New F150

Coppertone · March 6, 2015

Ford made a rather bold move going from Steel to Aluminum Construction on their Number One Product, but there have been reports of Body Shops spending close to $70,000 on the specialized tools and Equipment to be able to effectively repair the 2015 F-150, and that spending is likely going to show up in both the Body Shop Prices, and the Insurance Premiums; because Aluminum is MUCH harder to work with than Mild Steel, and the added cost of the Labor to work with Aluminum is the main reason why Aluminum bodies have only been the domain of the High end Luxury European Manufacturers like Jaguar, Bentley, Audi, etc.

All 2014-2015 Sierra/Silverado hoods are aluminum. How would the bodyshops work on that before they bought $70,000 worth of equipment?

Coppertone · March 6, 2015

and on the Subject of Turbochargers, they are VERY Complex Machines that require a CONSTANT Supply of Pressure Fed Engine Oil, which feeds bearings that are supporting a shaft that turns TENS OF THOUSANDS of Revolutions a Minute; now Imagine what would happen if the Oil Supply on a Turbocharger was interrupted; or even worse, the oil seal on the Compressor side failed letting in Oil go into the intake stream: I bet the Duramax Owners here on this site know what happens when the latter happens.

"Turbochargers operate at high speed – up to 170,000 rpm – and under intense temperatures of up to 950 degrees Celsius (1,740 degrees Fahrenheit). Some previous-generation turbos were reputed to suffer from oil coking, in which they would bake their lubricating oil. Because oil coking can lead to premature turbocharger bearing failures, Ford’s advanced engine engineers specified the use of new, water-cooled turbochargers to combat this problem."

“During normal turbo operation, the turbo receives most of its bearing cooling through oil,” said Keith Plagens, turbo system engineer. “After shut down, the problems with turbos in the past were you would get coking in the center bearing. Oil would collect in the bearings, the heat soaks in and the oil would start to coke on the side and foul the bearing. Water cooling – used in the EcoBoost engine – eliminates that worry.”

The new EcoBoost V-6 uses two Honeywell GT15 water-cooled turbos.

“The EcoBoost engine uses passive thermal siphoning for water cooling,” Plagens explains. “During normal engine operation, the engine’s water pump cycles coolant through the center bearing. After engine shutdown renders the water pump inactive, the coolant flow reverses. Coolant heats up and flows away from the turbocharger water jacket, pulling fresh, cool coolant in behind. This highly effective coolant process is completely silent to the driver, continuing to protect the turbocharger.”

surebuttercringe · March 6, 2015

Man I can't wait until GM starts using aluminum body panels and turbos for gasoline engines in their full-size trucks. Going to be a lot of backtrackers and crawfishers in here and I fully expect to see the usual "Ford started it, but GM perfected it!" comments.I swear some of you actually think that turbos were invented 5 years ago and have never been used on a vehicle before.I totally agree with the poster who a few posts back said that some of you are such brand loyalists that you can't see the technology and reasoning that is coming our way in a few years.I especially get a kick out of the "I know a guy that had an EcoBoost and the engine blew up on him, so I'll never buy a Ford" comments. Never mind that that "guy" hadn't changed the oil in 40,000 miles and was driving down the highway at 98 mph in 100 degree heat towing a 12,000 lb. trailer. I know, I'm exagerrating but this is the kind of logic I've seen on this board. Like it or not, times are changing, CAFE restrictions are getting tighter and technology is advancing. You can either embrace it, support it and change with it, or you can become Blockbuster Video.

