2015 Ford F-150: Everything You Need to Know

 2015 Ford F-150 red front II

We've done all the digging, and now you have the as much information on the 2015 Ford F-150 as we could dig up for you from the 2014 North American International Auto Show in Detroit. We've broken down each of the important aspects of the new truck, so dive in and get an education on the segment's newest half-ton, due to go on sale near the end of the this year.

 

Intro: Body and Cab Configurations

Desgin: Exterior and Interior

Underhood: Four New Powertrains

Underneath: Frame and Suspension

Technology and Electronics

Simplified Trim Packages

Cool Bed Features

Five Things Ford Got Right

Video: 2015 Ford F-150 Up Close

Video: Top 5 Cool Things About F-150 

Ten Things Ford Got Wrong

Facebook Photo Gallery of 2014 NAIAS

Five Minutes With Ford's Frank Davis

The Switch to Aluminum Could be Costly

 

 

To read the full press release regarding the 2015 Ford F-150, click here

 

Comments

The truck is an evolution of the current truck. More slope to he hood and the nose looks more rounded to improve aerodynamics. The mirrors look more rounded. There is a more pronounced and contoured chin spoiler.
Looks like a lot of little aero tweaks.
The lower crease is different most likely to add rigidity.
I'm not totally sold on the looks of the grill but is is more subdued than the Atlas.

I guess I need to see this thing in person, not really sure if I like it or not from the pictures.

Kind of disappointed it does not have the roof rack as pictured on the Atlas, that was a great idea.

Nothing too unexpected but it looks really nice overall. I think GM made a mistake by not pushing a little harder on their new trucks. With this new Ford and the new Ram coming next year GM will need something big to keep up. I expect the new 8-speed to make it to the trucks but I doubt they can do any weight savings.

I do like that Ford offered more mid level powertrains for those not interested in a max-tow motor. I'd bet that the 2.7 come in around 310-315hp and 330-345 lbs of torque which should be great for towing around 8-9k lbs and the payload should be high with the weight reduction. This is all the more I'd need. I do think Ford should have offered more than just the 6-speed though. Right now Ram has the best tranny available and that will help carry them until their new truck arrives.

I bet we see some powertrain upgrades in the next year or 18 months as Ford typically does this. Maybe the 3.2 diesel will make it in as a special model if Ram's diesel does well.

digging???? really i'm pretty sure all this info was in a press packet for you from mike levine......errr ford....... impressive how far this site has come to be just a ford fan site....... very disappointing.

Let's see if ford will adhere to the J2807 standard like they said they would with a new model... I think unlikely but we'll see.

I see their is finally a dead pedal, something every vehicle needs but absent on some pickups.

I think this will be a great pickup. We will have to wait for mpg, power ratings, and see how it rides / drives but we all know it will only be better than the current generation. Several other articles I have seen Have stated that ford will use sae j2807 being the first of the big 3 to do so. That tells me they are confident in this 150. There is a lot of added features and tech in this new pickup and I expect large payload gains as well. Ford clearly took a larger step forward on this than GM did on their 2014s. Only time will show us the results.

