Ford to Introduce New 6.4-Liter Diesel for 2008 F-Series Super Duty Pickups
22 August 2006
 |
| The 2007 F-250 Super Duty pickup. |
Ford Motor will offer a new 6.4-liter Power Stroke diesel in its 2008 F-Series Super Duty pickup, to go on sale early in 2007.
The new engine —which will replace the current 6.0-liter V-8—and aftertreatment system is designed for Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD), will use piezo-electric injectors in its high-pressure, common-rail fuel injection system and feature a new diesel particulate filter system. The 6.4-liter diesel system will have PM emissions comparable to that of a gasoline engine, according to Ford.
More details will be available at the official announcement at the Texas State Fair in September.
Ford has sold 1.3 million diesel-powered F-Series pickups in the US since 2001. On an annual basis, Ford sells more diesel-powered pickup trucks than Chevrolet and Dodge combined. Nearly three-quarters of all Ford Super Duty trucks are sold with the Power Stroke diesel.
It should almost have enough power to go to the store for a carton of milk.
Posted by: Aussie | 22 August 2006 at 03:38 AM
great to see that ford america starts using new technology, only problem is that there will be no chance for b10 or b100 diesel fuels, but can´t get everything
Posted by: Sebastian | 22 August 2006 at 05:05 AM
Aussie:
Be reasonable. Some people need trucks like this. Other people buy them because the fuel mileage is comparable to a mid-size truck and one can fit the entire family in it and pull the house across the street. :)
Let's hope Ford improves their reliability with this engine. I've known several who have taken the truck back after it wouldn't idle or started smoking a couple hundred miles in to ownership. These guys all drive Chevy Duramaxes or Dodge Cummins now.
Posted by: John Ard | 22 August 2006 at 05:23 AM
Sebastian, what do you mean? This engine, just like any diesel engine, should run on any percentage biodiesel up to 100.
Posted by: ForrestGump | 22 August 2006 at 05:45 AM
Aussie wrote:
It should almost have enough power to go to the store for a carton of milk.
LOL!!!
We have nearly no trucks like this in Denmark, but one of the few we do have belongs to a guy in my appartment building. You can hear it coming several hundred meters away, even in dense city traffic. It even blocks out the noise from accelerating trains right next to it! I love it when he presses the accelerator - it doesn't go much faster, but it gets even louder...
Forgive me, I'm biased agains pick-up trucks in general. But especially this Ford F-2500 with the edge of the storage space above shoulder height. How can you ever use this space.
But most of all, I love that fact that if he rear-ends me, I will be crushed, just to please his male ego, or deficiency, or whatever...
Other than that, it's probably great that this vehicle now has an even bigger engine with piezo-electric fuel nozzles...
Posted by: Thomas Pedersen | 22 August 2006 at 06:06 AM
Yes, trucks like this are stupid to own in city/suburb areas. But those who live beyond Suburbia (like me) have need for such things. We use our Dodge 2500 Cummins to tow our tractor, boat, and the occasional 10,000lb. of concrete. A little truck just won't do the kind of things we need done. The Fords have always sufered from less torque than the competition and poor reliability, so this is good news for those who demand their truck be "Ford Tough". Also, these trucks get mileage in the low 20s which is better than anything but a midsize. My Dodge gets 15MPG when pulling a 16ft. trailer with 10,000lb of concrete through the hills of central Alabama. I know that sounds like crap, but the V8 Dodge we traded for the diesel got around 12MPG empty and struggled to pull a Volkswagen Jetta (returning about 6MPG in the process).
Posted by: John Ard | 22 August 2006 at 08:16 AM
All hail the diesel age! This is good news for those of us who'd like to see a transition away from gasoline usage and towards diesel and biodiesel.
Posted by: Sid Hoffman | 22 August 2006 at 08:21 AM
here in germany every newer diesel engine, and i think piezo technology is pretty new stuff, is not allowed anymore to use b100 diesel because the new injection technology just doesn´t like it and especially for the emission reduction system like diesel particulate filter its not suitable
Posted by: Sebastian | 22 August 2006 at 08:56 AM
Thomas,
I'm glad you don't need to tow a 10,000 lb camper or horse trailer as I do, or have a large property to manage or haul dirt and brush, clear hurricane debris or do any number of heavy hauling jobs that tens of thousands of Americans have to deal with on a regular basis. The diesel powered F250 series type trucks serve a real need here and get 30-40% better fuel mileage than thier gasoline brethren.