DanMan_S · March 6, 2015

Man I can't wait until GM starts using aluminum body panels and turbos for gasoline engines in their full-size trucks. Going to be a lot of backtrackers and crawfishers in here and I fully expect to see the usual "Ford started it, but GM perfected it!" comments.I swear some of you actually think that turbos were invented 5 years ago and have never been used on a vehicle before.I totally agree with the poster who a few posts back said that some of you are such brand loyalists that you can't see the technology and reasoning that is coming our way in a few years.I especially get a kick out of the "I know a guy that had an EcoBoost and the engine blew up on him, so I'll never buy a Ford" comments. Never mind that that "guy" hadn't changed the oil in 40,000 miles and was driving down the highway at 98 mph in 100 degree heat towing a 12,000 lb. trailer. I know, I'm exagerrating but this is the kind of logic I've seen on this board. Like it or not, times are changing, CAFE restrictions are getting tighter and technology is advancing. You can either embrace it, support it and change with it, or you can become Blockbuster Video.

Yeah, I get the impression that people treat turbos like they are some new fangled technology that just came out.

I've been around lots of turbo charged vehicles (Mustangs, Corvettes, Mercedes, Subarus, Duramaxes, etc) and they've run great! Heck, me and my brother in law bought a 2003 Subaru WRX with well over 200,000 km on it and the engine and turbo were still in great shape. And this was a car that DEFINITELY had not be babied. Yes, turbo's can fail, like ANY other engine component, but that's the risk of any piece of complex machinery.

Keep in mind that GM already has a fantastic twin turbo V6 in it's engine line up. I've driven a few CTS V-Sports and they were awesome. I definitely wouldn't be scared of having a vehicle like that in the garage.

newdude · March 6, 2015

Having sat in all three at the local auto show, GM and Ram tied for interior quality and the new F150 was not superior inside. Felt very hard and cheap.

MikeNH · March 6, 2015

Man I can't wait until GM starts using aluminum body panels and turbos for gasoline engines in their full-size trucks. Going to be a lot of backtrackers and crawfishers in here and I fully expect to see the usual "Ford started it, but GM perfected it!" comments.I swear some of you actually think that turbos were invented 5 years ago and have never been used on a vehicle before.I totally agree with the poster who a few posts back said that some of you are such brand loyalists that you can't see the technology and reasoning that is coming our way in a few years.I especially get a kick out of the "I know a guy that had an EcoBoost and the engine blew up on him, so I'll never buy a Ford" comments. Never mind that that "guy" hadn't changed the oil in 40,000 miles and was driving down the highway at 98 mph in 100 degree heat towing a 12,000 lb. trailer. I know, I'm exagerrating but this is the kind of logic I've seen on this board. Like it or not, times are changing, CAFE restrictions are getting tighter and technology is advancing. You can either embrace it, support it and change with it, or you can become Blockbuster Video.

I have very little issue with the use of aluminum itself, just the way Ford is spinning it. Their trucks have had a weight problem since 2004, they spent all this money and development on the aluminum body to come within 100 pounds of dumb old GM and their steel trucks.

As for the turbo engine, you're probably right that they'll be everywhere someday. But until then if I buy a pickup, it'll have a V8 if the option exists.

'01LS1 · March 7, 2015

All 2014-2015 Sierra/Silverado hoods are aluminum. How would the bodyshops work on that before they bought $70,000 worth of equipment?

Was thinking both Ford F150 & Ram has been using aluminum hoods since 2009. May be wrong, but thinking I remember reading about it on various forums.

j-ten-ner · March 7, 2015

Even I could take a damaged aluminum hood off and put a new one on...

so long

j-ten-ner

Edit: No matter how underdeveloped the car industry in East Germany was, they were a little ahead of the time...

"The Trabant was a steel monocoque design with the roof, trunk lid, hood, fenders, and doors made of Duroplast. Duroplast was a hard plastic (similar to Bakelite) made of recycled materials: cotton waste from the Soviet Union and phenol resins from the East German dye industry. This made the Trabant the first car with a body made of recycled material ^[5] and was partially responsible for the misconception that it was made of cardboard. The Trabant was the second car to use Duroplast, after the "pre-Trabant" P70 (Zwickau) model (1954–1959)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trabant

I bet that it'll come back. Different kind of plastic though.

