Ford F-150 named 2012 Motor Trend Truck of the Year (Ecoboost the highlight)

[Falc'man]

http://www.autoblog.com/2011/12/12/f...k-of-the-year/
Video in link.

The next in the never-ending list of 'OTYs comes courtesy of Motor Trend and the buff book's crowning of the 2012 Ford F-150 as its Truck of the Year.

Aside from the expansive list of standard and optional features, the F-150's general fitment and polish, and Ford's claim that you can spec your workhorse in one of 650,000 different varieties, what seemed to win over the Motor Trend crew more than anything else was its drivetrain. And one engine in particular.

While the 5.0-liter V8 was a favorite, after all the judges sampled a Platinum EcoBoost SuperCrew variant fitted with the twin-turbocharged 3.5-liter V6, the vote was unanimous. The combination of 365 horsepower and 420 pound-feet of torque, along with commendable – if not world-beating – fuel economy and 11,300-pound towing capacity was enough to put the EcoBoost over the top. Read all about the magazine's testing and assessment in its official pronouncement and check out a related video after the jump.

[Falc'man]

More reading here.
http://www.motortrend.com/oftheyear/...0/viewall.html



You Know that feeling you get when you see a supercar sitting in the parking lot of the local six-buck-a-cup coffee shop? The ache in your stomach, knowing that toddling back and forth from the gated community to the strip mall is all the driving that poor car will ever do? We get that same feeling when we see an F-150 that doesn't have at least 1000 pounds in the bed or 5000 pounds hanging off the hitch. Just like that supercar, the F-150 is a tool built for a purpose. It has a goal in life, and the people who never use it as it was intended are squandering the truck's ability and a heritage that goes back to 1948.


We had a pair of Ford F-150s for our 2012 Truck of the Year testing that represent two of the more popular trim levels: a Platinum Edition EcoBoost and an XLT 5.0-liter V-8. New for this year, but not on hand, are Ford's entry-level 302-horsepower, 3.7-liter V-6 and the range-topping 411-horsepower, 6.2-liter V-8 from the Raptor now available in the Lariat, Platinum, and Harley Davidson Editions.

We extensively tested all four engine options early this year, including strapping each one down to a chassis dyno, so we're very familiar with power levels and delivery of the entire lineup.

"The testers who drove the 5.0-liter first were bigger fans, at least until they drove the ecoboost."

The EcoBoost is the obvious orange in the apple crate here. Ford's throwing a gasoline direct-injection, twin-turbo-fed V-6 under the hood of a full-size truck is almost enough to knock the earth off its axis. What's even more shocking is that an engine that looks like it would be at home mid-mounted in a sports car is actually better than any of the eight-piston offerings in maybe any company's lineup. It clearly checks the box for Engineering Excellence, one of the key criteria for any Of The Year competitor. Truck Trend editor Allyson Harwood noted, "On the road, the EcoBoost makes the 5.0-liter look like obsolete technology. The twin-turbo V-6 is incredibly quick and eager, power is abundant throughout the rpm range, and I didn't really notice any lag."


All our testers had similar remarks, and for good reason. The EcoBoost delivers more torque to the ground than the big 6.2-liter up to roughly 5000 rpm and more than the 5.0-liter all the way up to 6000. In loaded, towing, and uphill testing, several judges noted how hard the 5.0-liter was working. "Power seems opposite of where you want it in a truck" to "had to keep the throttle mashed while the transmission hunted" were typical comments.

To be fair, the testers who drove the 5.0-liter first were bigger fans, at least until they drove the EcoBoost. "Moved over a half-ton with ease at very impressive NVH levels," logged Lieberman, adding that the V-8 sounds "good and burbly." Kiino loved the "musclecar engine note" and wondered if this is the "boss of trucks." The V-8 is obviously still a good engine, but it's overshadowed by a great engine. This is often the problem with advancement: People don't know what they've always wanted until after they've experienced it.


It seems as though Ford's big marketing push with the EcoBoost is centered on fuel economy. During our testing, the EcoBoost turned in almost identical numbers to the 5.0-liter V-8. Most consumers will look at that and think there isn't really an advantage to buying the slightly more expensive twin-turbo V-6 if the efficiency benefits prove negligible. Were the performance between the two the same, we'd agree, but the smaller engine's performance is closer to the 6.2-liter V-8's. If they could just make it sound like a V-8, everyone would be happy.


