Spied: 2018 Ford F-150 Power Stroke

Cdauto_MustangF150_121216_11 II

It’s interesting that Ford is doing some double-duty camouflage testing with its most popular models. Could it be that both vehicles have a small diesel engine under the hood? There has to be some reason they were paired together. Regardless, we expect to see an updated half-ton Ford at either the Detroit or Chicago auto shows — most likely showing off Ford’s newest turbo-diesel powertrain. Here’s what our spy shooter sent us.

“The Ford F-150 and new Mustang will both get updates for the 2018 model year, and we’ve caught prototypes of each on the road during testing. The most significant change on these prototypes appears to be to the front fascia. We can see some new LED-ringed headlights peeking out from the camouflage.

“On sale since late 2014, the Ford F-150 is now due for its mid-cycle facelift. The prototypes in our photos show that the F-150 will get moderate design updates to the front and rear fascia, and to the headlights and taillights. The bigger news, though, might be under the hood, as the F-150 will finally get the diesel 3.0-liter V-6 that has been rumored for some time. The 5.0-liter V-8 will also be updated. Both engines will be mated to Ford’s new 10-speed automatic transmission.”

Chris Doane Automotive images

 

Cdauto_MustangF150_121216_3 II

Cdauto_MustangF150_121216_12 II

Cdauto_MustangF150_121216_13 II

Cdauto_MustangF150_121216_7 II

 

Comments

It's true its a Range Rover engine,???

When will Ford or any US auto makers will extend the oil change to 10 Miles and Trans Service to 60 Miles.

@Vincent

What?!

Is the 3 liter Powerstroke Ford's latest emgine? I thought this engine has been around for years. The engine is known as the Lion.

On a positive note it is good to see Ford use existing technology in a pickup.

Ford will finally be putting the 10 speed transmission into the Mustang as it continues to chase after the Camaro. Also, finally Ford will be offering a Diesel option in a light duty pick-up, 3 years behind GM.

@gms, so when your camaro tranny goes you gonna blame Ford? where is this diesel option in a gm half ton?

@gms, so when your camaro tranny goes you gonna blame Ford? where is this diesel option in a gm half ton?

Posted by: Nitro | Dec 19, 2016 12:47:50 PM
Who said anything about half ton? I said light duty as in F150, slivy 1500 and Colorado, Canyon.

Once agin GovMs is wrong... Chasing the Camaro? Mustang has a 3 year head start before Camaro ever existed AND Never abandoned its fans.

For once GovMs is right about the something GM was the first with diesels in half tons... it was about 36 years ago... it was the 6.2V8 and it was a disaster.

GM has done more to poison the American public's perception of diesel than VW and that's saying a lot.

GM was also last to bring a modern turbo diesel to the HD market.

Putting diesels in little trucks that don't tow anyway really isn't interesting and just prices them beyond to size half tons that actually can do work.

This little PS will be interesting to stack up against the Fiat ED (which has been a decent success). Obviously the Ford will have advantages in weight and in the auto tranny but I like that the Fiat has 3.5 vs 3.0 in this situation. In a like like comparison of V6, DI, turbo, diesels a difference of 15% displacement matters.

@CLint, well said, I was trying to get info from Johnny, I mean GMSRGREAT, but apparently he doesnt understand or know, notice no response for who to blame for the tranny....

But, for those of who actually use trucks, this is great Ford again is going to out-do everyone, Ram was first, and should be commended for that, but Ford will be the game changer, just lke the military grade body they currently have and all the records to go along with it.

"When will Ford or any US auto makers will extend the oil change to 10 Miles and Trans Service to 60 Miles."

10 miles... I'd need an oil change just to make it to the supermarket and back.

Assuming this meant 10,000 and 60,000 miles... HD diesels are already rated as high as 15,000-mile oil changes. The transmission service getting to 60K could only happen for a truck that exclusively runs highway, or is an otherwise lightly-used weekend vehicle.

