2015 Ford F-150 2.7L EcoBoost vs Ram 1500 EcoDiesel

Eco vs Eco. Diesel vs Boost.


Strict fuel economy regulations are forcing automakers to make big changes, and some of the biggest have come to pickup trucks.

These typically thirsty workhorses are being taught to be more efficient and each automaker is taking a different approach at addressing the problem.

Ram went the diesel route, opting for a 3.0-liter unit, hooked up to an eight-speed transmission, the latter of which is available with all of this truck’s engines. With four-wheel drive, the 2015 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel is rated to return a combined average of 22 mpg while getting 19 mpg city and 27 on the highway.

Get the Flash Player to see this player.

Ford, on the other hand, answered the fuel economy question with EcoBoost, which has been Ford’s answer for just about every question in the past few years. The 2015 F-150 now sports a 2.7-liter turbocharged V6 to help it save gas. And as you’ve probably heard, it also has an all-aluminum body, helping it shed weight to cut down on fuel used.

That brings the official rating to 20 mpg combined for this rig, breaking down to 18 mpg city and 23 mpg highway.

The trucks take two very different approaches and drive very differently, but which one delivers the most savings while still being a hard worker?

2015 Ford F-150 2.7L EcoBoost vs Ram 1500 EcoDiesel

Heavy vs Light

The first and most staunch difference you’ll notice is that the Ram drives heavy and the F-150 drives light. The Ram is a whopping 750 lbs heavier than the F-150, with a curb weight of 5,611 lbs compared to the F-150’s 4,806 lbs. But I’m not just talking about the actual pounds here. The steering is heavy, the steering wheel is big and thick, and the hood bulges and makes the nose feel like it’s far away from the low driving position.

If the sensation of driving a big rig is what you’re looking for, then the Ram 1500 will deliver.

DodgeRamExterior6And that diesel power only adds to the feeling. As expected, you’ve got good torque down low, while the eight smooth-shifting forward speeds help keep you in the power band when the rpms climb.

Diesel rumble is definitely pronounced in this truck, but it sounds good and isn’t so loud as to be grating, at least to me, a guy who loves a good ol’ diesel rumble.

On the opposite end of the driving spectrum, we have the new F-150. Steering inputs take no effort at all, thanks to a light setup, complemented by suspension that makes this truck fairly nimble in the corners. Unlike the Ram that likes to push wide through every corner, the F-150 actually feels like it tucks in nicely and wants you to turn it further into the apex.

Ford’s new 2.7-liter EcoBoost is a great little motor for this truck, too. Off the line, the truck takes off and pulls right through to 6,000 rpm, feeling way more powerful than its numbers suggest.

FordF150Exterior6How Do They Tow?

I hitched just under 5,000 lbs worth of trailer to the back of each truck after cruising empty, just to make sure these machines knew what an honest day’s work was like.

While this didn’t have either truck flinching, some of the differences became a little more pronounced.

The heavy-set nature of the Ram keeps the truck rooted to the ground like an oak tree, while the F-150’s light nature makes it feel more like a sapling in the wind. The Ford’s steering is easy to use and isn’t so bad as to make the truck feel dangerous, but the Ram’s more direct, heavy setup feels better when hauling weight. It communicates more to the driver, while the F-150’s wheel keeps you fairly isolated.

Ride quality is also better in the Ram, most of which can probably be attributed to the four-corner air suspension that also acts as an equalizing hitch because it is self leveling. When the back end lifts up, it helps to spread the weight around all four wheels.


Let me reiterate that neither truck felt sketchy, as each was well below its posted towing limit. The F-150, however, was definitely more unsettled than the Ram and the Ram made me feel more confident.

Trucks Built to Work

While I am an unabashed fan of the Ram’s interior, and its overall look, I have to give credit to Ford for coming up with a very functional layout. While I still think the Ram has more style, the F-150 definitely packs in the features.

It’s these small features that make the F-150 such a great truck to work with, day in and day out, because each one saves you time and effort, important aspects of working with your truck every day. This is especially true if you’re in business for yourself, where time really is money.

DodgeRamInterior1 FordF150Interior2

The trailer light check system makes towing a breeze, the spotlights on the mirrors come in handy in the dark, and the bed step on the back is still the best in the business. It has been made even easier to use on the 2015 truck, too. Ram hasn’t caught on to this trend yet, offering no step whatsoever.

Out back, Ford’s new BoxLink system is a genius way to allow bed customization, offering a number of accessories that can be easily slotted into the open receptacles once the tie-down cleat is removed. In-bed LED lights are also available on the truck, controlled by a rubber button mounted in the box, another simple solution that makes this truck a working man’s best friend — you save time by not having to go back to the cabin to find the light switch.

A massive flat loading floor in the F-150 also makes things incredibly convenient. Ram came up with a solution to this problem by installing flat panels that fold out to create a flat floor, but they don’t feel very sturdy. It also adds an extra obstacle to deal with if you’re loading things into the back seat.

DodgeRamInterior10 FordF150Interior5

More than any other half-ton truck, this F-150 will save you time and hassle thanks to its very smart, work-oriented features.

Compare Specs

2015 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel
2015 Ford F-150 2.7L EcoBoost
Vehicle 2015 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel Advantage 2015 Ford F-150 2.7L EcoBoost
Engine 3.0-liter V6 Diesel - 2.7-liter Turbocharged V6
Horsepower 240 hp F-150 325 hp
Torque 420 lb-ft 1500 375 lb-ft
Weight 5611 lbs. F-150 4,860 lbs.
Max Towing Capacity (of engine tested)* 9,200 lbs. 1500 8,200
Max Payload (of engine tested)* 1,610 lbs. F-150 2,160 lbs.
Rear legroom 40.3 inches F-150 43.6 inches
Fuel Economy 19 mpg city, 27 mpg hwy Ram 18 mpg city, 23 mpg hwy
Starting Price (with engines tested) $32,935 F-150 $31,470
As Tested Price $55,000 F-150 $51,000
*when properly equipped

Eco vs Eco

Let’s get to the most important part of the story: fuel economy. I took both trucks on an identical drive loop, with and without the trailer to figure out their real-world fuel economy.

When running empty over a roughly 40-mile loop that consisted of country roads with plenty of stop signs, I managed an 18 mpg average in the F-150, while getting a pretty impressive 26 mpg in the EcoDiesel.


Those numbers by themselves tell you a big part of the story, but it’s also worth mentioning that the EcoDiesel returns stellar fuel numbers without even trying, while the F-150 needs some coaxing and babying to make sure it doesn’t consume too much gas.

Cruising on the highway, we saw the EcoBoost deliver up to 24 mpg, while the Ram would sit around 29 mpg.