I grew tired of repeatedly repairing transmissions in previous smaller trucks and SUVs while hauling the loads these larger trucks were designed for. When I towed with a big gasoline engine equipped SUV I would average 6 mpg, the F250 outweighs my former SUV by 1.5X yet it gets 13 mpg hauling the same load and doesn't overheat in the mountains. If I'm not towing it averages between 17-20 mpg which is pretty amazing for a 6000 lb vehicle. While my wife's diesel Jetta averages 38 mpg. We both run biodiesel that I have to haul back from the coop in the next county in 55gal drums that weigh 700 lbs each (couldn't do that with her Jetta).
In short I think few people buy these trucks to "be seen in them" although I'm sure there are a few. The F250 is expensive, loud, rides lousy and is difficult to park. If someone wants a big vehicle to be seen in they'll get a Hummer or an International CXT. I see a lot of F250 type trucks in the area where I live and they are usually hauling something or are loaded with cargo.
I'm glad to have my behemoth and sorry that you have to live in a world where everyone can't get along with an electric scooter
Posted by: Chris Carpenter | 22 August 2006 at 09:06 AM
I'm simply curious Thomas. How do farmers cope without trucks like this in Denmark?
Posted by: marcus | 22 August 2006 at 09:27 AM
They don't use trucks like this in Japan either. The only trucks I ever drove were 660cc engined vehicles and that was when I worked for a construction company. Now, for the true "heavy" jobs you would have a large truck with a specially licensed operator.
Quite frankly, I would regulate to death large trucks...you would have to fill out a stack of papers showing your need for the truck (commercial purposes) and then have to get extra licensing for the size & weight of the vehicle (especially since you can and most probably will be towing very heavy loads) and then I would allow all properly registered and licensed business owners requiring these trucks to claim a tax exemption up to the value of the truck. This keeps the casual user from buying the truck and gives a benefit for the small business owner/farmer who needs the trucks.
Ever notice how large SUV sales dip but large truck sales stay strong? Seems to me, that more often than not those who buy large trucks tend to use them for commercial use and not as a fashion statement (there are exceptions of course and I remember nearly everybody I knew in Texas drove a full size Dodge Ram, Ford F-150 or full size Chevy every day 2 miles from the barracks to the exercise area...)
Posted by: Patrick | 22 August 2006 at 09:39 AM
I guess a lot of the criticism for big vehicles like this really comes from the fact that in the US you see them all over the city. Everyone knows the average car size here is bigger than anywhere else and I'm not talking about farmers lugging concrete. I'm talking about millions of commuters, one to an SUV each sitting there almost stationary in the peak-hour traffic. For lowering GHGs I say thank you to high gas prices because not many of these people would ever change otherwise. Perhaps farmers with real needs could get special help or perhaps the current increases MPG will be enough. I have no complaints with those in real need.
Posted by: marcus | 22 August 2006 at 09:40 AM
Sebastian,
You are not right. You must know that EU regulations say all offered diesel fuel in EU must be B5 and soon will be B10 or B12. So my Mondeo TDCi runs on B5 mixture. I tested B30 diesel fuesl offered here in Czech Rep. and no problems. Consumption a little bit higher. All new technologies bring some particular problems, we are here to solve them. Peter, Czech Republic.
Posted by: Peter | 22 August 2006 at 09:41 AM
In short I think few people buy these trucks to "be seen in them" although I'm sure there are a few.
I think you have it completely backwards. Every time one of these vehicles gets mentioned, it's inevitable that someone will come on and start talking about how they "need" it and how people are being bigoted against large vehicles.
Of course some people need such vehicles. But "need" is a pretty subjective term. Do you "need" your trailer? It reminds me of the little circular tale: "Why'd ya buy the truck, Carl? - To tow ma trailer. - Why'd ya get the trailer, Carl? - So I'd have somethin' ta tow with my new truck."
I'd be very curious to see some actual demographic data on buyers of the bigger vehicles. I personally see quite a few in my urban neighborhood. I certainly hear them every time they drive by (they sound like a school bus). And my neighbors using them certainly don't need them by any stretch of the imagination.
