Spied: 2015 Ford F-150 Makes More Appearances

Ford F-150 spy CD 6 II

Photos by KGP Photography

As we get closer to the debut of the next-generation 2015 Ford F-150, we're hearing about and seeing more test units in public. Clearly there will be three distinct cab configurations, but everyone is guessing about what materials the truck incorporates and how much it will look like the Ford Atlas concept.

At this point, all we know for sure is that Ford has spent plenty of money on full-body camouflage for each of the test trucks that make it outside the gates of proving ground test facilities. Here's what our spies just sent to us:

Cutting Through the Camo

"Ford has done an admirable job keeping prototypes for the 2015 F-150 heavily cloaked in camouflage, leaving even the smallest details covered in some form of marine vinyl. Today, however, we spotted the first meaningful chink in the armor, revealing the F-150's headlight design in a modestly undisguised form. While there's still a minor bit of black mesh covering the camo's headlight opening, the light and our lens thoroughly penetrates the mesh and reveals a headlight that looks far more adventurous than those found on GM's latest Silverado or Sierra."

Atlas Cues Revealed

"Just as we see on the Atlas concept, the production F-150 shows a trim piece that cuts into the headlight, nearly bisecting it into upper and lower sections. The shape of the headlight, its interaction with the front fender, and its interplay with the grille shape looks to be a carbon copy between the Atlas concept and the production-spec prototype caught on the streets of Dearborn [Mich.]. The only difference seems to be the headlight internals, which have the reflectors and lighting elements necessary for a volume-production product — instead of something designed primarily for auto show flash.

"After this look at the F-150's headlight, and its telltale Atlas-inspired designs flourish, we now have our first solid proof that the concept truck truly does foreshadow a key element of the new F-series' front fascia. Considering that the headlight and grille makeup the bulk of a car's character and identity, it now seems safe to say that the rest of the F-150 will similarly follow the lead of the Atlas concept."

Best Look at the 2015 Grille

"Another F-150 prototype gave us our best look yet at new truck's grille. It's still covered by some camouflage, but we're getting our first look at a heavily chromed grille. The placement and size of the Ford oval is also revealed. For those who believe that Ford's Atlas concept was a strong design direction for the next F-150, everything seems to be falling into place very nicely."


Ford F-150 spy CD 1 II

Ford F-150 spy CD 2 II

Ford F-150 spy CD 3 II

Ford F-150 spy CD 5 II

Ford F-150 Geiger friend 2 II(Above photo take by Kenneth Cockrill) 


I really like the Ford trucks but I'm holding off buying one until they start warranting their powertrain for 100,000 miles

I'm not sure why everybody is surprised that it looks similar to today's truck when Ford representatives said it themselves that the truck won't change much.
Just like Peter said above. How much different a pickup truck can be?
Take today's truck and go back 10, 20 even 30 years and you'll see similarities in all those trucks. Chevy, Ford, Ram, they will never step out over the line. They will always try to improve on their product first instead of going with new and unproven.

Agree--A truck is a truck and there is only so much you can do to change the exterior. What matters is what is below the exterior. It appears that all the manufacturers are making changes in drivetrains and materials to meet the new fuel standards. Most truck buyers do not want radical exterior changes. After all these are trucks we are talking about not designer clothing.

So funny. Ford changes the grille on the f150 every year and the ford fan boys get all excited.

Trucks can be maid to look differant, you could say the same thing about a sedan its just four doors and a truck what more can you do? Complete BS that you can't change the syling on a truck. I can say their is a big difference in looks between a 2003 F-150 and a 2004 F-150. Thats the kind of change we want to see after ten years.

I love Ford trucks mainly because they provide me with a very fat paycheck. You know the old saying Fix Or Repair Daily.