The trailer loop was too short to get an accurate fuel economy representation (about 15 miles with a lot of stopping and starting), but it’s still interesting to note that the F-150 returned 8 mpg while the Ram managed 11 mpg.

Pricing and Value

Now we know that the Ram will save you more money at the pump, but is it worth it to buy?

As our F-150 sits, it costs just about $51,000. But the real story is that the 2.7L EcoBoost is only a $795 option.

On the other side, our Ram EcoDiesel is worth nearly $55,000. Keep in mind that the EcoDiesel is a $4,500 option, which means that without it, these trucks would be similarly priced.

Group4So, is paying the extra cash for the Ram really worth it?

The average price of gasoline and diesel is nearly equal right now in some parts of the United States. As of July 20, gasoline costs an average of $2.802 per gallon, while diesel costs $2.782.

Using my observed fuel economy of 26 mpg in the diesel and 18 mpg in the F-150, you’re looking at paying about $700 more every year to run the Ford.

The cost of DEF for the diesel should also be considered. If you’re buying DEF for about $3 a gallon, which is available at many truck stops, and you fill up every 10,000 miles, you’re only looking at about $36 every 15,000 miles. If you’re buying DEF in jugs or containers, you might be paying up to $6 a gallon, doubling that 15,000 mile number to $72. Still, not enough to break the bank.

SEE ALSO: Diesel Total Cost of Ownership Bests Gasoline Vehicles: Study

You can’t count on gas prices staying the same, but what you can count on is that this diesel engine will continue to offer fuel efficiency, mile after mile.


The Verdict: 2015 Ford F-150 2.7L EcoBoost vs Ram 1500 EcoDiesel

The new F-150 has many helpful, usable features that make it an ideal work partner. But when it comes to the big stuff, namely driving dynamics and fuel economy, it can’t match up to the 2015 Ram EcoDiesel.

  • Diesel Driver

    Simple enough, if you like fords buy the ford. If you like dodge buy the dodge. I have a ford ranger I use for running around town and I have a dodge 3500 to tow my trailers. I like them both. I can’t afford a new vehicle anyway so I can only dream.

  • thomas

    At least the guy admitted he was a Fiat man.

  • Isend2C

    I think my biggest problem with the Ram 1500 Diesel is that the 3.6 Pentastar is already a very good engine, and paying almost $5k over that good engine cannot be justified for me. But, I’m not likely going to buy a truck anyway so it’s whatever to me.
    Stephen- I can’t stand that you admitted to owning a Fit! I can’t get it out of my mind when reading these truck reviews!

  • laserwizard

    When the new 8 or 9 speed transmission is in the Ford, I’d like a re-test. The Ram is benefiting from that difference. And you cannot say that if you subtract the diesel, the two are similarly priced. The whole point of the test is that these were “eco”. Thus, Ford’s owner has $4,500 to spend on gasoline before the Ram driver can fill up the first time. That is quite a head start for the Ford owner. And at 18 mpgs in the city, that is a considerable savings right there over a fair comparison with gasoline engined trucks.

  • If it puts your mind at ease, I am also a professionally licensed truck driver. I’ve driven everything from garbage trucks, to dump trucks to full size car carriers. Before I got into this business, I was driving full time.
    My family has also ALWAYS had pickup trucks, so I have worked with and driven pickups my entire life.

  • chuck klim

    You guys must be towing with the 150 in first gear only to get only 8 mpg. Drive the ford as slow as the ram goes wide open which the ford would only need about 1/2 throttle to keep up and compare the mileage. My 3.5 eco. gets 14+ towing 10,000lbs. Enjoy driving your ram eco pig!!!!!!!!

  • Stephen Elmer

    LIke I mentioned, the towing portion was (regrettably) quite short, at only 15 miles. During that time, there was constant stopping and starting because we were filming.

    So my trailering MPGs are not representative of what the trucks would get in the real world. I only included them to show the MPG split between the two engines, put through the same set of circumstances.

  • Stephen Elmer

    If it puts your mind at ease, I am also a professionally licensed truck driver. I’ve driven everything from garbage trucks, to dump trucks to full size car carriers. Before I got into this business, I was driving full time.

    My family has also ALWAYS had pickup trucks, so I have worked with and driven pickups my entire life.

  • SSXT

    Please fix the typo on price per Liter>>>Gallon.
    Good story….still think all these 1/2 tons are over-priced.

  • Jim Farnsworth

    Stephen, maybe you could explain how the self leveling suspension feature on the Ram takes weight off of the hitch ball and transfers it to to front of the tow vehicle and to the axles of the towed vehicle like an equalizing hitch does.

    I’m certainly not anti diesel but there are more concerns about diesel ownership than the added cost of DEF. Common concerns for me are the cost of oil changes, the fact that I am not the sole driver of my PU and I’m sure my wife would not understand paying a premium for the inconvenience of starting in cold weather, visiting the always dirty/oily diesel island ( at least my local ones are), getting smelly diesel on her hands, clothes or shoes.

    Thanks RAM for providing an alternative in the “1/2 ton” pickup market place I’m sure there are some that have to have the diesel for what ever reason. I’ll stick to gasoline as my preferred fuel and the near diesel performance of Ford’s Ecoboost.

  • Jared

    I was curious about how the weight reduction would affect the newer f150 while towing and ya’ll showed me how I thought it would play out. I figured the lighter truck would get tossed around more. Both trucks are nice and at the end of the day I feel diesel is the way to go for gas mileage. Both trucks are capable of towing campers and heavy trailers but I would personally use a bigger truck for towing heavier trailers anyway. I currently drive a 2012 f150 and I like everything about it except for the gas mileage. My next truck will be a diesel no preference wether it’s a dodge or a ford both are good choices. This was a good unbiased review imo

  • And if you like the spyder, Buy the Can-Am Spyder.

  • Jonny_Vancouver

    I don’t have a need for a truck and will probably never buy one, but this was a cool comparison. Good article, thanks!

  • bcl187

    Yahhhh GO RAM!! Cant wait till they reengineer this car in 2 years and kick both their butts!Rams been on a roll lately! Ford and Gm try to hard…Ram listens to their fans and costumers!

  • SDWeltoro

    I have a ’13 F150; STX 4X4 short bed; 302 CI Coyote V8; 360HP; 380 ft. lbs. torque; 6-speed auto; it weighs right at 5,000 lbs; steel body. Mileage: mixed 18.8; highway 21MPG. I tow my boat & trailer which are a combined 4750Lbs; my mileage only drops 3 MPG while towing the boat. I am curious why the 2015 F150 with aluminum body and a V6 weighs within a couple hundred pounds of my truck with a steel body and V8.

  • Stephen Elmer

    Hey Jim,

    Sorry for the delay.