GM was also last to bring a modern turbo diesel to the HD market.

Posted by: Clint | Dec 19, 2016 1:00:31 PM

Did I just read that properly. Yep, that's what he typed in. Clint must have missed the year 2000 when the Duramax came on the scene. That was the first modern Diesel offered in the HD truck market. To argue otherwise would be.......well....... silly.

@CLint, well said, I was trying to get info from Johnny, I mean GMSRGREAT, but apparently he doesnt understand or know, notice no response for who to blame for the tranny....

Posted by: Nitro | Dec 19, 2016 1:06:20 PM

The 10 speed trans was codeveloped between GM and Ford. . However, if one fails in a Camaro then yes, I would blame Ford.

What?!Cummins was partnered with dodge back in the 80's and Navistar was partnered with ford back in the 90's. Lol GM was just playing with diesels(every one was a flop) until they partnered with Isuzu. Lol

@GasserV8

You might want to be careful mentioning the words "Ford" and "Diesel" in the same sentence when speaking with people who bought F-Series diesels during the last 20 years.

The sheer number of Ford HD trucks that got returned under various Lemon Law statues would make your head spin.

Re Dodge

The Chrysler corporation's engines during the 70s/80s/90s were nothing to write home about. Bad subject.

@gms, thanks for the response we knew you would give, so what your saying is the camaro now sucks since it now has Ford in it and basically running it.....

@ papajim,

Really...426 Hemi,440,383,340 just the best engines around..10-13 second 1/4 mile times when cars of that era could hook up,the 205/70/14 bias ply tires couldn't hold traction..Yet the 318' and 360 all of these would go 300,000 miles with minimal care..

The 80's brought Futuristic technology that everyone uses today, Chrysler had 2.2 4 cyl TURBO engines from 146-224 hp, they even had a 350 hp 2.2 Turbo but they didn't produce it..

The 1990's Dodge V-10...Enough said...
GM,Ford,Imports had nothing special during those years ..

But, but, but, Ford doesn't need a small diesel and will never go that way. Ford has an Ecoboost. LOL.

Here at gm after the new year we will be idling plants for up to 3 weeks in the US do to, too much inventory and lack luster sales in our car divisions. We wish our camaro would sell like the mustang and as part of the outreach we are wondering what went wrong with the camaro. We are thinking of making the entire cab out of military grade glass so people can see out of it. That is one of our biggest complaints is visibility. Do you think a glass cabin could help us increase sales so we dont have to idle production for so long?

@Dr Auto

Sorry dude, but I'm old enough to actually remember those days and Mopar was mostly crap. If it had not been for AMF and American Motors, Mopar fans would have had no one to make fun of.

I admit there were a few 340s and 440s that came well equipped with steel cranks and hot tunes, but most of the Hemi and 383 engines were just total dogs. Dual quad Hemi engines with the trick tune from the factory were rare as hen's teeth. Most of the 383s were in station wagons.

Why would ford put a diesel in the Mustang? i could see it in the F150, but the Mustang? thats weird.

"@Dr Auto

Sorry dude, but I'm old enough to actually remember those days and Mopar was mostly crap. If it had not been for AMF and American Motors, Mopar fans would have had no one to make fun of.

I admit there were a few 340s and 440s that came well equipped with steel cranks and hot tunes, but most of the Hemi and 383 engines were just total dogs. Dual quad Hemi engines with the trick tune from the factory were rare as hen's teeth. Most of the 383s were in station wagons."

I was around in those days too and agree about multiple carbs being hard to tune. Other than that my experience with Chrysler V8s through '72 was that they were great engines and we had quite a few. They were a lot better than the Chevy V8s that one of my grandfathers bought. I remember my father hitting cruise control reset on a 1968 Monaco at 30mph and the car lighting up its tires. We had a 1969 Newport for pulling a 22' boat that went that did a great job and went 175,000 miles and was still running great when we sold it. Both cars had the 383. My brother and I both bought Newports with 400s when we got old enough to pull our boats with and were very pleased. I am not a Mopar nut, I have not owned one since 1994 but I do have fond memories of the older ones, espically the 1972 Demon with a 340 that a brother had. By the way, the Town and Country wagon came with the 440. I never owned a hemi but they did not get their reputation by being slow although they did suffer from the multiple carb tuning issues.

