2011 Ford Super Duty

[4Mogger]

Anyone else anticipating this one?
A LOT of new features.

[zuking101]

Im going to be watching for a few years notice "few years" I dont keep up with Jones.

Dont think they can be no worse than the 6.0 line......

Time will tell. Being first year run bugs will have to worked out.
Not crazy at all about muffler fluid (The fix to regens i heard). Thats the bad thing about modern diesels is EPA ferking with us.

Hopefully these trucks wont have some locked ecm or deathflash bullshit in em.

[wagman]

Not really I'd be more jacked about a 2001 7.3 with less than 150K! Between the price, performance & dependability I'd rather have the the old stuff!

[KS Toy]

I am not in the market for a $60,000 pick up but it sure looks good. I like all of the locking storage compartments. Oh, and the 4" screen in the center of the steering wheel would be cool. Suppose to get 25 MPG. Guess we will see...

[montecarlo31]

Originally Posted by KS Toy

I am not in the market for a $60,000 pick up but it sure looks good. I like all of the locking storage compartments. Oh, and the 4" screen in the center of the steering wheel would be cool. Suppose to get 25 MPG. Guess we will see...

Not quite 25 MPG. They are saying the 6.2 will only get slightly better fuel economy then the current 5.4.

The 6.7 they are being tight lipped about but Progress Energy is testing a few of them and they are not seeing over the 20 mpg barrier on the highway at speed.

From what our fleet reps are saying 18 to 19 for a 250 4x4 CC SB. Not bad but not the mid 20's that GM is claiming with their new duramax. That is ashame because the superduty cab is so much nicer then the Chevy's and has more room but their poor fuel economy makes me wonder.

It's also interesting that GM and Ford are going with SCR and Dodge is going with out and using EGR and DPF still.

Time will tell how this works.

[ramv]

We have one at work too, I will ask to see how its working. F450, it doesn't leave the yard without a 20k trailer, and will spend a ton of time idling, so it won't be seeing any stellar mileage but at least we can see how it does compared to the 6.0/6.4s

Personally I never had any luck with the 7.3 either. But perhaps just bad luck.

[Paul Gagnon]

I was going to wait for the 2011 but I figured that there wouldn't be too many discounts and I stumbled across a 2010 optioned almost exactly as I would order so I bought it at the end of November instead of waiting.

[elongate]

Originally Posted by Paul Gagnon

I was going to wait for the 2011 but I figured that there wouldn't be too many discounts and I stumbled across a 2010 optioned almost exactly as I would order so I bought it at the end of November instead of waiting.

same here. love the Ford looks and chassis so i picked up a 2010, didn't want to be a guinea pig the first year around on the 6.7l.

[#rawkon]

Nope, With FORD diesel track record for the last 8 or so years, I am not interested in anything they make. Everything since the 7.3 has been complete junk.

[lost1]

Originally Posted by #rawkon

Nope, With FORD diesel track record for the last 8 or so years, I am not interested in anything they make. Everything since the 7.3 has been complete junk.

X2 Ford diesels have had too many serious problems for me to even consider one. I dont like all the emissions crap that comes on the new diesels but the clean diesel stuff on the 6.4 is a joke. Who the hell would want a diesel that gets 12 mpg unloaded? I dont know what they did to correct those problems on the new engines but I would not want to spend 60K and hope that Ford finally got it right this time.

[zuking101]

X2 on being a 7.3L fan.

It saddens me that there will be no more ford diesel vans in 2011 due to the engine size and compartment, Didnt like their trade off with 6.0L so I was hoping they would put the 6.7L in them got word they wouldnt.
Guess I will keep wrenching on my 7.3L E350s. And watching the new 6.7L roll down the road.

[bhaugen]

Originally Posted by montecarlo31

Not quite 25 MPG. They are saying the 6.2 will only get slightly better fuel economy then the current 5.4.

The 6.7 they are being tight lipped about but Progress Energy is testing a few of them and they are not seeing over the 20 mpg barrier on the highway at speed.

From what our fleet reps are saying 18 to 19 for a 250 4x4 CC SB. Not bad but not the mid 20's that GM is claiming with their new duramax. That is ashame because the superduty cab is so much nicer then the Chevy's and has more room but their poor fuel economy makes me wonder.

I will believe those Milage numbers when I see them. I can't remember specific Hp/Torque rating, but if I recall they haven't reduced them so I highly doubt mpg will be a huge increase.

[Hottrod81]

Originally Posted by montecarlo31

Not quite 25 MPG. They are saying the 6.2 will only get slightly better fuel economy then the current 5.4.

The 6.7 they are being tight lipped about but Progress Energy is testing a few of them and they are not seeing over the 20 mpg barrier on the highway at speed.

From what our fleet reps are saying 18 to 19 for a 250 4x4 CC SB. Not bad but not the mid 20's that GM is claiming with their new duramax. That is ashame because the superduty cab is so much nicer then the Chevy's and has more room but their poor fuel economy makes me wonder.

It's also interesting that GM and Ford are going with SCR and Dodge is going with out and using EGR and DPF still.

Time will tell how this works.