    While hauling a trailer, you will notice that the front end of a truck starts to lift as weight is added to the rear. That leads to light steering, lack of braking traction and poor driving dynamics in general, which can be dangerous.

    By lifting the rear end of the truck up and allowing it to sit flat, the lifting forces that would normally be exerted on the front suspension are lessened, allowing the front wheels to stay firmly planted.

  • Jim Farnsworth

    Hi Stephen,

    I’m looking at this from a physics standpoint and it doesn’t work for me. The rear axle is the fulcrum, it doesn’t make any difference how high you raise the fulcrum with the air suspension the weight on the hitch is still going to take a proportional amount of weight off the front axle. The only advantage I see is that the steering geometry might not be as affected because of the lessening of the rearward rake.

  • p { margin-bottom: 0.25cm; line-height: 120%; }

    Very well done article. I am in the market – I have a nice 2012 Pathfinder but do
    not like the way it tows so I am researching now for 2016 models. I
    love the F150 2.7 features but I like the Ram 3.0 mileage. I hate the
    smell of diesel but my pocket book is very important for me so I am
    hoping to see if Ford will bring out a better tranny – they would
    have knocked it out of the park had they done both body , 2.7 and 8
    or 10 speed tranny altogether!

    Your review of how the heavier Ram feels better with the trailer was very insightful. I
    to want to be able to tow and feel like I am controlling the trailer
    and not the other way around. Fully loaded with my camper I will only
    be doing aprx 5000lbs like in your test but it is very important that
    I feel in control of that 5000lbs. But I have talked to several
    F150 owners during my camping trips and with same or bigger
    trailers, and they are saying they like the feel of the towing with
    it, some say they don’t even know there is something back there with
    thier 4500lb loads. I also met one new Ram 3.0 owner my last trip
    out, now I can’t remember what he said he had before… and he loves
    the way the tow feels but not getting the mileage he hoped for – I
    think he said 15L/100km which works out to aprx 15.7mpg, better then
    your results which is good and I believe he was doing about a 250km
    trip to the park. I can remember very well the F150 numbers I heard
    but they seemed ok for towing – -on person with a 3.5EB said he was
    getting about 22mpg towing if my memory serves me and it probably
    doesn’t as that seems high.

    Ford will most likely not come out with a better tranny for 2016 based on my research
    I have done so far, accept on the Raptor. So I am probably edging
    out more on F150 features over the Ram fuel at this time as I am
    currently only at 20k km’s a year right now so not a bank account
    buster with my low km’s. Even if I decide to do some longer trips
    sown to some of the beautiful spots down in the US once every couple
    years that will not be a significant hit in the wallet.. actually
    with the way the Canadian dollar is currently, that may need to wait
    a few yrs until it comes up a bit.

    Again, thanks for you great review — hope you can do a longer towing review.

    Cheers, Patrick

  • WYOutlaw

    Very poorly done article. Pretty lame to compare Dodge’s “best” engine offering to Ford’s base engine. The 3.5l ecoboost is the premium offering in an F 150.

  • Matt Speirs

    unless they were comparing the most economical versions of each truck… OH WAIT… that’s exactly what they were doing

  • WYOutlaw

    Uh no. The most economical version of each depends on the use. 2.7 is most economical when NOT towing. 3.5 is most economical FOR towing.

  • Stygimoloch

    $50,000+ for a pickup? These prices and truck sizes are way out of hand. The F150 is as big as the 250/350 and it absolutely doesn’t need to be.
    Bring back the small pickups (Ranger, D21 hard body, Dakota, Faster, LUV, etc). Ford fit the 4.0L V6 in the Ranger and gave it a 5,580lb towing capacity in 1990, there is no reason they couldn’t fit the 2.7L EcoBoost in a ranger and make it safe to tow 8,000lbs while getting twice the economy of the F150.

    Hell, they already put the 3.2L Powerstroke in the Ranger for every country in the world EXCEPT the USA. It can tow 7,716lbs.

  • Matt Speirs

    2.7 is still probably most economical when towing very light loads, like a single stand up jet ski that doesn’t even affect the mileage of my accord much. I am completely guessing on this next number but I think I have to be fairly close, I bet at least 90% of people who buy half ton pickups drive them sans-trailer over 90% of the time so the 2.7 is still the most economical because better mileage 90% of the time more than makes up the few times you get a little worse towing a big trailer…

  • Isend2C

    diju see that the 2.7 turbo was an optional engine also? Ford only charges $795 for it versus $4,500, but it is still optional.

  • Isend2C

    Just think about when you see a truck (or it almost always seems to be an old Suburban to me) towing a probably overloaded trailer and the vehicle is at a 10% angle pointing upwards. The front tires are lifting up because the back is being dragged down. The less weight on the front gives a floaty sensation and the front tires won’t dig in and grip as well.

  • Jim Farnsworth

    Yup, understand that, sagging rear, light front, but adding lift capability to the rear? how does that transfer weight to the front? I had air bags on my Tacoma and still needed a WDH otherwise my rear was up and so was my front. Sure raising the rear via air bags is better than the sag but the original statement that: ” When the back end lifts up, it helps to spread the weight around all four wheels.” is still incorrect.

  • edr9x23super

    ARE YOU KIDDING ME ????? For roughly the same money one could have a 3/4 ton diesel in either flavor, Dodge or Ford that would blow the half ton towing specs out of the water……

    RIDICULOUS. Here’s hoping the next economic crash brings these insane prices (and the pretty boy trucks) to a more reasonable level.

  • Buffalo Diesel

    The best value trucks FORD sells are in its over seas market. Thanks to Democrats and Union workers who vote for Democrats.. EPA laws have eliminated the sale of superior vehicles that are available in foreign markets. Those who keep wishing for an economical diesel mini truck that will last forever can keep on dreaming. Elections have consequences. My 93 6.5L diesel actives 24 miles highway.. all day long. When it quits I will install a another 6.5L diesel and it will cost a lot less than 55,000 dollars. Nuts to FORD, who refuses to sell what the market needs and wants. The only cure will happen when die-hard FORD owners destroy FORD’s bottom line and re-build what they own and let FORD dealers twist in the wind.

  • Airstreamingypsy

    I drive a Ford F-350 crew cab 6.0 diesel….. after reading this article, if I had to choose I would go with the Dodge…….. I like the feeling of an oak tree vs a sapling, especially pulling my 6500# trailer…… besides Ford treated me like crap when the 6.0 went kablooie…. cost me $14,500 for a reman 6.0 and 18 days in Dalhart, Texas…. the truck was under the mileage warranty and 1 mo out of the time warranty and wouldn’t help me out at all….. again, I’d buy that Dodge.