Regardless of the drivetrain, the judges were unanimously impressed with the F-150's ability to earn its keep. In towing or hauling, the consensus was both trucks only got better the harder they were working. "It rides even better at 80 mph with a payload than without. It carries out its business like there's nothing there," wrote Jurnecka. "As nice as the ride was unloaded, it got even better loaded," agreed Harwood.

Even in handling tests, the F-150 feels more planted and better balanced with a payload in the bed. Some trucks feel as though the load is trying to peel the truck off the asphalt and roll it over, but in fast turns, the F-150 is still using both rear tires to put power down. We aren't delusional about how people will use these trucks; no one is buying one as a sports car. However, our performance driving translates directly to how an F-150 will handle in emergency situations. We'd be confident to throw one of these, even loaded, through an emergency lane change.

Ford tells us there are roughly 650,000 different ways to equip an F-150, including engines, cabs, beds, wheelbases, and assorted options, but not paint color. The moral of the story is, if you're seeking a truck and can't spec out an F-150 to suit your needs, you may want to look into buying your own personal freight train. Our judges found the XLT a more honest approach to trucks, with Kiino calling it "clean and functional." Jurnecka referred to it as "cheap, but palatable with the reduced MSRP." The V-8 XLT comes in at $38,745, which was considered about right for a work truck and seemed like a steal compared with the $50,115 Platinum Edition EcoBoost.

Ford insists it gets crossover customers from some of the luxury brands who tell them the interior is nicer in their F-150 than in the sport sedan they traded in. While that might be a stretch, we agree the Platinum is certainly nicer than the standard truck, although we'd still go for something more utilitarian.


Both the SuperCrew and SuperCab body styles offer plenty of room in front and back. The Platinum's front seats are bisected by a center console with enough storage for files, a large lunch, or even a medium-size pet. The shifter is console-mounted, which a few judges found un-truck-like. Others more accustomed to cars deemed it sporty and familiar. The XLT retains the traditional column shifter with a bench seat in front and a folding center backrest with cupholders. Clearly, Ford's marketing department has missed a golden opportunity for yet another acronym with this feature. We'd have called it the Storage On Demand Active Center Accessory and Nutrition Holder, or SODACAN Holder for short. Yeah, Ford, that one is free.


Storage cubbies abound throughout the interior, along with such other thoughtful design touches as extra power outlets and wide-opening doors. We still have mixed feelings about Ford's Sync system, but it seems to be evolving into something more useable than the first iteration. The new gauge cluster features a 4.2-inch driver productivity display for monitoring fuel economy, towing, and off-road driving data.


Platinum and XLT front-seat configura-tions offer plenty of space for two or three passengers, and all the judges, who range in height from under 5-to 6- feet, were able to find a comfortable seating position with good visibility. Both cabs offer three-across seating on the rear bench with fold-up seat bottoms for a huge amount of storage inside the SuperCrew.

Entry and exit are relatively easy, though still require a step on the runningboard or a good pull on the steering wheel or O.S. handle for passengers. Which brings us to one of the few ergonomic complaints with either truck. The Platinum edition includes power runningboards that swing out when the door is opened. Just about every judge complained of bruised shins, as the boards pop out during the roundhouse leg kick up and into the truck. Yes, the runningboards are electronically defeatable, but why have them if they just stay tucked up under the body?


It was hard finding fault with design elements or overall execution of any of the F-150s. Several judges remarked that, were they in the market, the EcoBoost F-150 SuperCrew would be their choice, hands-down. The more utilitarian XLT or even something like an FX2 or FX4 trim level would likely be chosen for value over something like the Platinum Edition. Besides the 10 trim levels, Ford offers four engine choices: three that represent solid traditional options, with the EcoBoost truly a step forward in performance. The two transmission choices are six-speed automatics with the higher-end option offering select-shift manual modes. We all agreed the F-150s are built to work and felt better the more they were challenged.


Ford offers an enormous variety of configurations and designs, making the truck tailorable to just about any need. It's the combination of advancement in design, engineering excellence, efficiency, safety, value, and the performance of intended function that has earned the Ford F-150 the title of Motor Trend's Truck of the Year.

Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/oftheyear/...#ixzz1gO8SvRaI

[csv8]

Is that the same V6 that could have been in the Falcon ??? if so, Its a Dunnydore killer...

[Falc'man]

Wasn't someone calling for an independent review of this Ecoboost? Well, there you have it.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Wasn't someone calling for an independent review of this Ecoboost? Well, there you have it.

That was me in the other thread, I meant the same type of torture tests Ford put their engine through.

Its a nice looking truck, I don't know why they bothered with the Ranger, when its 90% of the size of this thing, this would have been better I reckon.