I guess there will always be the blind fanboys. Meanwhile many of my chevy buds that used to always talk crap about Ford (you could make a decent case for it in the past)are considering or have already switched to Ford or Ram. I don't know anybody anymore that is hardcore chevy and I've never known any reasonable ram fanboy. The ram fanboys are just ridiculous. They have improved but if you made it through the last 15 years as a ram boy you must not be open minded. Aside from the cummins engine almost everything about the trucks was inferior to ford and chevy (ive put all three to work regularly for the last 15 years). When they redesigned the 09 ram I bought one along with a few other people I know (all farmers or cattlemen). All of us have since switched or are waiting to switch back to chevy or Ford. For those that think ford does nothing but change the grille obviously haven't had much experience with the trucks. A 2009 to 2014 f-150 interior is vastly improved over a 2004 to 2008 (which was already a solid interior) not to mention all new powertrains a few years ago. They keep the overall look the same on purpose, because it is the most well-liked look overall. It would be difficult at best to improve the basic design of the f-150 as well as many other features. Examples: Front windows with the drop towards the front was genius and improved both the look and function. Rounded wheel wells obviously preferred. Tailgate step soon to double as ladder rack is genius. Personally I think the front grille and headlights look better than ever. What else are you going to change to make it look different? The ford badge? Take the grille, lights, front doors, and wheel wells off a ford and match them to any other truck and it's going to look like a ford. The verdict is still out on the ecodiesel ram and 8 speed, but over the last few years Ford has pretty well proven itself as the best overall truck to me (due to all the problems with my 09 ram). THAT is why they sell the most trucks and why they are continuing to gain more market share than any other truck. I like the truck I think is best with an open-minded perspective. If chevy or ram ever surpasses ford I'll be the first to admit it. It's what I thought with the 09 ram but turned out I was wrong. Right now ford needs to upgrade their powertrain (won't be long), but you can still make a solid case for them having the best design overall.

is it me or do the headlights sort of resemble the ones on a 2007-13 silverado minus some suttle differences.

RamTrucks, I agree just has the thingy in the right middle.

I will buy a Ford when they get rid of they rediculously high bed, Ford did for one reason so they could claim best in class payload, but lets face it nobody huals coal in a pickup truck they want easy access over the bed rails.

I'm just glad to see an extended cab with the suicide door! Very upset chevy went with a baby rear door instead of the suicide door.

i wonder if this truck will squat with a small load in the bed like the super duty does? talk about weak suspension. they need to work on this.

Probably the last gen of this truck before the Koreans take over.

As long as they put an Ecoboost in it then I am game. Better yet, make it more powerful.

Ike Gauntlet 2.0
An 8 mile test starting at 9,000ft elevation and ending at 11,000ft elevation towing a little over 10,000lbs. Keep in mind that all of the other trucks in Ike Gauntlet 1.0 either could hold the seed limit of 60 mph or had it floored to hold the speed limit of 60 mph with a 7,100 lb trailer. The 2014 Ecotec 5.3L Chevy with 3.08 gears with a tow rating of 6,600 lbs per Chevy towed under it's tow rating at 5,700 lb trailer and could not even keep 50 mph.

This F-150 Ecoboost is rated at 9,600 lb and is towing a little over 10,000 lbs. Held over the speed limit of 60 mph and even gotten to 70 mph with no problems.


Really, Really, Just get the size back down.... with the beautiful sculpted look of a '41 of a '55; and the weight in there at about 3,800-4,000 lbs.

and for Pete's sake give up on the blasted slab sided, huge wheel gaps and the over-sloped windshields. Goes for all the rest of you 1/2 tons.

What are the pillar gauges for?!?!?!!


Congrats to the EB so far in winning the 1st Ike Gauntlet and leading in the 2nd test so far. I like the first test that the EB won better as I am not a fan of flooring an intentionally overloaded truck up a steep grade with traffic around. That idea to me defies common sense as I would believe that if anybody overloads their pickup they would at least go slower. Also when they say people overload their trucks that’s true but at least it is their truck and they are familiar with judging their trucks stopping distance as it changes from my Tundra to someone else’s Tundra and even more when going to a different brand. I hope nothing happens in front of them and they have to make a panic stop http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9jaOROeYII or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQIUp-INitI now I couldn’t resist that but you get the point. If they are going to do a test like that please go closed circuit.

I am very sure the 5.3L is designed to do whatever a 1/2 needs to do but with FE in mind. The 6.2L is designed for everything the 5.3L does but with more performance. So a test like that doesn't lend itself to the 5.3L at all. To be J2807 compliant you only have to maintain 40mph up the Davis Dam or equivalent grade so what is your point about the 5.3L?

The 5.7L iforce is somewhat like the 5.3L in that it is the premium engine that can do whatever a 1/2 ton needs to do but the Supercharged 5.7L is what Toyota offers for additional towing mountain passes and performance http://www.toyotaracing.com/trd/features/package_the_5_7l_v8_supercharger_kit.html "TRD Superchargers deliver the extra torque you need for towing, passing and carrying heavy loads. Because they pack more air into every cylinder stroke, they are especially effective at higher altitudes." I will give the EB all the respect it earned for beating the 5.7L Hemi, 5.7L iforce and if it can beat a Supercharged 5.7L iforce or either the Ford or GM 6.2L but not so much for beating the 5.3L or current 5.6L.