  • Airstreamingypsy

    I agree… that oak vs sapling comparison got me….

  • Airstreamingypsy

    That oak vs sapling comparison got me too..I’d get the Dodge.

  • Diesel Driver

    I have a ford ranger, 98, 4.0 5 speed automatic, rated to tow 7,000 lbs. Empty and running 65 It only gets 22 mpg. I have a 01 Ram 3500 for my toyhauler and it gets 19.5 at 65 mph. I wish I could have the ranger with a 2.5 liter inline 4 turbodiesel. I’d put a 4BT cummins in it but then I’d need to rebuild the front end to handle the weight. Meanwhile, I look for a wrecked BMW or Mercedes, maybe a 3.0 6cyl BMW would be fun in my ranger.
    Oh and pertaining to the article, how is that ecoboost any better than my ranger? The ranger is a lot smaller and is far easier to maneuver in traffic and parking lots. Gets about the same mileage and I don’t have a $50,000 truck to pay for. If I was in the market I’d get the dodge and I’d be willing to bet I can top the mileage figures the drivers got. I don’t speed. I have to pay for my own fuel, and I’d rather pay up front and get something I know is going to be good for the rest of my life.

  • Diesel Driver

    Yeah, Ford really screwed up with the 6.0. Alienated a lot of their fans. If they wanted a new engine why not use the one they had and update just the heads to 4V and better combustion chamber shape. The 7.3 was a great engine, I had a 94 Ford Power Stroke. I loved it. But I like my 01 dodge better. Drove both on the same 4900 mile round the country trip towing my 30′ toyhauler and both got 12.5 mpg. The only difference is that grades that required 3rd gear at 35 mph in the Ford were 5th gear and 55 mph in the Dodge. Not really a fair comparison due to the difference in years. But then again, the Ford had 4.10 gears, the dodge has 3.73’s. If I could find a Ford F350 with no engine I’d be tempted to pull my cummins and put it in the Ford.

  • Airstreamingypsy

    The saddest part of my story was…… I found out later that I could have put a Cummins in the Ford. There’s a kit, but I found out too late. So $14,500.00 later I had another POS 6.0 in my truck and had to spend thousands more to bulletproof it……. Every time I tow with it I worry, but so far so good It only 42,000 miles on it.

  • hancock

    I use a 2002 7.3 350 diesel to pull my 7800lb 5th wheel. It has 65k on the clock and pulls the 5th wheel like a small wagon. However the tranny gets hot and slips. Ford checked it and replaced the fluid, charged me $400 and said its ok. So now I keep it out of OD and it seems to work ok. Plays heck with my mileage though. Strange that it doesn’t show overheating. Ideas?

  • D

    I noticed that your set was lacking. Trailer tongue was way to low on the ford as opposed to the ram. This will make the back of the truck wiggle going down the road. You need to set trailer ride height to level to get a good feel for these trucks.

  • D

    **setup **

  • Gary Johnston

    I have one of those 2015 F-150 2.7 EcoBoost crewcab Lariat vehicles. I’ve taken several trips of 500 miles or more and each time I have averaged a low of 25.5 to a high of 28.9 mpg. ( not towing ) The high end came from a trip from Kingston, Tn to the Norfolk naval base in NC. driving very carefully at 65 mph. The return trip averaged 27.9 mpg. driving 70 mph.
    I also tow a two horse trailer ( A sundowner #707 ) with two horses and a tack room full of saddles. The total weight of gear, horses and trailer is about 5500 lbs and my average trips are 100 miles each way between Kingston and Big South Fork near Jamestown , Tn. I average between 16 & 18 mpg ( and I can’t believe that this truck is getting this kind of mileage ) . I have made four of these trips and the mileage is always within that same range. When I purchased this truck I thought that I had made a mistake with the small, under powered engine that would not get out of it’s own way. Boy was I ever wrong. You have a “select ” button for normal, towing or sport mode and when it is in sport mode there is not much on the road that can keep up with it. I’ve owned about 15 new trucks over my 56 years of driving and have never had one this much fun to drive. I also own a 2013 F-150 4wd 3.5 EcoBoost crew cab that is not nearly as fast and only averages 17 mpg. Only recently has diesel fuel come down in price to compete with gas prices and who knows how long that will last. The bottom line is” Drive these two trucks”.

  • Todd

    I came down to deciding between these exact 2 in the last month. Laramie vs Lariat. I bought the Ford, even though I was intrigued by the diesel. 1st, the Ford cost $1000’s less, even though the Ram had more discounts/incentives. 2nd, the Ford just drives better, the only plus in the story for the Ram is the air suspension, which adds $1600 more and which I wasn’t factoring in (just another very expensive thing to break down the road). 3rd, the RAM is a slug vs the 2.7. 4 seconds slower 0-60, which is forever. 4th. the RAM was only available with chrome 20″ wheels, I much preferred the aluminum 18″ on the Ford. 5th, diesel is still 20c/gal more expensive than 87 around here and that’s the closest it’s been in years, so at 20 mpg for the Ford vs 26 for the RAM the payout is probably as long as I’ll own the truck. He says you have to baby the Ford to achieve the best MPG, which is true, but even babying, it’s as fast as the RAM is with the pedal floored. 6th, the tailgate step, if you’re in out of the bed a lot, and I am, this is a godsend. Last, and the THE most important reason, is the EGR/DPF/DEF, which to me is unknown reliability/durability time bomb. Blowing soot back through the turbos and then collecting the rest in a trap which has to be burned off just seems like a recipe for disaster.

    The one thing the RAM had was the $500 convenience package, I do miss the rain sensing wipers and the auto high beams.

  • KB3MMX

    Yes, time to rebuild the trans.

  • KB3MMX

    Agreed! $50K for a half ton toy of a pickup is completely insane. Gotta give it to the MFGs , they have 100% focused on the Yuppie market.

  • Kevin Kellerman

    Sadly I think your transmission is on it’s way out, specifically the clutches for OD. The slip there would/will heat your oil as a friction source, so that’s more than likely where your problem is.

  • Kevin Kellerman

    And this is different by the other manufactures how?

  • Kevin Kellerman

    I’m not sure how they missed this, but the operational costs on the diesel is higher than the gas engine. Oil change, oil filters, fuel filters, air cleaner… add that to the DEF costs and then see where you fall.

  • todd69

    I would pick the Ford on straight reliability. No way do I believe that a Dodge would handle better than a Ford. Dodge does lead the way in vehicle buy backs and a close second on recalls though.

  • caddydaddy

    There’s no way the maintenance cost for an Ecodiesel would get near the $700 per year they said the Ford would cost in extra fuel!

  • Mark Rodenberg

    *The problem with Dodge is fit and finish. EVERYTHING from doors to interior fall off a Dodge right AFTER the warranty is out!