I believe Dodge put a Mitsubishi diesel in their half ton before the GM (Detroit) 6.2. I would disagree that the 6.2 was a bad motor- many are still going and they were very fuel efficient. They were however, gutless. The turbo 6.5 is another story (I have a few). The Duramax was indeed the first "modern" diesel in a pickup with innovations such as 4 valves per cylinder, aluminum heads and common rail injection.

All that said, good for Ford for developing another option for customers.

Ford should rename their diesel engines Going Broke, fits so much better then Power Stroke.

Be sweet to watch GM embarrass Ford with their all new 1500 truck in 2018 with v8's and a diesel.


Once agin GovMs is wrong... Chasing the Camaro? Mustang has a 3 year head start before Camaro ever existed AND Never abandoned its fans.

For once GovMs is right about the something GM was the first with diesels in half tons... it was about 36 years ago... it was the 6.2V8 and it was a disaster.

GM has done more to poison the American public's perception of diesel than VW and that's saying a lot.

GM was also last to bring a modern turbo diesel to the HD market.

Putting diesels in little trucks that don't tow anyway really isn't interesting and just prices them beyond to size half tons that actually can do work.

This little PS will be interesting to stack up against the Fiat ED (which has been a decent success). Obviously the Ford will have advantages in weight and in the auto tranny but I like that the Fiat has 3.5 vs 3.0 in this situation. In a like like comparison of V6, DI, turbo, diesels a difference of 15% displacement matters.
Posted by: Clint | Dec 19, 2016 1:00:31 PM

So much wrong with this post it's almost funny. GM had a 5.7L diesel before they had the 6.2L
The 6.2 and 6.5 was just bout bullet pure but pretty gutless. GM was first with a modern diesel the Duramax, remember Ford ditched that 7.3 for the new 6.0L, A joke of an engine LOL!!!!

proof*

You guys haven't been around all that long, I had an 86 (I believe) Ford diesel 1 ton that had the predecessor to the 7.3, it was a 6.9 Navistar. Before the 6.2 GM diesel they built a very light duty 5.8 in the late 70's. Both those GMs were reworked gas engines. All these motors were prior to Dodges with Cummins.

@Mr.Moose
The GM 6.2 was co-developed by Chevy and Detroit Diesel (still a GM division at that time) - it was NOT a gasoline engine like the Olds 350 diesel that was used prior to the 6.2. There was a larger version of the 6.2 for medium-duty trucks, at 8.2 liters.

@Mr.Moose, The 5.7 diesel was I believe a converted Olds engine (never put in trucks). The 6.2 was a clean sheat design by Detroit Diesel- then built to GM's specs, not Detroit's.

..so what your saying is the camaro now sucks since it now has Ford in it and basically running it.....

Posted by: Nitro | Dec 19, 2016 2:11:24 PM

I believe what I said was Ford will finally be putting the 10 speed transmission into the Mustang as it continues to chase after the Camaro. However, the Camaro is "running" LT1 power, so the Mustang will only ever chase. Some things never change.

"When will Ford or any US auto makers will extend the oil change to 10 Miles and Trans Service to 60 Miles."