I recently looked at and test drove all the big 3 current pickups, plus the new GMC. I once again went with the F150. Everything about it fits with my job, my lifestyle and my tastes. But ALL three of the pickups were great in their own right and I could make a case for all three. This is the best time in American pickups, period. And I gotta say, I just saw my first new Tundra, up close and personal, and all my opinions about Toyota even softened a bit. So I just feel that we're damn lucky to have our pick of the best trucks on the planet.

@ed...PU's with the suicide doors are on death watch. The roll over standards coming up are requiring a B-pillar support for increased cab strength on the "extended cab" models. That means they will probably have forward opening rear doors. Like you, I lament the loss of that design feature. Now, just like what we have had with the cars over the last 20 years, 2-door (extended) cabs will look like shortened 4 door crew cabs. At least Toyota found a more innovative solution to this problem by coming up with something a little different on the (double cab) Tundra. GM and Dodge just succumbed to the bean counters and went with the 4 door crew cab look on either model. If Ford retains the suicide doors for the 2015 F-150, they get huge props from me. I'm just wondering how Nissan is going to address this design issue on the next gen Titan.

@ AD

Actually that same exact configuration tows 11,200 lbs in the max tow package. However this is a luxurious "Limited" trim that does not have the max tow mirrors, slightly larger radiator or slightly thicker leaf springs so it is limited to 9,600 lbs with everything else being the same as max tow package including brakes and axle.

The 5.3L in that test still towed under what Chevy rated that truck for. If it could not tow what Chevy says it can tow in that test while maintaining close to the speed limit then Chevy needs to either lower their tow rating for that truck or face scrutiny for posting a rating on a truck that it can't do. The point of those videos is not primarily on who beats best who, but rather how well each truck does towing. Also if the trucks can do what their manufacturers say they can do. I don't see it as a race, but rather a way to see if each truck can live up to it's numbers put upon them.

The J2807 is also a joke. I don't want to go 40 mph towing. I want to go 60 mph or at least the speed limit, and they should raise it to that. Not make it easier because the rest can't hang. If they can't do it then lower their tow rating and quit saying it can do something it can't just to sell trucks. That goes to Ford too.

Also, I would not be interested in paying an additional $6k+ on a supercharger kit(not including labor) just to hear the whine of a SC for 8 freakin miles gong up a mountain. I would want to shoot myself I before I got to the top if I had to hear that thing for that long. If I were to spend that kind of money then I would go with a turbo upgrade kit. However, if a stock EB can easily do more than the speed limit then my tuned EB will easily do the 65 mph I am willing to do pulling that loaded without spending a crap ton of money that can be spent on other toys. If I were to spend another $6k+ on a truck for more towing needs then I would be stupid not to just get a 3/4 tine 400hp and 800lb-ft 6.7L PSD or any other 3/4 to 1 ton.

The Titan only tows 9,500lbs and they did over 10,000lbs which is what I referring too in the overloaded comment. I am not trying to persuade you to a Tundra I was saying their are more powerful performance based 1/2 ton powertrains to beat if you want bragging rights than an outdated 5.6L and the get the job done with good FE 5.3L. As for you bringing up the cost of the Toyota fully warranted Supercharged 5.7L iforce I just take that's your way of trying to discredit the supercharged 5.7L iforce because you know the EB can't out tow it so I will leave it out for ya. I have already given the EB credit for the 5.7L Hemi and 5.7L iforce that still leaves the Ford and GM 6.2L options to beat.

@ AD

Also, although I agree with you that the Chevy 5.3L is more for fuel mileage and not for towing. I think that Chevy should not say it can tow 9,600 lbs. If Chevy says it can do that while marketing the fuel economy of the Ecotec 5.3L versus the Ecoboost then by all means put them in the same towing test. If can't compete like Chevy like to says it can, then let it be known that it has inferior towing performance to the big dogs and Chevy should have egg on it's face for giving it such a tow rating while comparing it any way to Ecoboost.