  • Mark Rodenberg

    My first pickup was a 1977 Ford F150 with the XLT options without 4wd. It had a 460 in it and if you were on the highway watching speed it would average 17 mpg. Only cost me $5,777!

  • tech

    Dodge in the same situation would do the same thing to you…seen it happen hundreds of times

  • tech

    Remember the 350 Chevy engine it wasn’t worth a crap either from the factory but the public made it to have the reputation it has that still stands today. The 6.0 is when cared for properly as well upgraded properly is as good if not better than anything else on the market

  • tech

    Yup couldn’t agree more

  • tech

    In this country we will never get the vehicles like overseas simply do to the fact our elected officials are in bed and indebted to the good ole boys club and have to make sure all their industrial friends and workers and tree hugging environmentalists are all happy and taken care of

  • tech

    Fat fingered smart phone this was meant for the top 10 trucks not sold in us

  • 2MileHi

    My ’03 Powerstroke 4R100 overheated a couple of times on long 7% grades here in Colorado pulling about 11,000 pounds. I decided to do something about it. Added a Ford/Donaldson AIS first. But If you take a look at the stock cooler on that transmission it’s scary small. Put in a cooler from the 6.0 Powerstroke, add a real transmission temp gauge and, above all, keep your engine’s RPMs over 2000 and get out of OD. I’m often in 2nd running mid 2000s. No reason you should overheat pulling 8000 pounds if you drive right. It’s a workhorse, but don’t expect it to keep up with today’s diesel engines. The big rigs just put on their flashers and putt along, they aren’t zipping up hills at 65 mph, and you shouldn’t feel bad letting those $70k 6.7s zip around you.

  • 2MileHi

    But today you can pick up a 6.0 for a song, spend some hefty dough on a proper remake and you’ll have a nice truck for tens of thousands less than a 6.7.

  • Kevin Kellerman

    Have you owned a diesel? How many more quarts of oil does a diesel take vs a gas engine? How much does a gas oil filter cost by comparison to a diesel oil filter? How many fuel filters do you change per year on your gas engine? How much do they cost? How much does the diesel air filter cost by comparison to the gas model?

    Until you answer those questions, you have no idea what the operational costs of the two vehicles are.

    Hint: I have a diesel, I know what those costs are, and they are significantly more than the gasser cost.

  • S J

    Oil filter -same price.
    Fuel Filter – same or marginally more depending vehicle, if you are smart and run a CAT filter then its hard to beat $10 for a high quality filter. (usually change the fuel filter on a gas motor 24k-50k anyway so not much of a difference and all the gassers I have had the filters were more expensive than this truck)
    Air Filter – those can be a bit more than comparable gassers
    Oil capacity – about 2.5 gal I use rotella T and it cost about $30-$35 for the amount I need.
    these massive operational expenses you speak of, are no where near as drastic as you are trying to convey. I will take my better fuel economy better hauling capability any day over a comparable gasser.

  • Kevin Kellerman

    Did a little research. Dodge fuel filter is $20. Ford is lifetime sock in tank (not uncommon for gas) Oil filter Dodge, $32, Ford $6, oil, Dodge 10.5qt 15-40, Ford 5w30 6qt $4/qt push other than volume, so figure $20 per oil change more. Air cleaner I couldn’t find a Dodge one out there, I’m sure the parts places will catch up, but the Ford one is $15.

    Oil change interval is about the same depending on how you’re towing so figure 10k each, which seems long to me, but whatever.

    So, each oil change is $46 more expensive for the diesel. Yeah, it the diesel gets better mileage, but I’ve not seen diesel less than 30 cents a gallon more than regular unleaded. Add your DEF cost over whatever interval too.

    Say what you want, maintenance is more.

  • S J

    Diesel in my area is about equal to gas. Never stated it wasnt more, just not nearly as expensive as you tried to portray. Duramx oil filter can get em for $10. The key to is to shop around for the best prices, rotella t for about 12 to 13 a gal .

  • S J

    And to me in a truck, that little extra in maintenance is worth the capabilites and longer life of a diesel.

  • Brion

    You will be doing more oil changes in a gasser vs a diesel. Try about every 2-3K miles in a gasser and 3-5K miles in a diesel. The diesel will outlast the gasser. I drive a diesel (three of them- I have three powerstrokes).

  • Vigilante

    I dont’ know what country/trucks you are talking about, but the environmentals laws in Europe are a lot stringent than here, in Switzerland you can’t even modify your car (sedan), due to my job this year I went to France and I drove to Germany in a hybrid diesel, very efficient but don’t even dare to modify it or think about “rolling coal” on a truck – that car lterally turned off on every stop in order to save fuel (I am not kidding!), then restarted as soon as you push the pedal. Over there I can’t drive my Powerstroke, over here I was ablet o get rid of the cat, tune it, modify the engine, get rid of the EGR, etc. Over there don’t even dream of doing that. Using your own words: in foreign countries cars are superior in efficiency, but that comes with a cost (more regulation, filters, less power, etc.). Be careful on what you wish for…

  • gregsfc

    As a new owner of a 2015 F150, reg. cab, 2wd, 3.31 rear axle (not one configured for heavy towing) and a huge fan of diesel power trains–yes, I know, I’m a diesel proponent but chose a diesel wannabe engine-powered truck; there a couple of things to point out.

    If you want or need a runaround truck like I did w/o lots of features and w/o alot of initial investment and w/o the need to tow anywhere near capacity, then there are some things to point out that weren’t pointed out in the article: I chose the 2.7 Ecoboost F150 as an admitted diesel-power enthusiast, because I could choose the gasser in a regular cab, 2wd, short bed, and I got it for about $28K. If I had chosen the cheapest Ecodiesel available, then it would have been more like $38K, and it would have been more truck than I wanted. That’s a huge amount of money and a lot of extra cab space that I don’t need or have room for at my home just to own a spark plug-free truck. Likewise, if I opted for the smaller Colorado/Canyon little Duramax, I was going to be forced in to a crew cab with all kinds of towing and lane monitoring and other features that I don’t want or need, and that was going to cost me around $35K. And in this case, we’re talking about a mid-size truck; not a full size, which was okay by me, but I definitely didn’t need a crew cab, and I definitely don’t need all those extra features to do heavy-duty towing just for an efficient diesel.