Let's assume that you meant 10k miles then the answer is 2012. My two newer Forecommend that you go by the engine computer's guidance, not a fixed number of miles. On both of them the computer has told us that the oil is good for over 10K miles and that is with a lot of cold starts and trailer pulling. The 2016 in particular is mostly used to haul a maximum load trailer around the county for construction jobs and rarely sees the interstate yet the computer told me to take it over 10k miles. I do change a bit earlier to be on the safe side but Ford is going for your benchmark, so mission accomplished.

yep 6.2 and 6.5 was a true diesel engine .. not like the 5.7 diesel and no the half ton gm diesel was not a disaster there alot of 94 to 1998 1500 6.5 diesel here in canada even me got a 95 back in the days and it was a good truck when i own it so ill repeat again for thos who think a 6.2 and 6.5 was a gaz motor before You are Wrong!

The most interesting thing about Ford coming with this very good dieselengine is ............
What will GM do to respond?

Will they take the Duramax 4500 off the shelf where is has been since 2009?

RAM 1500 is the clear leader with their VM Motori V6 diesel but will Ford and GM manage to catch up?

Mustang has a 3 year head start before Camaro ever existed AND Never abandoned its fans.

@Johnny doe

You obviously are NOT familiar with the old Pinto mustangs. At least GM never insulted its customers with a really crappy small 4 cylinder car with the word Mustang glued on it.

I'd rather be abandoned than drive a Pinto-Mustang 4 banger

Mustang has a 3 year head start before Camaro ever existed AND Never abandoned its fans.

@Johnny doe

You obviously are NOT familiar with the old Pinto mustangs. At least GM never insulted its customers with a really crappy small 4 cylinder car with the word Mustang glued on it.

I'd rather be abandoned than drive a Pinto-Mustang 4 banger

I never said anything bout the Ford poopstain.

Excerpt from article above:

Could it be that both vehicles have a small diesel engine under the hood?

The Mustang would benefit from an injection of more low end torque. Maybe Ford is playing with the 10 speed ratios to attain better low end acceleration from a higher torque diesel engine.

@Johnny doe

Poopstain? Really?

Seriously, get professional assistance. There's no shame in reaching out for help. Many people in your condition have seen big improvements.

Sometimes it's just a small dose of the meds or a change in your treatment plan--and in a year or two you'll be right back in the pink.

No harm in trying, right?

Re: Camaro

Nitro and All#1 and Clint,

Breaking News.

GM to close 5 factories next month for 3 weeks including Camaro due to bloating inventory.

GM's inventory of vehicles on dealer lots at the end of November stood at 874,162, up 26.5 percent from the same time a year ago.

They have enough Camaros to last for 177 days, according to Ward’s Automotive. Normally automakers like to have a 60-day supply on lots.

These plant closures and the accompanying inventory and sales numbers are more bad news for GM.

http://www.seattletimes.com/business/gm-to-temporarily-close-5-factories-as-car-inventory-builds/


This is good news. I'm not a fan of diesels, but competition is good. i'd love to see GM offer a diesel half ton and a turbo v6. I won't even consider a GM truck anymore until they update that old 5.3 v8. I'd take any of ford's half ton engines over the gm 5.3 and the 6.2 is just too expensive.

No worse this Ford idling their plants, selling out to fleets/rentals 80% of the year to clear inventory, while making tiny profits.

"Ford started 2016 with more inventory than GM despite having fewer nameplates and lower market share, but GM entered December with about 224,000 more vehicles in stock than Ford, the biggest disparity between the two automakers in four years, according to the Automotive News Data Center."

http://www.autonews.com/article/20161212/OEM/312129957/ballooning-inventories-will-test-gms-resolve

It's the end of the year time for deals to get people in the show room doors. GM smoked Ford in profits now giving their workers a nice Christmas break, clearing inventory of 2016's make room for 2017's, and that gives them time to retool plants for bunch of the brand new model GM CUVs and cars coming out for 2017.

It is worse. 3 weeks for GM. 1 week for Ford. The only reason I brought it up was because you bashed Ford when we all told you GM would be shutting down next and you didn't believe it. Here it is just like we told you. You lose. Good day, sir!