HMMMM, I like it. Front end will take some getting used to, as most of them do; this coming from a die hard Ford man. Currently own 05 FX4 Supercrew w/ dealer installed supercharger, now w/ 170k miles, all original except transfercase @ 138 and alternator @ 90ish, as well as my beloved 11 FX-4 Ecobeast Supercrew w/ 6.5ft bed and 3.73rear, currently @ 69k miles of PERFECTION. Out of 69k, Ecobeast has towed 39k miles. Mostly 2 and 3 horse loaded trailers from NJ to Va and back. Generally, 11.5 while towing, 19-21 when not. Toe into the throttle and enjoy that DEEP torque.....no need to rev the engine up to high RPM because the torque is so low is is stupendous!!!! Now my MILLION $$$ ??????? Will 15 F-150 be the truck I need to do this and have absolute perfection all the time? That is yet to be determined. I like what I see tho, despite the Tundra-ish front end, tho I am sure Ford has had this design in the books for quite some time, really doubt Ford copied Toyota, which is why the interior is COMPLETELY different. Great job Ford so far, but please give us a truck that is as capable as my 05 and 11 have been. If it is at least 500 pounds lighter, fuel economy will be NO issue, plus even if the power figures all stay the same, 500 pounds lighter is like gaining 40 horsepower, so this will be interesting. I still would like to see big things happen to Coyote. Direct injection would yield a stout 380 HP and 400 Torque. In a 500 pound lighter truck, that will be AWESOME and efficient. You still have to keep the V-8 alive in this truck. Being a service/customer relations manager at a large dealership, I have had drive time in the new ECODIESEL Ram, and came away impressed, but the Diesel is very expensive. People talk about the Ecoboost being unreliable for the long haul, but i cannot imagine the 3l Turbo V6 being any different, plus Ecodiesel is expensive, and despite strong EPA numbers, it will take a LONG time to recoup that money back in fuel savings, given the higher maintenance costs, up front pricing, probably 3 times the Ecoboosts option price, and higher price for diesel fuel. Sprinters are very expensive to maintain, realizing it is a TOTALLY different beast, but I am just saying. I am over the moon about my experience with Ecoboost. In any case, Ford has a great thing going here, and am very excited about the possibility of owning a 15 FX-4 Supercrew w/ 6.5 ft bed. I have already been spreading word on selling my 05. It is still a beauty after all these years. It has been thoroughly maintained, with transmission filter and fluid changes, transfer case, f and rear axles meticulously changed every 30k. I have been doing the same on my 11. I run 89 octane in both, all the time.

Note to self, check insurance rates before buying. I bet it will cost a lot more to insure as repair costs will be much higher being aluminum.

Deal breakers:
6 speed automatic?
LED headlights, standard?
red rear turn signals? Unsafe and unacceptable.

Hey hemi lol:

You can't blame PUTC for having so much coverage on the biggest release of all the large truck manufacturers. As soon as chevy produces a new truck worth even looking at, they won't cover it like they do Ford & Dodge. Get used to it.

@Lou

Disagree about evolutionary. If you simply mean appearance, ok. But to use so much alloy in place of steel sheet for the body is game-changing.

Look for GM and Ram to compete but it will take time. In the interim if F150s are seeing huge improvements in FE the market will move away from Chevy and Ram.

Almost the entire exterior looks the same as the current model. The only difference I can see is the grille and the RAM like spoiler on the tailgate. The interior's center stack looks like a mess....too many buttons. Definitely not as refined as RAM, but not as plastic toyish looking as GM's twins. Also, just like GM, no new tranny to match RAM and no diesel to match GM and RAM. PUTC says this truck is "historic"........I don't think so. They should have pushed the envelope quite a bit more.

I guess ford is going back to the shorter leafs, they lengthened them last time, now they are making them short again. Also the big gap between the bumper and headlights/grill is a step backwards.

Reminds me of my titan with the chrome middle in the front and three piece bumper.

@ George C

How are LED lights deal breakers for you? The 6-speed I can understand isn't exactly pushing the envelope but the lights? LED's are the way of the future.

From a personal perspective the light tubes of the Ford and similar lights on Audi's look 10x better than the individual dots as seen on the Sierra. Those dots look dated, the light tubes look modern.

I agree this vehicle is a leap forward with technology.

Could Ford have produced a vehicle that would be cheaper and achieve the same or similar results?

I have always disagreed with the regulations controlling US vehicle design. CAFE in particular.

Many on this site always discuss and debate the cost of pickups. How much will this vehicle cost?

It's great to have this technology, but I'm also told how conservative the US pickup fraternity is.

Will this vehicle be within reach of the 'average Joe'?

I've stated that the direction US pickups are heading in will make them expensive. I've used the Pentastar, 8spd Ram as an example.

Maybe the Colorado will be a winner more than most might suspect.

Full size trucks will become the domain of the rich set.

@howam00
LED headlights are a pet project of the marketing department.
They claim 'closer to sunlight', when daylight is a combination of sunlight-which varies depending on time of day, time of year, and north/south latitude; and skylight.