    One other thing to note: I can’t remark on the Ram Ecodiesel, but with respect to the F150, a driver cannot rely on the trip meter for an accurate mpg record. After my first two tanks, the trip meter showed 16.4 and 17.8 gallons burned, but the actual amount of fuel added back to the tank to refill it were 17.8 and 19.3, respectfully. The error so far has been consistent and huge for the first two tanks. The actual mpg has so far been exactly 2 mpg less than what the computer showed: those results were: 25.5 (computer) versus 23.5 (reality), and 23.4 (computer) versus 21.4 (reality). This is very conservative driving in a 2wd, regular cab with high gears. I’ve also noticed that this truck with this engine is very sensitive to driving style, speed, highway versus city, loaded versus unloaded; not what I’m used to with my previous, diesel car that could get 40 giving it everything I could give it and get no better than 47 with everything just perfect. There is no telling how much fuel this truck with drink if I was really trying.

    I’ve done one GPS run testing the trip meter, and that error seems as though it will tend the other direction; though much more accurate than fuel consumed error. First test indicated that the trip computer lost 1 mile to the GPS after 27 miles or 3.7% more miles driven than what the trip computer shows. I didn’t reset the GPS until I had the truck ready to go forward, but this will take a few runs to see if this error is somewhat consistent.

  • bravozullu@juno.com

    Your comments are correct. However, golf cart technology is nothing new. BMW has imported some models into the U.S.A with that feature. I was not referring to Europe, but non European counties. Also, those rolling coal idiots are on borrowed time. It is a federal crime to make those modifications and if they pass through NYS for example they better
    pray a state trooper does not notice their vehicle. If they are lucky the
    trooper will not impound their vehicle, but knowing those guys, they probably will impound it and fine the driver. Now, if you removed or deleted any of your diesel pollution features… that is also a federal crime, regardless of your state inspection laws. In PA, NYS and
    others…. Those vehicles will flunk annual state inspection… and not pass until restored to Federal standards. Also,your registration will not be renewed. So fix it or park it. Still, I know most people get really angry when I say this… !!WAKE UP!! BUT ELECTIONS HAVE
    CONSEQUENCES. The UAW/AFL just loves Obama. Since I have friends who work at dealerships, I know that their repair facilities just love these new stricter EPA standards. To quote one manager “They are a money tree for our dealer repair shop.” Yes, Europe is one big NAZI state now. But third world counties may sign all those “global warm agreements” but they do not enforce them. When and if our diesel
    engines die… we plan to just rebuild the motors. Still cheaper than a new FORD by a factor of 1/5 th the cost. A buddy of mine just purchased a FORD diesel and paid over $60,000.00. If diesel returns to normal price, which is a guarantee, he will never recover the premium price he paid for a diesel. And also factor in the cost of new studs and other reliability enhancements and outrageous repair bills Ford dealers charge
    to repair their engines that are out of warranty. The diesel is on its way toward extinction, thanks to Democrats’ EPA.

  • bravozullu@juno.com

    . Also, those
    rolling coal idiots are on borrowed time. It is a federal crime to make
    those modifications and if they pass through NYS for example they
    pray a state trooper does not notice their vehicle. If they are lucky the
    will not impound their vehicle, but knowing those guys, they probably
    will impound it and fine the driver. Now, if you removed or deleted
    any of your diesel pollution features… that is also a federal crime,
    regardless of your state inspection laws. In PA, NYS and
    Those vehicles will flunk annual state inspection… and not pass until
    restored to Federal standards. Also,your registration will not be
    renewed. So fix it or park it. Still, I know most people get really
    angry when I say this… !!WAKE UP!! BUT ELECTIONS HAVE
    The UAW/AFL just loves Obama. Since I have friends who work at
    dealerships, I know that their repair facilities just love these new
    stricter EPA standards. To quote one manager “They are a money tree for
    our dealer repair shop.” Yes, Europe is one big NAZI state now. But
    third world counties may sign all those “global warm agreements” but
    they do not enforce them. When and if our diesel
    engines die… we
    plan to just rebuild the motors. Still cheaper than a new FORD by a
    factor of 1/5 th the cost. A buddy of mine just purchased a FORD diesel
    and paid over $60,000.00. If diesel returns to normal price, which is
    a guarantee, he will never recover the premium price he paid for a
    diesel. And also factor in the cost of new studs and other reliability
    enhancements and outrageous repair bills Ford dealers charge
    to repair their engines that are out of warranty. The diesel is on its way toward extinction, thanks to Democrats’ EPA.

  • Vigilante

    I understand what you are saying, but I sitll have one question: what Ford truck do we want to bring here from overseas that is a “best value truck”? like Buffalo Diesel said, please don’t think I am trying to argue with anyone I’m just curious of what truck and country is that? By the way, I totally agree with you about the price of Diesel truck right now, it is outrageous there is no way to recover the investment in fuel savings. I will stick to my 07 Powerstroke for a long time, if some day the car inspection gets implemented in my state I just put the cat back again. The reason I took it off was to reduce EGTs and back pressure to the turbo, that’s it.

  • Ian Anderson

    You folks are right
    Diesel is dearer. Advantage is low speed use ie across dirt roads or lots of city stop start. The low end torque efficiency of diesel holds it own. The longevity issue is silly in big or small pickup’s. Is Aussies call them utes by the way. The petrol engine lasts 100s of thousands of miles/ klms these days with minimal maintenance. Diesel is more expensive to maintain. Unless your useage as noted requires diesel, gas is pretty good.
    Australia has lots of diesel vehicles ad we either have city congestion or crap roads in rural areas that require pickups ergo diesels.
    Ian Qld

  • cardboardharley

    My question is WHY does anybody try to compare a diesel to a gas motor ?
    A diesel will tow more & get better fuel milage.
    But it cost more to buy & maintaine a diesel.
    And a diesel is slower than a gas motor off the line.
    Do you like the smell of diesel on your hands when you pump fuel. Ever smelled diesel fumes in a vehicle.
    The new diesels require def. Fluid thanks to epa.
    Oh you forgot about that.
    A diesel without a turbo charger is no good either.
    Ever seen a diesel fuel filter leak?
    You need to add a fuel treatment to the diesel fuel periodically too.

  • Marty Wilson

    Dud, drive one before you judge, you don’t have a clue!

  • Jeff

    B.S. My 3.5 gets 14 MPG empty…we have 8 more at work and none average over 16 empty. You could only hope for 8 MPG towing 10k…ecoboost is smoke and mirrors, nothing more. Wish I had my 5.0 back, it was good for 16MPG empty.

