50,000 miles. We spend $6,940 for diesel to go the same 50,000 miles. We saved the cost of the engine right there (or very close - $4,560). In the next 50,000 miles, you save another $4,500 - which stays in your pocket instead of going to the oil companies.

People are getting 15-16MPG with the Hemi in the 1500's... if a diesel option could get them 25MPG, that's $7,184 for gasoline, vs. $5,000 for diesel over 50,000 miles. So even if the engine's a $2,000 option, it easily pays for itself.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Your analysis would probably explain why light diesel vehicles are prevalent all over Europe and much of the rest of the world.
Bill

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
bill allemann wrote:

Diesels there are not a huge premium to buy as they are here. Also they don't have the EPA rules against them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom,
You're just confusing them with facts, ya know. ;)
--
Budd Cochran

John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tom Lawrence wrote:

Name a diesel engine that puts out the same or greater power than the Hemi that gets 25mpg in a Dodge 1/2 ton size and weight vehicle and costs less than $2000 more than the Hemi. I agree, if they could do that it would sell. Nobody has even come close so far.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I disagree both my diesels are paying for themselves in fuel savings the liberty especially. my wife's liberty is putting out 160 hp and 300 ft lbs of torque in a 4 cyl. and she's seeing 28 mpg with her driving style (lead foot) on the interstate to and from work everyday. driving the same commute she fills up once every week and a half when in the 360 powered Durango she was filling up every 3rd trip (not day trip to or from) basically she was filling the Durango every other day.
--
----------------------------
-Chris
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.