I actually had "Chevy guy" distant family member of mine try to tell me that the Ecotec 5.3L has similar power numbers to the Ecoboost and can tow 9,600lbs while getting better fuel mileage like what was stated on the Chevy commercial. He then proceeded to talk about how the Ecotec 5.3L can do all the things the Ecoboost does but get better furl mileage. He could not figure out why I was laughing so hard. I trying explaining it to him, but he was sold by Chevy's adds and really thought the Ecotec 5.3L could do all that like Chevy said. That is why I say put the Ecotec 5.3L in the same competition as the others since Chevy says it can. Then when they see that it performs miserably versus the other big V8s and FI engines that were built to tow, they will at least see the line of bull that Chevy has been feeding them and that this an engine made for fuel economy and light towing only just like most base engines. Any heavy towing should be left to the Ecotec 6.2L which it clearly deserves the heavy towing motor title in the Chevy line up.

@ AD

Not trying to discredit the TRD SC Tundra. Yes it is a warrant-able option for the Tundra to tow the load better than a stock 5.7L, and so would a turbo kit would be for the Ecoboost when Roush comes out with their warrant-able turbo upgrade kit. Those two are moot points for me because I would just by a 3/4 diesel if I wanted to tow the load better and spend that kind of money. I am not willing to fork over that kind of extra doh for an after the factory add on. However, if you want to retain your warranty and be in the 415hp and 505 lb-ft of torque range, then you can shell out a little over $600 for the Roush stage 1 Kit.


I wasn't going to bring up the Roush thing as some of those supercharger retain factory warranty if installed at a authorized Ford dealer and they are in the range of the Supercharged Tundra if not better. Since the Supercharged powertrains can carry a factory warranty but are not factory models I am more than willing to leave them out to be fair. I am more than willing to give credit for anything with more than 400lb ft. That means the EB has 2 down both 5.7L V8's and needs to beat the 2 remaining 6.2L V8's.

I think you have to remember the 5.3L tow rating was probably done at 40mph which is all that is needed to qualify and would also explain why the 5.4L had an 11,000lb+ tow rating like the EB. GM was onboard with the SAE tow test until Ford backed out then they said they wouldn't either. The whole tow rating thing by GM seems to be out of the Ford playbook.

@ AD

I know the Ecoboost and Boss 6.2L will do the job just as good, but the 6.2L being in the higher rpm pulling the load from experience. There performance numbers are almost identical with Ecoboost barely nudging out the quicker numbers on the forums. From stock, the Ecoboost has more hp and torque than the Boss 6.2L all the way until around 4,250rpm. The 6.2L makes more power than the Ecoboost only from around 4,250 to 5,500 where it shifts. However, the 6.2L will suffer big time in the altitude which might give the Ecoboost the edge. The Ecotec 6.2L is what I don't think the Ecoboost will tow better than. The Ecotec 6.2L has more then enough extra peak power to negate any altitude power loss. I would be really surprised if the Ecotec 6.2L does not do a better job that the Ecoboost in the next test. Although, a lot of other things come into play. As we all know, it is not how much power you have under your hood, it is how much you can get to the ground that counts.

If this truck has that Ego Boast engine then i don't want it. Nothing but trouble from my neighbor's.


With each new model and each new engine comes more performance and capabilities along with new expectations and standards. Five years ago when when the standards were discussed, 40 mph towing may have been the expectation, but expectations on what towing should be has changed. Truck buyers don't expect to go 40 mph up a hill anymore, they expect 60 mph. There for the standards bar should be raised and not have to go by the stupid J2807 standard. The reason why I say it is stupid is because there is a big different between an Ecotec 5.3L giving you all its got with no power to spare compared to even an i-Force 5.7L that is barely turning with plenty of power on tap to move at that slow of a speed. There is a big difference between having passing power to spare and not having anything left. That is what the J2807 does not address and I think they should do something to address this to better inform truck buyers. I believe if they raise the minimum speed limit that the truck has to hold, it would help truck buyer make a better informed decision based on there real life expectations of what a truck should be able to do. I would like a show of hands on who expects to be going 40 mph up a hill while towing anymore......... no one? anyone?

Who wants a truck that rides like a car ...not me i want a real truck and thats why i buy fords f 150 not chevy to low to car like

All chevy trucks looks alike year in year out but ford trucks all ways are different in every series

Lol at the sissy ram and gm girly girly boys have fun fixing the ball joints on your ram we all know fords tow more safer.