[Falcon_Crazy]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

That was me in the other thread, I meant the same type of torture tests Ford put their engine through.

Its a nice looking truck, I don't know why they bothered with the Ranger, when its 90% of the size of this thing, this would have been better I reckon.

Glad they did. Not sure i like look of this newer F series. but great review. between f series and Ranger its a great global dominance me thinks

[Falc'man]

Not like the currrent Falcon's motor isn't already. Yes practically the same, Falcon was getting the same but in 3.7 litre atmo. This is the 3.5 litre Ecoboost version, which most likely have ended up in a Falcon, too.

[mac_man_luke]

Dont think it was the ecoboost version, but that would be nice

EB 4, EB 6 and SC 8

[jpd80]

Only 3.7 NA V6, Americans weren't going to give Austraila the Ecoboost V6.
No they were going to just slide by with the 300 odd Kw 5.0 V8,
Yeah, woe is us.....

[Bossxr8]

Engine choices for one thing. Ranger runs 4's and a 5, mostly diesel.

F series runs V6's and V8's, and the towing capacity difference between them is huge. The F150 is just a starting point as the range gets bigger and bigger up to the massive Superduty's.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Engine choices for one thing. Ranger runs 4's and a 5, mostly diesel.

F series runs V6's and V8's, and the towing capacity difference between them is huge. The F150 is just a starting point as the range gets bigger and bigger up to the massive Superduty's.

Boss, there's two trains of thoughts on the future of F150 with concerns centering on
the amount of overlap that exists between F150 and F250, the choices are:

1) merging F150 and F250 into one vehicle (F200) that covers around 80% of F truck sales.
This would make room For Americanized T6 Ranger called F100 to fit below the bigger truck..

2) Ford continues to lighten F150 while making it slightly shorter and narrower.
This reduces overlap with F250 and enables F150 to attack more of Tacoma's amrket.

It will be interesting to see which way Ford jumps with that one....

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by jpd80

Boss, there's two trains of thoughts on the future of F150 with concerns centering on
the amount of overlap that exists between F150 and F250, the choices are:

1) merging F150 and F250 into one vehicle (F200) that covers around 80% of F truck sales.
This would make room For Americanized T6 Ranger called F100 to fit below the bigger truck..

2) Ford continues to lighten F150 while making it slightly shorter and narrower.
This reduces overlap with F250 and enables F150 to attack more of Tacoma's amrket.

It will be interesting to see which way Ford jumps with that one....

I thought they dropped the idea of bringing in an F100.

[Road_Warrior]

Make no mistake I'm proud of the work FoA did with the new Ranger, but I love these new F150's. And I'm rarely a fan of these sorts of vehicles.

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by Road_Warrior

Make no mistake I'm proud of the work FoA did with the new Ranger, but I love these new F150's. And I'm rarely a fan of these sorts of vehicles.

I agree 100%..why does the ranger exist? Is is that hard to engineer the 150 to RHD?

[Eaturbo]

Have a look at the US web Site and check out the Platnium ECO Boost double cabs spec. Heated and electric seat, heated rear seats, Dual zone climate, Electric everything, factory trailer brake controler, rear camera, leather trim, you name it it has it and for the price wait for it. $45,000. Why cant we have cars like this at these prices. Heres the link http://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/trim/?trim=platinum

[HULK EF]

Originally Posted by Eaturbo

Have a look at the US web Site and check out the Platnium ECO Boost double cabs spec. Heated and electric seat, heated rear seats, Dual zone climate, Electric everything, factory trailer brake controler, rear camera, leather trim, you name it it has it and for the price wait for it. $45,000. Why cant we have cars like this at these prices. Heres the link http://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/trim/?trim=platinum

perhaps due to the difference in the size of the aussie to american markets?? mass produced (america) = lower cost.

[Elks]

Love it.

I saw these up close in the US at the start of the year. I'd have one in a heartbeat. Make mine a Platinum or Harley edition in black. Now 6.2 v8 or Ecoboost??

I'd pay $60K for one no problems if anyone at FoMoCo is listening. That's a 33% premium over the US price.

[Falc'man]

It's like saying "why have Kuga when we have Territory, or for that matter Explorer." They're not exactly the same size are they. Why have Fiesta when there's a Focus, why have Mondeo when there's a Taurus?
Why have anything when there's a Falcon? And on, and on.

There's a market for each to suit different buyers, generally speaking.

If you reverse the question and say "why have F150 when Rangers so good" you would need to give yourself an uppercut, not because F150 may or may not be the better vehicle, but it (the F150) happens to the most popular vehicle in the USA for.. I've lost count of the years, and changing it's recipe is a recipe for disaster.