Naw not worse, cause if you knew what you were talking bout... You'd know 9 brand new models are being made in them 5 plants. Retooling and building a supply to carry them over till the new models are made. Sure try researching sometime. It make you look less dumb.

should*

Ford F-150 with a diesel under the hood will be a homerun. Super Duty is selling 80 % of their trucks with a diesel

http://www.fool.com/investing/2016/12/19/why-fords-new-2017-super-duty-pickups-are-booking.aspx

That's a big deal. While an F-250 XL starts at $32,535, the starting price on a top-tier F-250 Platinum is about $30,000 higher ($62,110) -- and options like an $8,000 diesel engine package can take that price over $70,000. (That may sound like an expensive diesel, but Ford said that about 80% of retail Super Duty buyers have opted for the diesel so far.)

When is the F-150 going to lose the solid rear axle like the Mustang?
When is the F-150 going to use the CVT Transmission?

Don't laugh,, it's coming !

wow you people are very chilidish, thanks for reminding me why i dont come to this site much anymore...

@GMSRGREAT/JOhnny, what I ment was, you said you would blame ford for tranny problems in the camaro, why? because that tranny is joint ford/gm designed, dont blame Ford, they are just trying to help

I think its just as likely that this F150 and Mustang are both testing 5.0/10 speed combinations. While the Mustang is enjoying sales success in Europe, I don't think investing in a big (for the European pass-car market) diesel is a viable option. The mustang sell over there on its American characteristics.

Ford has a LOT of engines in the F150 at this point, and it makes me wonder if one will go away- 3.5 base engine, 2.7EB ($800), 5.0 Coyote V8 ($1,800), 3.5EB ($3,800) and now the diesel, which will probably cost about $4k more than the base engine. meanwhile, the Transit uses the old Puma diesel and a detuned 3.5EB- I think those will get updated to the 2.7Eb and Lion V6.

@Miath and Wild Willy- the diesel in question is the FORD Lion V6, which was developed BY FORD for JLR when those brands were still part of Ford.

@GMSGREAT- not sure where you get "3 years" from, but the 2016 was the first year for the 2800 Duramax option. Before that you have to go back to the 90's for a light-duty GM diesel.

I doubt anyone could argue that original 5.9 Cummins and Navistar 7.3 were anything but great, durable engines, while GM's 6.5TD was neither. But one thing they were NOT is "modern", which part of what made them so good. GM definitely beat the competition to the punch with a common rail, multi-valve engine.

@RoadTrip, Mr.Moose- the 6.2 GM diesel came to be because the CUCV dense contract required it. it was never intended to do even big block work, but simply be a drop-in small block replacement w/o spark plugs. The 8.2 "fuel pincher" (which shares nothing except a V8 configuration with the 6.2)was a disaster- it was meant to go in place of Big Block gassers in MD trucks, but its open deck design had it spitting out head gaskets regularly. GM MD trucks started shipping with Cat and Cummins engines.

@Willy- I think Duramax 4500 suffers the same problem as the proposed Lion 4.4V8, the Toyota V8 TD and the Cummins V8- they cant out-work the gasoline counterparts in a half-ton and don't beat them in the fuel economy department. That's where the V6 diesels are really a good fit- as much HP as the base gasser, better fuel economy, as much torque as the top gas motor for the same towing performance. The EcoDiesel is hampered in the last category by RMAs failure to increase GVW sufficiently.

I for one want to see an F150 with the 4.4 diesel.

Given the low gas prices and the slow take-rate for half ton diesels, Ford's existing menu of engine options is sufficient for them to compete.

Where I live a 2 or 3 year old F150 with the base V6 is almost un-sellable.

It's common to find a white-painted long WB fleet trimmed regular cab F150 on dealer lots with the 5.0 V8 They either have a ton of them to sell or they don't sell well. All the dealers have them. Maybe they are lease/rental/fleet returns, but they cheap and they still don't sell.

Upgrade trimmed F150s with the 3.5 EB engine are everywhere.



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 | © 2017 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us