    As for the “sapling vs oak tree” reference, I totally agree. Put 500 pounds in the bed of the F-150 and it starts to dance over bumps at highway speeds…

  • MasterBlaster

    I know the article is a little old now but, I can’t get over some gleaming errors or omissions. Regarding price if you go to both manufacturers websites the cheapest (currently that I could find) truck you can get these engines in are as follows:
    Ram Tradesman Reg Cab 4×2 Ecodiesel 3.92 Axle (this adds some $ but gives the towing as stated in the article) = $32,185 w/out incentives. Max Payload 1513 Lbs
    Ford F150 XL Reg Cab 4×2 2.7L EcoBoost 3.73 Axle (Same as Ram the axle ratio adds some $ but gives the 8500 Lb Tow Cap) = $28,193 w/out incentives. Max Payload 1920 Lbs.
    This is a $4k difference not the $1500 difference the article claims, also note that tow capacity for the F150 is 8500 not 8200 as stated in the article.
    Note: I could not find a configuration that allowed the Ram to have a 1610 lb payload. If you configure the two the two trucks as short bed crew cabs similar to those tested it shapes up like this. The cheapest these engines can be had for is:
    Ram Tradesman 1500 CrewCab 4×4 Ecodiesel 3.55 Axle = $42,505 w/out incentives and of which 4700 is the Ecodiesel and required transmission. Max Payload = 1194lbs, Max Tow 7750 lbs.
    Ford F150 XL Crewcab 4×4 EcoBoost 2.7L 3.55 Axle = $38,914, Max Payload is 1960 Lbs, Max Tow = 7600 Lbs.
    Note worthy is that the Ram Crew Cab has such a low payload it would barely handle a 15% tongue weight at max tow let alone a 300Lb driver, at 10% TW it only leaves 125lbs for gear after a 300lb driver.
    So really the only major differences (on paper) as tested is the Payload (Ford wins by a significant amount) MPGs (Ram wins by a significant amount) and upfront cost (Ford wins by a lot). The Fuel economy as it is right now here in the North East Diesel is 15% more expensive running about 1.75/Gal compared to about 1.5/Gal for gas. which at the observed MPGs makes it a wash for fuel economy in terms of $/mile.
    I think for my money though, I would just upgrade the engine in the F150 and get the 5.0L or the 3.5 EB and have much better performance than either for only a slight less in FE. If I really cared that much about FE I would probably just get the 3.5L NA V6. I had a rental F150 Crew Cab N/A 3.5L V6 on a buisness trip down in the NM area a few months back. That truck handled great and it easily got 24-25 on the HWy and average about 19 with the mixed City driving. Yeah it was a little sluggish when pushed but, was certainly adequate and didn’t need any caressing of the pedal to get the FE.

  • MasterBlaster

    Do you use your remote start consistently because the fuel burned during the remote start is not counted within the trip meter. In mild weather mine is consistently 1 gal/week off because of the time I have the truck set to run on remote start, when it gets really cold and snowy, as it has been as of late, it is a little more, around 1.5 gal/wk do to restarting it remotely again on the occasion when everything is frozen and under 6″ of snow.

  • MasterBlaster

    Also for what it is worth, the new computers are generally extremely accurate, whether it is fuel consumed or miles driven. I think the largest variable in in your trip odometer would be tire inflation. The stock 32″ tire should have approx. 100″ of circumference. in order to be off by 3% the circumference would have to compress or stretch by 3″ which would be extremely unlikely. GPS on the other hand has a margin of error that is usually measured in meters which with many winds and turns of the road can add up quickly. I would bet your truck is more accurate than the GPS. Unless of course there is a programming issue with your computer. You could always take the truck to the dealer and have them check it, if the problem persists.
    A few years ago I checked my MPG gauge during consecutive long day trips, filled at the same station and pump in the morning and then again in the evening after several hundred miles. Each and every time the difference was less than a tenth of a gallon and beyond the displayed accuracy of the truck readout. I.e. the pump read 12.45 gallons and the truck displayed 12.5.

  • MasterBlaster

    Your old Powerstrokes will out last the gasser, this diesel, I highly doubt it. It isn’t a HD engine and it was never even built for a truck. Most importantly it will likely be the ultra expensive emissions equipment on it that begins failing or causing the engine to fail that will nickle and dime their owners to death. Diesels have traditionally lasted longer because of their simplicity, HD design, and low speed operation (compared to a gasser). This engine lacks the first two and the engine this article compares it to is designed to have the low speed torque of a diesel allowing to run at low speeds reducing wear.

  • MasterBlaster

    Unfortunately this engine doesn’t give you either longer life or more capability.

  • MasterBlaster

    Styg I hate to break it to you but, the new ranger with the 5cyl TD is over $50,000 as well. 🙁

  • MasterBlaster

    I don’t know if this author had the tires underinflated or something but, the new F150’s handle extremely well. Very controlled and nimble even. I haven’t towed with one yet but, I have towed with the last generation (pre-2015) with the 3.5 Eb and they pull like a dream. Hauled over 9k Lbs and you barely know it is there, had a 3500lb double axle trailer that it would pull with no change in driving dynamic at all. I could cruise at 70 MPH with same amount throttle as driving it unloaded.

  • MasterBlaster

    B.S. Mine gets 19 to 20 all the time. I did a 200 mile drive at over 80 and still average 16.9. How are you getting 14, pulling a 5k lb trailer through NYC? I completely disagree, you put 500lbs in the bed and it handles better than empty. I used to load about 440lb in the bed of my old (2012) supercab in the winter and it was nothing but smooth, it really settled the truck down, empty it was far more inclined to hop over bumps.
    I do agree with the 8 towing 10K lbs though, at least in the winter through the mountains. Flat terrain it is much better but you aren’t going to get 16 that’s for sure.

  • MasterBlaster

    I would guess options, I have a 13′ FX4 3.5EB CrewCab well equipped with the 6.5′ bed and it weighs about 6,000 lbs.

  • MasterBlaster

    Agreed, lifting the rear only helps correct the rearward shift of the vehicles own center of gravity due to the sagging rear end, it does nothing to distribute the tongue weight. The fulcrum (the rear axle) that the trailer is trying to pivot the vehicle over is not moved. It can however help shift the trailers center of gravity rearward back to where it is supped to be which should lessen the tongue weight. Although, unless you lift the rear so high as to put the trailer in a rearward lean, shifting the center of gravity even farther backwards, which is just as dangerous, you have done little prevent the front from lifting.