By the same token, the F150 would not do as well as the Ranger on a global scale, because guess where each is made, and pay attention to cost per unit. You want this here? People are complaining about the price of the Ranger as it is so I hope people can add two and two together and figure out how much more the F150 would be.

The best solution is to have both.

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

It's like saying "why have Kuga when we have Territory, or for that matter Explorer." They're not exactly the same size are they. Why have Fiesta when there's a Focus, why have Mondeo when there's a Taurus?
Why have anything when there's a Falcon? And on, and on.

There's a market for each to suit different buyers, generally speaking.

If you reverse the question and say "why have F150 when Rangers so good" you would need to give yourself an uppercut, not because F150 may or may not be the better vehicle, but it (the F150) happens to the most popular vehicle in the USA for.. I've lost count of the years, and changing it's recipe is a recipe for disaster.

By the same token, the F150 would not do as well as the Ranger on a global scale, because guess where each is made, and pay attention to cost per unit. You want this here? People are complaining about the price of the Ranger as it is so I hope people can add two and two together and figure out how much more the F150 would be.

The best solution is to have both.

Couldn't they do what they did with the F250 they sold here? Build it to our spec in another country, I think they did it in Brazil when they did ours here, but they where junk versions compared to the real deal USA one.

The Fiesta came out in WS from Germany, then WT shifted to Thailand, LW Focus is starting out Germany then shifting to Thailand, why cant they do the F150 in Thailand as well to keep prices down?

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

The Fiesta came out in WS from Germany, then WT shifted to Thailand, LW Focus is starting out Germany then shifting to Thailand, why cant they do the F150 in Thailand as well to keep prices down?

No market for it outside the USA, the engines are too thirsty because it has no diesel.

IMO, Ford should make F150 and F250 as one vehicle (F200) to remove overlap and make space for Ranger below it.
Ford would then have over 80% of F Truck sales on one platform as well as a thriving global export program for the US.

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

I thought they dropped the idea of bringing in an F100.

Very touchy with UAW at the moment, Ranger plant is set to close this month,
perhaps a reasonable gap is needed to establish F150 down reach of Ranger buyers
before realising the error of not having a Ranger/F100 to compete with Tacoma and Colorado

Head of T6 Ranger project is on record as saying Ranger was designed with all US regs in mind.
but that Ford intends pursuing F150 sales there rather than worrying about T6 for now...

[1TUFFUTE]

when you look at the big picture here in aus its seems a stupid mistake to try selling f series here in aus when our sales share has been fastly moving toward small cars.

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by jpd80

No market for it outside the USA, the engines are too thirsty because it has no diesel.

Didn't stop Ford with the Brazilian F250 though. The US version never had the MWM 4.2 I-6 or the Cummins 3.9 I-6 diesels. Ford could have chosen from a handful of diesels for an export F150. 2.7 V6, 3.0 V6, 3.2 I-5, 3.9 I-6, 4.4 V8 (which has already been tested in the F150).

[smoo]

Originally Posted by jpd80

No market for it outside the USA, the engines are too thirsty because it has no diesel.

IMO, Ford should make F150 and F250 as one vehicle (F200) to remove overlap and make space for Ranger below it.
Ford would then have over 80% of F Truck sales on one platform as well as a thriving global export program for the US.

The F250 and F150 completely different vehicles, the F250s are part of what they call the superduty range and are essentially a commercial vehicle, you only need to compare the engine offerings (diesel and V10), payload and towing capacity to see this, it would be like saying mitsi Should can the Canter cos they have the triton.
In saying that you may have a point if the majority of F250 sales are for family haulers as opposed to workhorses, which I'm guessing is the case.

[Polyal]

I dont think we were meaning it quite like that...replace the Ranger with the 150 tomorrow if it made economical sense and what do you lose?

Is there really that much difference with the two?

No one is saying that 150 should be changed, but just like the mustang engineer the thing from the start to sell in both RHD and LHD and who is it hurting? Build the thing where you like, but spec it the same and would you not save money by economies of scale?

[Falc'man]

It's not a matter of making F150 RHD, even if they do it would still won't be as affordable as the Thai made Ranger.

Yes there are a lot of differences between the two. Price, size, flavour, power, suitability, different preferences for different markets, like, in the US the F150 has been the highest selling vehicle for God knows how long. And that in itself tells us that if "economical sense" may lead us to believe, for example, F150 was to be made in Thai to save dollars, they would be jeopardising this vehicles heritage. How would the loyal American public view that?