What do you expect out of the car companies. They are not only backed into a corner by the EPA but also by the consumer. The consumer wants 500 hp and 1000 lbs of torque and also 30 mpg. It's a no win situation

[87manche]

Originally Posted by Hottrod81

What do you expect out of the car companies. They are not only backed into a corner by the EPA but also by the consumer. The consumer wants 500 hp and 1000 lbs of torque and also 30 mpg. It's a no win situation

the sad thing is that if the EPA had left light duty diesels alone we might be seeing 25 MPG, if the evolution had been allowed to happen.
Now we're stuck with DPFs and urear injetion and all other manner of devices that hurt performance.
So now you're going a step back in fuel mileage, but it burns cleaner. How can something that uses more fuel be better for the enviroment? The EPA has some really fucked up logic.

[FordFascist]

Originally Posted by lost1

X2 Ford diesels have had too many serious problems for me to even consider one. I dont like all the emissions crap that comes on the new diesels but the clean diesel stuff on the 6.4 is a joke. Who the hell would want a diesel that gets 12 mpg unloaded? I dont know what they did to correct those problems on the new engines but I would not want to spend 60K and hope that Ford finally got it right this time.

Once again you are not following facts. The 6.0 has had some problems, but if you were to also compare Chrysler and GM products of those years, they too face serious drivetrain issues.

So far all of the Big 3 diesels are facing problems with the DPF passive / active regen regulations and are all getting atrocious fuel economy because of it.

Incidentally, a majority of the problems (faulty DPF, fire out the exhaust, shitty fuel economy) with the new trucks disappear when you do a DPF delete.

Now as far as the 6.7 and 6R140 transmission - I'm looking forward to see how much of an evolution this is over the 6.4 5R110 combination.

[72blazer]

IDK why anyone would pay what I think is going to be a huge price tag (what, something like 70K+ fully loaded?). I love my Duramax

[ramv]

Talked to our ops manager today. He said 2011 is the best truck in the fleet. The 6.7 is noticably better then the 6.0/6.4 and the new trans is an improvement. He has about 15 F450s and 10 F350s that report to him. They had looked at some MDTs (International) prior since the F450s were having so many problems, but crew cab 4x4 MDTs cost significantly more then an F450 new.

No idea on mileage since ours all get bad mileage. I am not sure what Ford is doing on maintenance on the 2011, but I assume they send a tech out to do it.

[southern k5]

Originally Posted by lost1

X2 Ford diesels have had too many serious problems for me to even consider one. I dont like all the emissions crap that comes on the new diesels but the clean diesel stuff on the 6.4 is a joke. Who the hell would want a diesel that gets 12 mpg unloaded? I dont know what they did to correct those problems on the new engines but I would not want to spend 60K and hope that Ford finally got it right this time.

Take the emission shit of the 6.4 and you'll get good MPG's and its actually a good engine, w/ a lot of power potenial.

[CJHeap]

Originally Posted by montecarlo31

Not quite 25 MPG. They are saying the 6.2 will only get slightly better fuel economy then the current 5.4.

The 6.7 they are being tight lipped about but Progress Energy is testing a few of them and they are not seeing over the 20 mpg barrier on the highway at speed.

From what our fleet reps are saying 18 to 19 for a 250 4x4 CC SB. Not bad but not the mid 20's that GM is claiming with their new duramax. That is ashame because the superduty cab is so much nicer then the Chevy's and has more room but their poor fuel economy makes me wonder.

It's also interesting that GM and Ford are going with SCR and Dodge is going with out and using EGR and DPF still.

Time will tell how this works.

I will believe that mileage when I hand calculate it.

The last diesel I had that would break the 20 mpg barrier consistantly was my 2 91 CTD 2wd single cabs. The one with the standard would get 24 hwy and the auto with lockup swutch would get 22 hwy. Both were late 91s with the intercooled engine. We also had a 85 ford diesel / standard / 2wd that would knock down high 20's on the hwy.

My current 08 CTD 6.7 with DPF delete and EGR unplugged will get 18 - 20 hwy @ 62 MPH . Houston city driving knocks it down to 15-16 . Pulling a loaded 16ft wells cargo from Houston to Eastport Maine averaged out to 14.6 . I have noticed the mileage slightly improving since it now has 33 k on the clock.

BTW, I looked at the new dodge 2500 and it is nice. Actually thought about trading mine since the new one has an actual crew cab. But the price is nutty. 60k+ for one rigged like my current truck then they insulted me with a 24k offer on my truck. I pointed out that the beat up 07 2500 with 120 k on it was priced at $34,000

[rockdog57]

Originally Posted by wagman

Not really I'd be more jacked about a 2001 7.3 with less than 150K! Between the price, performance & dependability I'd rather have the the old stuff!

I love my 01 7.3 F350 crew!! Has 102,000 on the clock. I wouldn't trade it for any of the new junk choked with all the epa garbage.

[#rawkon]

Originally Posted by FordFascist

Once again you are not following facts. The 6.0 has had some problems, but if you were to also compare Chrysler and GM products of those years, they too face serious drivetrain issues.