  • Thomas

    Its good you added the def to the cost but the diesel I hear costs more to maintain. There is also a timing chain that needs to be changed on the GM diesel Colorado at 240k How much is that going to cost. Also the filters are very specific tampering with them means more hp and better fuel mileage so it is done often as garages inform the customer and make a sale. However, the rest of us end up breathing in even more chemicals and soot. Even with the proper filters diesel emissions are very dangerous. Big problem in the UK right now. The particles in the emissions are so small with diesel it penetrates your skin, heart, kidneys and brain and the soot attaches to the alveoli in your lungs. The soot goes in and never comes out

  • I don’t understand all the talk about how these two engines are on opposite ends of the spectrum. Other than the fuel and the fuel management, what these two engines demonstrate more than anything else is how much gas and diesels can be alike these days and much more alike than they could have been twenty years ago. It would have been unheard of many years ago for a gas engine to get nearly 95% of its available torque from 1900-5000 RPM. And it would have been impossible for a diesel to rev as quickly and create the horsepower per liter as they do today by virtue of lighter components, precise fuel management at extremely high pressures and advancements in turbo charging.
    There is a very well-written article somewhere else that describes more of what is really going on in the engine manufacturing industry for transportation and other uses, and that is that DIESELS are getting more like gas engines; and GAS engines are getting more like diesels with every new generation of engines. With respect to gas engines, nowadays, engineers have figured out how to make them combust using direct injection and at least partially using compression in the chamber for ignition. Moreover, they’re raising the compression and using near-same components, such as turbo chargers; and graphite composite iron as the material for at least part of the block. With respect to diesels, they now have far higher redline, lower compression, much smoother sound and operation, and have gas-like exhaust, which is basically nothing but water vapor and nitrogen and oxygen and carbon dioxide.
    There are some advantages of gas engines, and there are advantages of diesel engines. What we’re starting to see is those advantages being applied to each burner while minimizing the negatives. If engineers ever figure out homogenous-charged compression ignition, the engine we will get will not be technically a diesel or a gas engine as we call them, but a little bit of both no matter which fuel it burns, because a gas engine is really a spark-ignition engine that can currently burn propane, natural gas, ethanol or some other alcohol, or methane using a spark to ignite the fuel. A diesel engine is really a compression engine that can currently burn diesel, jet fuel, or biodiesel. So if we one day get HCCI engine technology, it’ll use a spark as well as compression to burn whatever fuel ends up being best. Ideally, it would be diesel, since it contains the most energy. However, it is also the most expensive to clean up the exhaust.

  • LarryNC

    I have a question for the commenters here. I live in North Carolina, and almost all gasoline sold in this State has a minimum of ten-percent methanol included. How will the 2.7 Liter engine handle that. It is not listed as a flex-fuel capable engine? Thank you all for any replies.

  • Gregory

    I’ve tried this on two or three occasions, have heard or read this claim before about EDs under around $38.5K, but have never found that a Ram ED can be had with a regular cab or in a regular Tradesman trim. Additionally, I’ve never seen one out on the road. If this were so, I’d be driving a diesel truck instead of an Ecoboost. The very lowest priced ED Ram is a quad-cab Tradesman, HFE 4×2 with an MSRP at or about $38,800 including destination and for me, this is where diesel fails, because I much prefer a diesel to spark ignition everything else being equal and would pay a few thousand extra for one. Also, if it were true that regular cab EDs were available, or any diesel 1/2-ton below $38K, we’d be seeing at least one or two now and then, and it’s the same for the little Duramax that can be had only in a crew cab and only in the highest trims, resulting in the cheapest diesel truck on the market being in the neighborhood of $35K versus the starting price of that same truck at or about $21K. And this is the problem with diesel choices in America. For many Americans buying a new truck, there is no diesel choice.

    On the other hand, I set out to build and price the cheapest F150 I could find with the 2.7 liter Ecoboost and found online that I could get it in any configuration and trim that I wanted for $800 extra dollars. Went down to the dealership. Added option package that brings power glass and cruise and a few other, not so important features, plus the chrome appearance package, appliedincentives; the dealer found the truck, and I came away with a 2.7 Liter EB under $28K after destination charges.

    Now just for arguments sake, lets say I could get roughly the same amount of incentives for a Ram Ecodiesel that I got for my F150 Ecoboost from Ford, and I was able to find a Tradesman Quad Cab HFE that now is standard with an Ecodiesel. That truck has an MSRP of around $39K and then hypothetically I was able to get around $3K off that price, then I’d have a truck configured bigger than I wanted for $8K more than the truck I got; the latter was exactly what I wanted minus a diesel engine. I’d have the diesel that I prefer, but everything else would be not what I wanted, plus the fact that I’d have to deal with DEF and worry about exhaust treatment systems going bad. I really, really love diesels, but in America they come with too much baggage and are way too pricey for those shopping in the low-to-medium price range in each segment in which they are available, and for me, they’re out of my budget anyway, so there is no sense worrying about it. I’m living fine with only 24 mpg in a full size truck with the small Ecoboost engine and a payment and terms that I can live with. But (yeah) if technology ever came around that made diesels price competitive, like they were pre-2007, I’d love to have a pickup with a frugal diesel engine. Or, if I were looking at fancier trucks north of $40K, then the diesel makes more sense.

  • gregsfc

    Four so-called negatives about diesels that are often brought up that have no validity or don’t tell the whole story. (1) Diesel fuel smells bad; well (yeah) it does, but so does gasoline. Just because people are more used to smelling nasty gas than they are nasty diesel does not mean diesel smells worse to someone who had never smelled either or are used to both. Admittedly, it does hang around longer, because it doesn’t evaporate but to claim diesel fuel smells bad leaves out the fact that gas is smelly as well; (2) Diesel fuel costs more. Diesel and gas are commodities. In what region of the country is this claim made and over how long a period of time. One year? ten years? one hundred years? Commodities vary in price wildly and the future can never be predicted based on past history. If someone decides against a diesel, because the last ten months diesel fuel has been 70 cents higher at one particular fuel station that he or she drives by, that means very little and it does not predict what will happen to both prices in the future. Diesel fuel is not nearly as price competitive as gasoline. In fact no product in North America is as competitive as gasoline on price. So the media publishes average gas prices and average diesel prices, but they don’t tell you that hardly anyone purchases either at the average price; not even for their area of the country, because much more volume is sold closer to the lowest prices for each region. Since diesel fuel is often sold at little convenience stores at much, much higher prices than the volume sellers, because it’s price is not as competitive as gasoline, this makes it always seem like the real purchase price of diesel fuel is higher than what people are really paying it for; (3) Diesel engines need fuel treatment. They don’t. I drove a VW TDI for eleven years and 160K and never put a drop of treatment in it. No engine manufacturer ever recommends it, and there is no proof that any of it does anything positive; sort of like gas treatment. (4) Diesels are more expensive to maintain. In most circumstances, it’s probably true, but someone would have to compare tens of vehicles with a gas and diesel engines, compile all those statistics, and then give us the results. As far as I know, no one has done that. People are just making claims. Sure you can compare an old truck you had in the 90s to a modern diesel and say that the diesel cost more to maintain, but if you compared two engine choices sold at the same time, there would likely be a different result as modern engines are costing more to maintain.

  • Bill

    When I was in the Marines I ran equipment with diesels and got use to them just like when you first start driving cars you have to get use the the gas fumes when changing fuel filters so what is the problem with diesel?