Cowpie · April 16, 2015

Everything I drove, up till my recent 2015 2500HD 6.0L, was turbocharged. Heavy trucks, Jeeps, ag tractors, etc. Yes, I said jeeps. Like my 2006 Jeep Liberty with a 2.8L diesel in it. A Garrett variable geometry turbo force fed it air. I too am pretty amused at the turbo dissing crowd. Why they would think that a motor gasping for air like an asthmatic would be a good thing I find difficult to understand. The F-150 with the turbo 2.7 won the 2015 Golden Hitch Award from TFL Truck recently. You can see how it did on the Ike Gauntlet pull test yourself....

http://www.tfltruck.com/2015/02/2015-ford-f-150-2-7l-ecoboost-ike-gauntlet-extreme-towing-video/

As for whether the aluminum F150 will be ok, NHTSA just wrapped up it's safety testing of the aluminum F150. It got 5 stars for frontal and side crash tests and 4 stars for rollover. Not bad.

http://www.worktruckonline.com/news/story/2015/04/ford-f-150-supercrew-earns-top-safety-rating.aspx?utm_campaign=Weekly-&utm_source=Email&utm_medium=Enewsletter

truckofwinandawesome · April 17, 2015

Everything I drove, up till my recent 2015 2500HD 6.0L, was turbocharged. Heavy trucks, Jeeps, ag tractors, etc. Yes, I said jeeps. Like my 2006 Jeep Liberty with a 2.8L diesel in it. A Garrett variable geometry turbo force fed it air. I too am pretty amused at the turbo dissing crowd. Why they would think that a motor gasping for air like an asthmatic would be a good thing I find difficult to understand. The F-150 with the turbo 2.7 won the 2015 Golden Hitch Award from TFL Truck recently. You can see how it did on the Ike Gauntlet pull test yourself....

http://www.tfltruck.com/2015/02/2015-ford-f-150-2-7l-ecoboost-ike-gauntlet-extreme-towing-video/

As for whether the aluminum F150 will be ok, NHTSA just wrapped up it's safety testing of the aluminum F150. It got 5 stars for frontal and side crash tests and 4 stars for rollover. Not bad.

http://www.worktruckonline.com/news/story/2015/04/ford-f-150-supercrew-earns-top-safety-rating.aspx?utm_campaign=Weekly-&utm_source=Email&utm_medium=Enewsletter

its not that everyone is afraid to embrace forced induction; its that when something goes wrong with the turbocharger out of warranty; that facilitates Replacement of the Turbocharger, things get REALLY EXPENSIVE, REALLY QUICKLY. I randomly chose a '15 F-150 on my local Dealer's lot to see how much a Pair of Turbos for the current EgoBoast cost: they've come down in price at only $660 a piece, but that's just for the Turbos Themselves, and NOT counting the Labor and cost of gaskets that will need to be replaced along with the turbos. and if you need the WHOLE Kit and Kaboodle replaced under the hood, you're STILL looking down the barrel of SIX GRAND. and the numbers i'm pulling from Ford's OFFICIAL Parts Site are for this truck right here: http://www.beamanford.com/new/Ford/2015-Ford-F-150-2d6819850a0a00e027da46202b2ad4ec.htm

and as for the Crash testing, nobody really pays attention to the NHTSA tests anymore, its the IIHS tests that REALLY show how safe or unsafe the truck will be.

kstruckcountry · April 17, 2015

I don't think anyone is dissing a turbo, personally I've spent probably 10x the hours in something with a turbo vs without... What I don't like is a tiny motor with a turbo trying to make the power of a motor twice the size. Deere runs a 13.5 liter in a lot of their big stuff now... You don't see any heavy duty users begging for a smaller engine.

Chris · April 17, 2015

I don't think anyone is dissing a turbo, personally I've spent probably 10x the hours in something with a turbo vs without... What I don't like is a tiny motor with a turbo trying to make the power of a motor twice the size. Deere runs a 13.5 liter in a lot of their big stuff now... You don't see any heavy duty users begging for a smaller engine.