Nearly all the LED headlights on the market use cool-white LEDs [just look at how blue they are] instead of neutral-white. The current HID achieve a neutral-white CCT, the blue-ish-ness of them are from the fringing at the cutoff. (although better ones have eliminated that)
If the engineers ever kick out the marketing department guys, and use a neutral-white color temperature + high CRI, then LEDs will be an upgrade over the current gas discharge lamps, which have a discrete spectrum, and low-ish CRI (color rendering index)

@ George C

Ok now I can understand your issue with LED's. I'd say from a practical matter the move to LED's isn't always to do with the light quality but to improve efficiency. Most LED's I've seen do have very high CRI ratings like 80-90+ which is better than halogen. The actual temp of the lights is certainly debatable since some LED's are up over 6000 kelvin making them more blue. That is ok for the sun but too harsh to me as well at night. For a headlight I'd prefer about 4000 kelvin so I get a decent CRI and light penetration but not enough to render everything with a blue hue.

Indoors I prefer the softer yellowish light at 2700 kelvin which is what I am running in my house

@George C and howam00
In my job we perform what is termed 'white light' inspections. We need this for identifying cracks, imperfections, etc.

The light spectrum from LEDs and even HIDs can be troublesome.

I can't inspect with our LED lights. They are okay for general work, but inspection, no.

I think our eyes have evolved to use a broader spectrum of light to be able to interpret what we see.

Very interested to see what they do for the next Raptor engine.

I think it is an improvement in styling over the old F150.
Not a bad looking truck.
I like the soften lines better that cutting edges.
There is some RAM styling in this truck.
The mirrors could have came off of a RAM, as well as some of the body lines.
Ford will not have to worry about losing its hold on #1.
My main complaint, this took about 5-years longer than it should have.

@GeorgeC:
NOT Deal breakers:
6 speed automatic? A darn sight better than the old 3-speed automatics.
LED headlights, standard? Brighter and safer than the old tungsten-based lamps.
red rear turn signals? Just as safe and acceptable as ever as long as the owner bothers to check his lamps regularly. Safer due to less risk of blinding a following driver at night if that amber lamp is too bright. I've found that owners tend to ignore purpose-designed rear turn signals when the bulbs burn out but are more frequently advised of their malfunction when it's part of the brake lamp circuit.

@Big Al from Oz:

Your argument about LED light really depends on the type of inspection. While I agree that typical LED lamps have a more blue color to them, lacking the warmer colors, it is only in places where the hue of the item being inspected is an important part of that inspection. Looking for the color distortion of metals due to excessive heat may be important, but simply looking for cracks, physical distortions or simply foreign objects are not so critical.

That said, warmer light does appear more natural to the eye and if you pay attention you can see that LEDs are gradually becoming 'warmer' in color--in some ways by using a combination of LED 'bulbs' to create a better balance. In fact, Apple has pioneered this type of technology in photography with the iPhone 5s.

@RoadWhale
Where I live we have many guys, including myself who require lots of night vision just to drive. It is legal to have 1000 watts of driving light if you want.

I went with Halogen. because after driving around at night with the different HIDs and LEDs, halogen offers the best vision.

I can see 400 metres up the road and spot a roo or buffalo/cattle easier with my halogen.

Reaction time is crucial.

I don't know why there isn't an infrared system available for people who live in remote places. That would be effective.

But we can't only have even number of lights that are symetrical.

'Look for GM and Ram to compete but it will take time. In the interim if F150s are seeing huge improvements in FE the market will move away from Chevy and Ram.'


- Really? You try and act as though GM or GM'C is the same as Chevrolet and vice versa. It is not. GM has told us for decades they aren't the same and continue to do so. Therefore, they aren't. GM did this to themselves trying to sell the same truck to different people yet using entirely different dealerships and companies names. It was a SCAM that bit them in the ass. Ford and Dodge Ram did it right. You sell the same truck to different buyers but still under the same unified name. Just pick your options of choice depending on your money and intended use. GM GM'C is screwed. Chevrolet is even more screwed because of GM GM'C. Unfortunately, they are attached to it. Chevrolet offers nothing in comparison to Ford or Dodge Ram. And a only a minority of Liberals care about GM GM'C.

