2018 Diesel

Pretty sure I fall into that target market now.

Home owner that wants a do-it-all vehicle...that does light hauling.

Anything super heavy I just get it delivered...(think I am finally getting smarter as I age. )

 

Yeah, true. I'm going to have to PM you a pic next time I go out with my buddy with his Ecodiesel and two sleds on the back. The thing is squatting on the bump stops and drives like shit. He does like to brag about the 11.1 L/100 km he gets with that load... except that my coworker gets 11.9L/100km with his Ecoboost and the same load.

 

Don't think the beds are long enough even with the tailgate down. A bike is 7' long.

Ridgeline is looking good, has that trunk that I stow gear, and the flip up rear seat for even more gear...though, not sure if it will hold up running down washboard roads over time. That and, I occasionally need to get the truck into some gnarly areas fetching bikes...but that is very rare. A Tacoma wouldn't flinch, where-as a Ridgeline I might hurt it.

 

Not that I would buy a Ram...I would treat it like a Tacoma...just pack it light and you're good. 98% of the time it is just me, my bike and a gearbag. Not much for payload.

 

I'm divided about the Ridgeline. We have a friend with a 2015 Pilot and it's apparently been nothing but problems. They also came from a Ford Explorer that felt much larger inside. They are waiting to see the Ridgeline before deciding on what they'll get next, they own their own business and lease their vehicles over 24 months for the tax writeoff, but I have this feeling that people are going to be disappointed when it hits the road.

The Ridgeline is going to be one of those vehicles where you know it's practical and can do what you need a commuter truck to do... but it'll never be as fun or functional as the half ton you really want. It's kind of like comparing a minivan and a CUV.

 

I am not sold on it yet either. I am guessing the mpg is going to be the same as a Pilot which is similar to a Tacoma, yet not as nimble offroad as a Tacoma...which I am finding I drive off-road more than I thought I did. Some of the trail heads I go to, I can see just getting into them giving the Honda trouble.

That and I have been driving Toyota trucks for 25 years now, and have had great luck with them. Why change now? An ACLB fits my needs perfectly.

 

There are 41 people watching us shoot the shit again lol.

 

[

Oh I don't know about that, MPG on the Colorado/Canyon is flat out amazing.
My buddy here owns Canyon and takes it to NYC and back from time to time. 25-26 MPG average on going through couple bridges tunnels, than 8th Ave in Manhattan. I get 28-29 MPG with my Subaru Crosstrek and 2.0 L Engine on the same trip. We both tend to stay within 65 MPH limit but closer to NY it does not even matter as usually the problem is being below minimum speed limit.
So him getting 26 MPG is short of crazy miraculous number. No way anybody can pull this with Tacoma even if they pushed it half way.
If Chevy dealer weren't such an A-hole asking like million dollars and having more than one in stock... than maybe I would have gotten one.

 

Ha!

Well...speaking of being a home owner and light duty hauling...I need to go pickup a sod cutter...the wife wants to expand her garden, and part of the lawn has to go.

Catch ya on the flip side.

 

I dunno...only a couple mpg gains over a Taco...and $10K more...no thanks. Well off to cut sod... see ya!

 

Do the math on the fuel costs for an average driver over the average ownership of the vehicle. I won't do it here because it's been done a few hundred times now. For the average person, the savings do not pay back the driver given the averages listed on fuelly. For some it will and that's great, but that's not representative of the average.

 

This is why Ford sells all of their vehicles overseas with Diesel engines, but do not bring them to the states. It's too costly to develop and certify for the emissions requirements when the sales volume would be so low due to increased running costs (maintenance/repairs) and the higher cost of diesel in the States vs. overseas which makes those engines less enticing to buyers.

Look at the GM twins. Sure, there is a diesel, but it costs $3700 more. Factor in the higher cost of diesel fuel and even though the engine has better gas mileage you won't make up for those deficits until 150k+ miles into ownership, and who knows if those new engines will even last that long given the horrible reliability of other modern diesels. Given the Colorado's already sketchy reliability reports (2015 Most Unreliable Truck - Consumer Reports) I would put my $ on not.

People who clamor for diesel drivetrains have a serious lack of understanding about the drawbacks of modern diesels in the North American market.

 

Except:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Power_Stroke_engine#3.2_Powerstroke

This engine is being tested in the Ranger from what I've heard as well. Ford has brought their small truck Diesel over here already in their work van line. It's a well respected engine as well.

Everything else in your post is correct though. The odds that someone buying the Colorado will save money buying the Diesel over their ownership period is small once you look at the whole picture.

 

A nice little extended cab 4x4 Colorado diesel in almost base trim is an intriguing unit. Even though I don't really like the unknown 2.8L jeep liberty reject diesel it has.

MPGS for massive DCLBs are nearing 30 average. So what will a smaller and lighter one get? Probably 32+ hwy, that's amazing.

 

What a strange measurement of fuel efficiency.

 

You don't have to do any calculations, there is already a scientific study about it and it says diesel saves money...

http://www.umtri.umich.edu/total-cost-ownership-gas-versus-diesel-comparison



Well Average person around me has to commute to city. Thats where Diesel saves tons of money, thats were 19 MPG on gasoline truck is a pipe dream because heavy city traffic obliterates gasoline efficiency.

Now if we compare Diesel to Hybrid than maybe, but Diesel vs gasoline is no brainer if you have to use a car as intended.

 

I'll have to ask about the work van line, I did forget about that, it may be exempt from certain regulations. I'll admit that it's not my area of engineering and I don't know all the ins and outs of the regs, but I do know that in general what I said about the certification/development costs vs. small market share is why Ford doesn't bring more diesels here for passenger vehicles.

AFAIK there are no plans to put a diesel in the North American Ranger, but they also are not planning to use the petrol engine that is used overseas. They're developing (adapting) a petrol engine specific to North America market for the Ranger. It's still a few years off though, so still plenty of time to change their mind.

 

Here's for hoping they but the 2.7 Ecoboost in the Ranger. That has the power most who complain about the new Atkinson cycle 3.5 would be looking for.

 

It's the standard everywhere but in the USA. I'm from Canada and our trucks report Fuel efficiency that way in the computer. You then convert it back to mpg.

 

yeah... thats what 11 people in Myanmar and Liberia say too.