All chevy trucks looks alike year in year out but ford trucks all ways are different in every series

@Mike, No way. I'm a Chevy guy but they have lost all looks credibility since 2003. The GM stayed the same but the Chevy became a China faced truck to go with the global Colorado. Ugly! Then 2007 came and ugly got even Uglier with that Silverado's wide 3 piece cartoon bumper and front end along with bulging fender flares that didn't even match front to back. What an Abortion. The GM on the other hand stayed the same. Now they're both just as nasty looking. The Chevrolet was bar none the industry's best looking truck through 2002. After that it's all about Ford, Dodge's Ram or possibly the GM for 03-13. Chevrolet styling as far as trucks go has gone into the crapper. Bad front ends, stupid side designs since 2003.

They need to bring back classy front ends, ditch those ugly fender bulges and go with round wheel openings. Until then, Chevrolet is bottom of the barrel.

Wow! more boring blocky bullshit from ford. another Stale Design no doubt!

Why do people keep saying that it looks the same when it is completely covered in camo? Are you kidding me?









Please people, let's not judge this new version of the F-150 before we get to see it in its entirety, which by the way, has been the BEST selling truck in America for well over 20 years running. Although I must say, from what I see here, the frame of the truck does seem to resemble past models. Nonetheless, I liked what I saw when Ford released the Atlas Concept to the public, so any design cues incorporated from the Atlas would be fine with me.

On one last note, I don't understand why so many people are going all "goo goo gaa gaa" over the new Dodge Ram "Ecodiesel", as it essentially rides on the same worn out frame that it's had since at least 2004-2005 (since then, structural changes on the outside include an offering of air suspension, big deal)!

As I view it, Chrysler is running on fumes and is lucky to even still be around considering they went bankrupt (again), but were saved BY THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS (also goes for GM). To me, it's kind of sad when a company only has two cars in their lineup that they put the most quality into (or try and tout to potential customers the most), like the Ram and Fiat (Fix It Again Tony) 500, for instance. Come to think of it, having lazy and arrogant workers manufacture such cars doesn't help the company's image either, it only tarnishes it.

still looks like a square Box going down the road

More than the looks, I'm interested in the mechanical improvements made across the segment. Ford seems to be going with weight reduction and turbo engines and I respect the ford family for betting on themselves and not taking handouts, Ram has a new diesel 6 coming shortly, that, combined with an 8 speed and a cushy air suspension is an attractive package. GM is playing to the red meat "trucks are trucks, not cars" crowd with their full size models but have brought back a mid size model with a diesel 4 coming down the line. I had an s10 as a teen and loved it. This competition and threat of extinction is resulting in a much better overall product by all automakers. These are only the first generation of pickups post-Detroit crash. The next generation circa 2020 should be just that much better.

Go troll elsewhere, you make a fool of yourself with every post. As I recall, FORD was the ONLY major auto maker who did NOT take government bail-out money. Don't know where or how you get your info, but you are obviously full of $h!t, and trust me I'm being kind.

Before retirement I ran a major construction company in the northeast, the toughest environment on the planet for vehicles. I've literally owned fleets worth of all three major pick-m-ups and vans, plus a few Dakotas, Datsun/Nissan minis, etc. etc. 25-30 vehicles on the road at any given time. We'd always purchase vs. lease because of the miles our workmen need to drive - as much as 125,000 miles in a year per vehicle make a commercial lease uncompetitive.

BY FAR, and I mean BY FAR, the least expensive of all the trucks to own - meaning the fewest repairs, the best reliability, decent (maybe not best, but not horrible) fuel economy - have been FORD trucks. It's not even close. We tried to take advantage of lower purchase prices and fleet deals offered by GM and Dodge, and every time it turned out being a mistake, and we'd wind up back to Ford. Typical annual purchase would be 1/4 of the fleet, so 6-8 vehicles, some years as many as 10 or as few as 4.

I don't give a rat personally - the interiors and exteriors don't matter very much when you're running a fleet - the utility and TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) are all that matter - we can put the identical Reading utility body on any of the truck chassis, or the identical shelving set-up in any of the major van bodies. But there is a reason Ford trucks outsell Dodge 6-to-1 and Chevy/GM 2-to-1 . They're damned good vehicles that last a long time and don't require many major repairs. Even with a typical 10-12% higher purchase price, the TCO was still 80-ish% of a comparable GM product and 75% of a typical Mopar product (which always fared the worst BTW).

I drive all Ford for my personal vehicles based on the performance of our fleet vehicles. Same solid results.

The comments to this entry are closed.