2015 Ford F250 Xlt on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2018 Ford F-150 Powerstroke vs. 2018 Ram 1500 EcoDiesel: comparing the specs

Now that Ford has finally released specifications for its diesel Ford F-150, we can finally see how it stacks up against its sole competition, the Ram 1500 EcoDiesel. Naturally, since we haven't driven the new diesel F-150, we can't tell you which is better on the road, but there are interesting things we can glean from the numbers. Compare these and other potential new vehicle purchases using our tool. For one thing, the two trucks are extremely similar from a powertrain perspective. Both trucks use a turbocharged 3.0-liter V6 diesel, with the Ford using a 10-speed automatic, and the Ram using an 8-speed automatic. The Powerstroke engine is built in the U.K. but specifically tuned by Ford for American pickup truck duty. It is also is related to the diesel V6 used by Jaguar and Land Rover. The Ram 1500's engine is made by VM Motori. Only 10 horsepower and 20 pound-feet of torque separate the two, with the Ford getting the slight advantage. The Ford also produces its horsepower and torque slightly sooner than the Ram. Peak power in the Ford comes at 3,250 rpm compared to 3,600 rpm in the Ram, and peak torque arrives at 1,750 rpm in the Ford, and 2,000 rpm in the Ram. View 9 Photos More significant differences become apparent in the payload and towing area, both of which put the Ford at an advantage. The F-150 Powerstroke can carry 2,020 pounds of cargo, or tow 11,400 pounds. The Ram EcoDiesel, depending on configuration, can carry 1,100 to 1,600 pounds of cargo, and tow between 7,560 and 9,210 pounds. Fuel economy might go to the Ford if it hits the company's target of 30 mpg highway. That would beat the Ram's 27 mpg highway. We don't know what Ford's target city mpg is, but the Ram manages 20 in town with two-wheel drive. Four-wheel drive drops the city rating to 19 mpg. View 6 Photos The biggest decider between the trucks might be cost. Ford is only offering its diesel engine on higher end trims, which means that the cheapest diesel F-150 starts at $46,315. That's for a two-wheel drive Lariat extended cab with a 6.5-foot bed. Ram on the other hand, offers the diesel in everything from its ultra-bare-bones Tradesman pickup, allowing for a base price of just $28,585, up to the fancy Laramie Longhorn and Limited trims. Ram's diesel is also available with all cab variants, while Ford's is only offered in extended- and double-cab body styles.

Volkswagen Golf, Ford F-150 named 2015 North American Car and Truck/Utility of the Year

Congratulations, Volkswagen Golf/GTI and Ford F-150. You've just been named the 2015 North American Car and Truck/Utility of the Year, kicking off the first press day of the Detroit Auto Show. The Golf faced some seriously stiff competition from its runners-up, the Ford Mustang and Hyundai Genesis. But the Golf has been a highly awarded vehicle since its launch, including recently being named Motor Trend's Car of the Year. As for the Truck/Utility award, it wasn't immediately clear that the aluminum-bodied Ford F-150 would win the North American honor, topping the Chevrolet Colorado and Lincoln MKC. The Chevy, after all, has been widely praised since arriving this fall, including taking home MT's Truck of the Year award. In 2014, Chevrolet had a sweep of the NACTOY awards, with the Corvette Stingray and Silverado taking top honors. Here's a look at the 2015 North American Car and Truck/Utility of the Year voting breakdown. As you can see, it wasn't exactly neck and neck. Car of the Year Volkswagen Golf/GTI – 256 points Ford Mustang – 204 points Hyundai Genesis – 110 points Truck/Utility of the Year Ford F-150 – 297 points Chevrolet Colorado – 205 points Lincoln MKC – 68 points The winners were determined by the votes of 57 North American jurors who work in all forms of media – magazine, newspaper, television, online and radio, and their ballots were tabulated in secret by accounting firm Deloitte & Touche. Autoblog editors Sharon Carty and Chris Paukert are members of the North American Car and Truck/Utility of the Year jury. Featured Gallery 2015 Volkswagen Golf TSI View 16 Photos Related Gallery 2015 Ford F-150 View 36 Photos Detroit Auto Show Ford Volkswagen Truck Hatchback 2015 Detroit Auto Show NACTOY

Ford finds flex-fuel engine design plays big role in emissions output

How bad is ethanol for your engine? There's been a lot of debate on this issue as the US considers upping the biofuel content in the national gasoline supply from 10 percent (E10) to 15 percent (E15). The ethanol industry and some scientists say higher ethanol blends show no "meaningful differences" in new engines while the oil industry says ethanol creates health risks. Researchers working at the Ford Research and Innovation Center decided to take a closer look at how a wide range of gas-ethanol blends - E0, E10, E20, E30, E40, E55 and E80 - affected the emissions coming out of a flex-fuel 2006 Mercury Grand Marquis. To see the full report, printed in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, requires payment, but there is an abstract and Green Car Congress has some more details. The gist is that, "with increasing ethanol content in the fuel, the tailpipe emissions of ethanol, acetaldehyde, formaldehyde, methane, and ammonia increased." At least NOx and NMHC emissions decreased. The researchers say that the effects are due to the fuel and "are expected for all FFVs," but that the way that a manufacturer calibrates the engine will affect NOx, THC, and NMOG emissions. It's this last bit that's important, since the researchers found, "Higher ethanol content in gasoline affects several fundamental fuel properties that can impact emissions. ... These changes can have positive or negative effects that can depend on engine design, hardware, and control strategy. In addition to direct emissions impacts, higher ethanol content fuel can also provide more efficient combustion and overall engine operation under part-load conditions and under knock-limited higher-load conditions." So, as we head towards more ethanol in our fuel supply (maybe), manufacturers are going to need to learn how to burn it most efficiently.