So far all of the Big 3 diesels are facing problems with the DPF passive / active regen regulations and are all getting atrocious fuel economy because of it.

Incidentally, a majority of the problems (faulty DPF, fire out the exhaust, shitty fuel economy) with the new trucks disappear when you do a DPF delete.

Now as far as the 6.7 and 6R140 transmission - I'm looking forward to see how much of an evolution this is over the 6.4 5R110 combination.

We have the facts. Teh fact is the 6.0 was a huge hunk of shit and the 6.4 isnt much better. the 7.3 was a far superior engine with no real problematic issues like the 6.0 and 6.4 boat anchors.And yes dodge and chevrolet have had a few problems, but nothing compared to the let down that is ford diesels since the 7.3

[RockcontrolXJ]

Originally Posted by FordFascist

So far all of the Big 3 diesels are facing problems with the DPF passive / active regen regulations and are all getting atrocious fuel economy because of it.

Incidentally, a majority of the problems (faulty DPF, fire out the exhaust, shitty fuel economy) with the new trucks disappear when you do a DPF delete.

I think a lot of folks are getting "atrocious" fuel economy with their DPF trucks due to the way they drive them. I've had my '08 Duramax for almost 6 months and have been very happy with it. Actual fuel mileage down to KOH and back, loaded down with a toyhauler was:

'08 Duramax
12.6 (60 to 65 mph)
11.7 (65 to 70 mph)
~16.3 Unloaded mixed highway and city driving, with a best to date of 17.1 (freeway only)

Compare those numbers to two other diesel trucks i've owned

'03 7.3 ford (six speed)
13 with the boat (65mph)
10 with the stock trailer (60 to 65mph)
16.5 to 17 Unloaded mixed highway and city driving, with a best of 19.4

'90 7.3 ford (five speed)
13 with the boat (60mph)
11 with the stock trailer (60mph)
16.5 to 17 Unloaded mixed highway and city driving, with a best of 17.6 (these figures are with reformulated low sulfur diesel fuel, in the 1990's i could get up to 21mpg with this truck with the old "dirty" diesel)

I'm sure the new ford's will get about 17 unloaded and 10-14 towing, just like every non-big block pickup made since 1987.

[FordFascist]

Originally Posted by #rawkon

We have the facts. Teh fact is the 6.0 was a huge hunk of shit and the 6.4 isnt much better. the 7.3 was a far superior engine with no real problematic issues like the 6.0 and 6.4 boat anchors.And yes dodge and chevrolet have had a few problems, but nothing compared to the let down that is ford diesels since the 7.3

You've got to be shitting me right? Remember the Duramax injector problems? Allison 1000 problems? How about the 47RH? Lift pump problems in the Cummins. CRD injectors in the 5.9? Or the 6.7 Cummins emission problems and random shutdowns. The 7.3 was a good engine, but it also had it's hiccup of leaving owners stranded on the side of the road because of a relatively simple sensor failure (CPS).

Yes, the 6.0 is a turd, early 6.4s had problems with emissions parts and injectors because they weren't running ULSD. That's where they were "making oil" because of injector leaks. Most of the small problems were fixed on the Job 2 and 3 trucks. For engine reliability the 6.4 is actually a pretty good engine provided you run the right fuel in it and turn off the regen cycle.

Let's try to be fair in our analysis of engine models. There's far too much "smoke" being blown by the 5.9 and 7.3 guys about newer trucks.

[Chillinthemost]

I'm one of those guys driving a 6.0 "turd". My 05 has 70k miles and its a great truck. It went in for headgaskets at 50k and I put ARP studs in at that time and this summer when the engine warrenty is up I will delete the egr system. I believe with the egr system gone and the studs I will have addressed the main weaknesses and will keep the truck another 5 years. I dont beat this truck, its is not chipped and I dont drag race or sled pull with it. I pull my trailers with it and it does everything a truck should do.

I think the biggest problems with the 6.0 is since the Super duty is by far the most desirable and best looking platform out there means there are a LOT of them on the road. A LOT of these trucks are driven by 1. soccer moms or city folk that dont need a truck and never "work them" which can cause issues with the EGR system and the VGT turbo. 2. "kids" that mod the hell out of them and beat them to death.

My last truck was a 99 Dodge and it spent more days in the shop for engine related issues than my Ford. That doesnt count the Dodge chassis issues.

I would love to have the new Ford but mines paid for and I dont have an extra 60k laying around. Also I only own manual tranny trucks and the 2011 will not be available with a manual.

[DT75FLH]

I have a job 1 6.4

its the first truck I don't feel the need to bomb like my 02 ford 7.3 or my 04 dodge 5.9. it tows GREAT and rides GREAT empty.

the truck went through 2 radiators and a new dpf. but it was a job 1 truck so you expect some issues.

I also spoke with a engineer briefly as they were testing a bunch of new fords up and down the hills from AZ to Laughlin. he said the truck gets significant better mileage? of course Ive had my fill any WON'T be a guinea pig again

I love the power and the cab in my 08...but the mileage BLOWS.. I get 11.

the tranny warranty is up at 60k miles. I think the DPF will fall off then.