Bring it here and try selling it for the same reasons as the Americans do and they'll say you're off topic, the joke thread is over there. Heck, people don't buy Falcon because it's "American".
Sure, F150 is a great vehicle, but who'll pay that price? Who needs that size? Why isn't it diesel?

[Polyal]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

It's not a matter of making F150 RHD, even if they do it would still won't be as affordable as the Thai made Ranger.

Could you not produce Asia Pacific 150's (or all RHD 150) in Thailand with as much parts shared with the LHD car as possible? How would it be anymore expensive, the aim would to be to share as much as possible.

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Yes there are a lot of differences between the two. Price, size, flavour, power, suitability, different preferences for different markets, like, in the US the F150 has been the highest selling vehicle for God knows how long. And that in itself tells us that if "economical sense" may lead us to believe, for example, F150 was to be made in Thai to save dollars, they would be jeopardising this vehicles heritage. How would the loyal American public view that?

Heritage? The car was once global wasnt it? Unless all 70/80's F trucks (150/250/350) where all grey imports, which I dont think was the case. I mean that the US R&D and Dev would stay as is.

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Bring it here and try selling it for the same reasons as the Americans do and they'll say you're off topic, the joke thread is over there. Heck, people don't buy Falcon because it's "American".
Sure, F150 is a great vehicle, but who'll pay that price? Who needs that size? Why isn't it diesel?

Agreed, a little bit of localisation would be needed, which all cars no matter how global they want to be should be subject too.

But if they leveraged the 150 for a world wide market then the amount spent on making a TDi ranger is the same as making a TDi 150 I would have thought.

You might be underestimating the strength of the F truck brand here IMO, it would have much more power than Ranger.

One Ford only seems to be implemented with American interests at the center.

[Falc'man]

Originally Posted by Polyal

Could you not produce Asia Pacific 150's in Thailand with as much parts shared with the LHD car as possible? How would it be anymore expensive, the aim would to be to share as much as possible.

Again. They're two different vehicles. Both have their own purpose. Like Fiesta and Focus.

Originally Posted by Polyal

Heritage? The car was once global wasnt it? Unless all 70/80's F trucks (150/250/350) where all grey imports, which I dont think was the case. I mean that the US R&D and Dev would stay as is.

I don't know if it was once global. The Falcon was once American. What is it now? Things change. It's the most successful vehicle in the US, changing anything in it's formula isn't a great idea.

Originally Posted by Polyal

Agreed, a little bit of localisation would be needed, which all cars no matter how global they want to be should be subject too.

But if they leveraged the 150 for a world wide market then the amount spent on making a TDi ranger is the same as making a TDi 150 I would have thought.

You might be underestimating the strength of the F truck brand here IMO, it would have much more power than Ranger.

One Ford only seems to be implemented with American interests at the center

Different price point, it's bigger, people need something cheaper, smaller. Ranger.

[chevypower]

Originally Posted by Falc'man

Who needs that size? Why isn't it diesel?

I like being able to put my Polaris Touring 850 in the back, carry up to six people, and pull a camper all at the same time. Couldn't do that in a mid-size.

The EPA is the agency to blame for lack of diesels in the US. It is not economically viable because with all the emissions crap you have to put on diesels makes them too expensive to buy, they now use more fuel than they used to. The old Ford 7.3, Cummins 5.9, and 2002 Duramax all used to get well over 20mpg on the highway. About 2008, the best you would get out of these big diesels (Ford 6.4, 2008 Duramax, and 6.7 Cummins), the best you would get is 17mpg. It wasn't because of the increase in power, but the EGR and DPF. Now that they have added urea, it has taken the Ford 6.7 and 2011 Duramax to about 18-20 mpg, but now you have that even more added cost. Now about $8k-10k option for one of these diesels. Even Ford's 4.4L V8 diesel for the Range Rover does not meet US EPA in its current state. On top of that, for about six months of the year, diesel requires winter blend in the US, which makes it about $1 more than unleaded.

Ford is on to a clear winner with the EcoBoost. $800 option for the engine, 21 mpg in the F150, uses low-octane unleaded. Will pull 11,000 pounds.

I got to test drive a 2008 F350 6.4 diesel and 2011 F150 EB back to back. The EB feels much more responsive and more fun to drive, despite the torque advantage of the big diesel. The EcoBoost used less fuel too.

[Polyal]

Well I guess we will have to agree to disagree, I never mentioned any change to the spec or setup of the 150 in its own market.

[jpd80]

Eagle Farm in Brizzy Assembled F trucks?