I hate the Deere 6135. It shattered my knuckle and tore my finger open to the bone my senior year. Now the DD15 is a good engine.

Cowpie · April 18, 2015

yeah, smaller motors with turbos are lame. Like my little 12.7L Detroit 60, under full load, walking past 15L Cummins ISX's and 15L Detroit DD15 equipped trucks a lot of the time. Did it today frequently on I-80 in Iowa with 23 tons of bee vomit (honey) in the box. And you don't see heavy duty users begging for a smaller engine? Might want to look at many of the heavy semi trucks waltzing down the road. Most of them any more are equipped with 13L Volvo's and Macks, and Maxxforce 13 motors. KW and Pete have the Paccar MX 13L offering. Many folks are declining bigger motors. Weight with a truck is everything, and these smaller motors deliver much of the HP and torque of the bigger motors and do it while weighing in 800-1000 lb less. 14, 15, and 16L motors are becoming more a minority every day.

And what is truly neat, is that the turbo for the 15L Cummins ISX is roughly $3500. The Borg Warner 171702 on my 500 HP 1750 torque 12.7L Detroit 60? Just looked at my supplier listing, and can have one delivered, total cost, for $670. New in the box with warranty and NO CORE CHARGE!

But I have never been fond of a V gas motor being turbocharged. Supercharging is a much better overall way to go in force feeding air to the V motor. A V virtually requires two turbos to balance things. Twice the risk of failures. Supercharger is a better, more reliable, more efficient way to go. With what the turbos are costing for these new gas setups, supercharger is pretty cost effective. Toyota has it figured out with their pickups.

truckofwinandawesome · April 18, 2015

yeah, smaller motors with turbos are lame. Like my little 12.7L Detroit 60, under full load, walking past 15L Cummins ISX's and 15L Detroit DD15 equipped trucks a lot of the time. Did it today frequently on I-80 in Iowa with 23 tons of bee vomit (honey) in the box. And you don't see heavy duty users begging for a smaller engine? Might want to look at many of the heavy semi trucks waltzing down the road. Most of them any more are equipped with 13L Volvo's and Macks, and Maxxforce 13 motors. KW and Pete have the Paccar MX 13L offering. Many folks are declining bigger motors. Weight with a truck is everything, and these smaller motors deliver much of the HP and torque of the bigger motors and do it while weighing in 800-1000 lb less. 14, 15, and 16L motors are becoming more a minority every day.

And what is truly neat, is that the turbo for the 15L Cummins ISX is roughly $3500. The Borg Warner 171702 on my 500 HP 1750 torque 12.7L Detroit 60? Just looked at my supplier listing, and can have one delivered, total cost, for $670. New in the box with warranty and NO CORE CHARGE!

But I have never been fond of a V gas motor being turbocharged. Supercharging is a much better overall way to go in force feeding air to the V motor. A V virtually requires two turbos to balance things. Twice the risk of failures. Supercharger is a better, more reliable, more efficient way to go. With what the turbos are costing for these new gas setups, supercharger is pretty cost effective. Toyota has it figured out with their pickups.

again, you are comparing Heavy Duty Turbodiesel Engines to Turbocharged Light Duty Gasoline Engines, which are on COMPLETELY Different planets in terms of power, RPM and Emissions.

Cowpie · April 18, 2015

Well, TFL truck wasn't when they put the 2.7 turbo Ford F-150 thru it's paces on the Ike Gauntlet pull test. It did pretty darn well. It won the Gold Hitch award and beat the Sierra with 6.2 and 8 spd on the run. In fact, it beat everything in a half ton including the ecodiesel in the half ton Ram up the hill. And while it blew everything else away on the test pull, only the ecodiesel beat it in fuel economy doing it. Anyone familiar with the Ike Gauntlet pull test knows it is about as real world as one can get for a pull test, and about as unbiased as one can hope for. No OEM fingers on the scale in these tests.