Thank goodness LED headlights are NOT standard.
If LED headlight start using something like the Nichia 219, a high CRI 92 neutral-white 4250-4750K CCT. Then by all means upgrade from mercury free D4S bi-projectors.

Incandescent light, by definition have a CRI of 100, and halogen have something like 99, and even HIR-halogen infrared reflecting are 97/98..

I hope Ford will put out a 500hp supercharged 5.0 V8 for the Raptor. 2016 model year would be nice.

It was nice that Ford installed the ZF 6hp transmission into the 2005 Lincoln Navigator, but they should have licensed the ZF 8hp until the 10 speed automatic is ready.

You are far more likely to be involved in a rear end collision when you have red turn signals. Hopefully that will be integrated into insurance pricing, or better yet made illegal by a slight addition to FMVSS108. It is very self evident that turn/hazard lights should be a dedicated color-amber, and that is why it is only acceptable in the 'backwards' USA.

Apple added an amber LED (phosphor converter IIRC) to make up for the lack of longer wavelengths with the 'standard' cool-white LED.

George_C I think most cars/Trucks have red turn signals and probably for a reason.

Ford will always kill Chevy. Even the PUTC readers get it. GMC has been ruining Chevy from day 1. Your Chevy dolts who think Chevrolet will ever compete with Ford now are delusional at best. Screw GMC.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2013/10/2014-chevy-silverado-1500-high-country-first-drive-1.html

Rob, Chevy is run by GM not GMC, Chevy, GMC, Cadillac, Buck are all divisions of GM. Chevy would not survive on its own as a stand alone brand.

Screw GMC.

Amen to that. GM sucks. They ruined Chevrolet and their trucks along with their dealers and company name and that's a fact. GM only cares about Buick of China and their GMc namesake. As for Chevrolet ever taking on Ford outside of a round racetrack, good luck. Government Motors put a stop to that. Big brother is still in full force when it comes to silencing Chevrolet. I'd rather Chevrolet just pack up and leave GM GMc for good. Maybe we'd finally get a truck worthy of Ford, Toyota, Nissan, Dodge competition. With Chevrolet in GM, we won't get squat but more cheap crap with everything. The ZL1 and Vette are just the bones they throw out to the Chevy guys to shut them up. Screw em.

Chevy would not survive on its own as a stand alone brand.

OMG, PLEASE. Chevrolet Motors Company CMC would literally ANNIHILATE "GM" on the NYSE in a New York Second. Nobody gives a flying crap about GM anymore. Get out of the 1900's. Take your faux Buick back to China and your GMc truck with it. Long live Chevrolet-Cadillac. Even Olds.

The more I see it the less I like it, really disappointed I was hoping it would be a better looking truck.

No word on a Raptor, but that's not entirely surprising at this point. If there is a 2015 Raptor I'm guessing it will be carry-over for the time being.

@hemi lo--I think you are far from objective since you sell Toyotas. Nothing wrong with Toyotas but you have a vested interest in Toyotas since you make your living selling them. This truck is revolutionary with the mostly aluminum body and some of the other features it has. I agree that there if Ford bias but lets admit that Ford has done a really great job on this truck. I own a Chevy and Isuzu but I will admit that I would take a serious look at this truck

@ Ryan
The reason, is to save money-boosting corporate profits. If they save $1 per assembly by not having to mold two different colors...
If they save $5-10 per assembly by using a combination tail/turn or super combination tail/brake/turn.
Who cares how many collisions could have been avoided if amber turn signals were used, the ownership makes more money. Hell, that same ownership probably owns the insurance companies which pass all the cost, and then some to the consumer.

Ho my god the front grill look like gm all terrain they show couple years ago???

G.M.C. is a Higher brand level than Chevrolet. I prefer G.M.C. over the Chevy.