Posted by: Joseph Willemssen | 22 August 2006 at 10:09 AM
Farmers in Denmark and Japan? Huh? The US does a thousand times as much farming as Denmark and Japan, why would you want to compare our farming to theirs in the first place?
Posted by: Sid Hoffman | 22 August 2006 at 10:38 AM
Joseph:
It's true that a nice truck is a status symbol and a source of pride. So is a Scion xB (which I drove until I broke it, my fault entirely). Folks that don't need trucks that buy them anyway are stupid. We all agree on that. But if they are going to be stupid, at least they could be driving a diesel and burning less fuel than if they bought a Ram SRT-10 or Silverado SS or F-150 Lightning.
Posted by: John Ard | 22 August 2006 at 10:47 AM
Farmers in Denmark and Japan? Huh? The US does a thousand times as much farming as Denmark and Japan, why would you want to compare our farming to theirs in the first place?
A thousand times? You sure about that?
Denmark has somewhat comparable amount of arable and permanent cropland per capita to the United States. Japan, simply because of its size, even though agriculture is more limited, has considerable agricultural output.
Not sure why you wouldn't compare them, especially at the vehicle size level being discussed. It's not a discussion about massive combines or anything like that.
Posted by: Joseph Willemssen | 22 August 2006 at 11:25 AM
I see a lot of lifted trucks where I am. Vehicles that look like they've gotten $10k worth of work to lift them two feet into near monster truck status and whose modifications probably knock off half their gas mileage. I inevitably think of Tonka trucks when I see one. They strike me as a huge "hey, look at me!" waste.
But I would never even think of telling people they can't buy what they want because I think they don't need it. It's not my decision.
Posted by: Cervus | 22 August 2006 at 11:30 AM
Yeah that's called exaggeration, but it's still a large gap. USA = 450 million arable acres, Japan = 14 million arable acres, Denmark = 6.8 million arable acres. All numbers from a few minutes of searching on the internet and trying to find a number the greatest number of sources agree upon.
If we break it down to acres per person, it appears to be 1.25 acres per person in Denmark, 0.11 acres per person in Japan, and about 1.5 acres per person in the USA. You are correct that on a per-person basis, USA and Denmark are quite comparable! I don't know anything about their farming industry; they could use UNIMOG's for all I know, which are even less efficient than diesel pickup trucks.
Posted by: Sid Hoffman | 22 August 2006 at 11:41 AM
People think they need trucks like this because Fords marketing department is doing a good job. I live in North Dakota there are farmers everywhere and I've never met anyone who NEEDED to have one of these. It is more want than need.
Posted by: Brian | 22 August 2006 at 11:45 AM
Want for better fuel economy, want for longer service life, want for more towing capacity, etc.
Posted by: John Ard | 22 August 2006 at 11:55 AM
Cervus, I have to disagree. While it is rare where I currently live I do remember many people in Texas with oversize off-road tires, body & suspension lift kits and the like and they definitely SHOULD be told what they can and cannot buy...in fact they are told that all of the equipment on their trucks are for OFF-ROAD use ONLY! Unfortuneately the police rarely ticket these offenders for "faulty equipment" until there is an accident that would have been a minor fender bender but ends up totally the other car due to the lifted truck riding right over the top of the bumpers and crash absorbing components. I believe California is one of the few states that will actively cite people (both for lowering their cars too much and raising them up too much) on public streets with illegally modified vehicles.
Someone just ran over a kid last night in my area with a lifted truck...apparently they did not see the child because their truck was lifted too high and then they ran because they were scared once they knew that bump they felt happened to be a child.
Posted by: Patrick | 22 August 2006 at 12:10 PM
I don't want to come off as though I am against diesels. I just don't think they need to be made bigger everytime there is a redesign. But I guess that is the American way. If you cannot innovate and make a better product just make it bigger and people will think it is better.
Posted by: Brian | 22 August 2006 at 12:17 PM
Not telling other people what to do only works if those other people are not ruining it all for the rest of us. Simple as that.
Posted by: marcus | 22 August 2006 at 12:20 PM
This truck will look great and sound awesome on my 130 mile commute into the city. My friends and I all commute in full size trucks, I don't see what the problem is if you have the money, power up!
Posted by: Joe | 22 August 2006 at 12:20 PM