@Big Al: I'm sure you're already aware that here in the US, total light output of headlamps and driving lamps is limited. This is primarily because of those who complain about bright lights in the eyes of oncoming traffic. It's so bad that in some parts of this country people never have the opportunity to switch to high-beam while those who do tend to forget to dim them when new facing traffic appears. Only in more open areas not too different from your outback can our high-beams be regularly used and for the same kinds of reasons.

Problem is, in deer country many cars strike or are struck by deer because the driver never had a chance to see them. The projector-beam lamps offer great forward visibility, but don't really offer a wide enough arc to cover more than a few feet off the passenger side of the road while they're purposely inhibited to reduce glare for oncoming traffic which means anything coming in from the driver's side is invisible until too late. I can think of a couple methods that might alleviate the issue, but would add cost in the short term with the change in technology.

What are you doing ford? Your are designing yourself out of the number one spot. You destroyed the mustang design and now this Flop 150. Why is it so hard to use the Atlas concept that everyone seemed to like. Good luck with sales. Im sure that they will still sell because buyers for some reason are so loyal to nameplates that they cant see a 4000 pound smelly POS that it right in front of them.

You are kidding right. The grill is 100percent atlas. Put it side by side and its the same . Tail lights and side view are the same as the atlas. New lockable tailgate and step. Push button tail gate. Access light on tailgate to help in trailer hook up or loading bed. New inter grated bed lights. New bed tie downs. New rams to allow loading of 4 wheelers and lawn mowers. New giant sunroofs. Plug ins for tool recharging. New under seat storage bins. Bigger screens for apps and work . Side mirror ground lighting for ingress . New towing apps and trailer monitoring and the list goes on and on not to mention 700 pds lighter and new aluminum military grade panels that make it harder to dent then metal. Chevy new truck debuted a new bumper with slots to step up in!!!!!!! Get the picture now gomer !!!!!

Mike your right it does look like an atlas... my bad, I must have been looking at the tundra. The only way I would buy a chevy is if they put a ford nameplate on it and put a ridgeline font end on it then you might have something. Anyway good luck with the new truck my friend. Oh and dont blow a gasket.

I wouldnt buy a chevy if my life depended on it...when i was 19 my dad bought me a 1974 chevy impala for my first car i took one look at it and said nope ill buy my own car ford was the only way i was going and oldsmoble

AWESOME!!!!!!!!!

I like how the front grill assembly looks as though there is a bull bar incorporated into it. It gives it more of an off-road look but still clean & simple. I have a 2011 F150 and I love it. Best vehicle I've owned thus far.

Name just one thing Gov't motors has ever come up with first. Ford is a leader and GM is a slow follower period! This truck will be the industry standard. It will take Govt motors another 7 years to catch up.

This truck is butt ugly..worse than all prior years back to the early 90's... Ford looked at the hideous front end of the new Tundra and the new Tahoe/Suburban and said. .lets combine the two and make the worst looking front end of any truck ever made!... congrats ford you succeeded. ..

I think I talk for most of the Public when I say that you guys at Ford are "Total Idiots"...Please let me explain, 1st of all, you guys take a Wonderful Looking & Best Selling 2012-2013 Ford F-150 & turn into this Heap of Junk for 2015...it looks like you guys just plastered chrome in the front of this plain & dull truck..believing that the American Public will be stupid enough to buy it. Will guess what I am NOT buying one..instead I will choose the options of either the Chevy Colorado or Toyota.
OK, the 2nd, Biggest Mistake that you guys made this year is taking the 2014 Tremor off the market..without having it even have a chance of becoming a really great mid-size truck..probably because you guys want to stick us the public with the high cost of trying to own one of these Hunk of Junk 2015 F-150...NOT to mention taking the Ford Ranger off the market too..All I have left to say, "is that I am Finished as a customer for the Ford Motor Company, I will NOT be returning as a customer until you guys start growing some brains again. Truly Unhappy, Jim :(



Post a Comment

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
  • Your email will not be shown.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Home | Buy or Sell a Truck | News | Special Reports

Powered by Cars.com. By using this site, you agree to our terms of service | © 2011 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us

Visit our partner: MovingTruck.com