Can you say "North American Truck of the Year" -- again.

The euphamistic "pro" app - aka rooky crutch.

I wonder how Ford waives responsibility for drivers looking at a small dashboard lcd screen while maneuvering a few tons of metal.

did Ford engineers answer a question nobody was asking?

So instead of controlling steering wheel by my hands I would need to control small knob ? If people are dumb enough to not know how to back up the trailer, they are not going to know, which way to turn the knob. Not to mention you have to prepare your angle position of the truck with trailer before you even start to backing up in tight spots.
If person doesn't know to do this, he will never back up to the camping site and will need to pay for pull thru or find another campground mostly. Doesn't matter how big knob is ford going to install at your dashboard. But it looks good at the show, with all the parking lot room around you. Ford is fooling their customers again. I will never buy a ford.

Really fiat driver. The reason this is done is for dumb asses like you. Every manufacture has to do this do to the stupidity of the average driver. I know of many people in my area that have switched to ford because of quality. Two years ago a company next to me bough a Chevy, a ram and a ford half ton. The Chevy couldn't stay out of the dealers garage long enough to get real data and the ram wasent far behind. They traded both in for two new 2015 f-150s. Every brand has issues but the ford is the better if the three

They don't add features like that to deal with stupidity, it is always to add value and sell more vehicles.

It's just steering the trailer instead of the truck. You want the trailer to go left turn the knob to the left..... Instead of turning the steering wheel to the right. The more left you want to go just turn the knob more.... You are just steering the trailer instead of the truck. It makes it equivalent to a steerable trailer when backing.

You want to straighten the trailer just release the knob and the truck will make the corrections to straighten the load out.

You want to back straight just don't touch anything.... No corrections needed.

Will make an easy task of backing a trailer even easier.

I do like electronic gizmos and bling, as long as it's reliable.

This will help, as the article states the few who do tow, remembering most who buy pickups now don't load and tow.

So, if Frod is using load and tow as it's marketing mantra in lieu of FE, because of the 15.4mpg 2.7 EcoSuck in the aluminium F-150s, how can Ford now state that not many tow?

I thought full size pickups were all about load and tow, just ask the Frod fan boi's.

Now you may be able to understand the improvement in Ram numbers over the past couple of years.

People want comfort, refinement and the ability to tow a small trailer, go to Home Depot, take the wife/husband out to dinner and take the kids to soccer.

That is what the American pickup is all about. It's about perception.

Load and tow from Ford? What happened to the great FE advantage with the use of aluminium?

Here some reasons why Ford went to the tow and load marketing spin.

Every comment will have a link/s;

"Despite having “eco” in its name, the Ford F-150’s newest engine, the 2.7-liter EcoBoost V-6, did not woo Wards Auto in its yearly 10 Best Engines test simply because of fuel economy. Wards’ independent testing showed the turbocharged V-6 only averaged between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 253-mile test loop in a 4WD supercab truck. What’s worse, checking the fuel economy manually by filling up the tank and dividing miles by gallons revealed a dismal 15.6-mpg average."

http://www.topspeed.com/trucks/truck-news/ford-27-ecoboost-falls-short-of-engine-award-due-to-poor-fuel-economy-ar167036.html

........................................................................................

Hmmm.......more,
"With a name like EcoBoost, one might expect Ford's line of turbocharged engines to be somewhat, um, economical. In other words, replacing displacement with a turbocharger is supposed to deliver better fuel economy. Based on the experience time and time again of multiple Autoblog editors, your author included, this is simply not the case.

Now, Ward's is calling out the cruddy efficiency numbers of Ford's EcoBoost line of engines. The column dresses down not just the new 2.7-liter V6 of the 2015 F-150, but also the 2.3-liter of the Mustang, the 1.5-liter from the Fusion and the 3.2-liter PowerStroke diesel found in the Transit, while also explaining why just one Ford engine was named to Ward's 10 Best Engines list."

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/01/07/ford-ecoboost-poor-fuel-mileage-complaints-wards/

........................................................................................

Yep, tow and load from the aluminium F-150, Ford realised the FE was a pipe dream. How many who buy a SUV/Car alternative really care about tow and load.

"2015 Ford F-150 claims segment's best payload, towing ratings

While we are set to drive the new, 2015 Ford F-150 in the coming days, there's a big piece of news on the latest-generation of the Blue Oval's bread-and-butter pickup coming out of Dearborn, and it focuses on the truck's hauling and towing abilities."

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/09/29/2015-ford-f150-best-payload-towing-rating/

........................................................................................

Ford has taken a hit overall in sales this year. I do know some will state that Ford's profits are good. But, can the numbers be fiddled with? We'll find out next year I suppose.

It seems the EcoBoost engines are quite good ............... except Ford is expecting way to much from them. They just aren't up to the task.

The EcoSucks are to small for the job that Frod demands from them. Not just in the pickups, but also with the 3.2 diesel fitted to the Transits.

The 2.7 EcoSuck would probably be best suited to a vehicle like the global Ranger. The 2.3 EcoSuck that is in the Mustang maybe shouldn't be in a vehicle larger than a Focus.

Where does this leave Ford with the current engines on offer??

I did, years ago find a link containing a working document and study done by a university for Ford regarding which direction Ford should head in.

It covered NA, turbo gas and turbo diesel engines. The best overall outcome was the use of turbo diesel. But the costs involved in using diesel made it unattractive as the entry price or initial purchase price of a vehicle.

So, the turbo gas engine was chosen due to the cheaper costs.

I do believe for a gasoline engine NA is the answer, until a hybrid compression ignition engine that runs on gasoline is viable. This would be the best of both worlds.

Fords current position, not just in the US, but also globally is due to a decade of not the best decisions, especially with the bread and butter pickups in the US.

The premature move to aluminium will prove to be costly in the mid to longer term for Ford, not just due to the loss of potential sales due to the added cost to the consumer, but also the added competition from vehicles like the Colorado/Canyon, Cummins Titan, new Taco.

It's a pity as I do like Ford overall, I did consider it to be the better of the US manufacturers.

Ford need to produce engines of the future and place them in vehicles they are suited to.

I would dearly love to see a 2.7 EcoBoost Ranger. I'd bet the FE would be very good. Why? Because the engine will suit the vehicle.

Ford has a long hard road in front of it to take on the new challenges and competition confronting it.

Oddly enough, I do believe if CAFE and the Chicken Tax were not in the US you would have a completely different Ford.

You would still have a steel V8 powered 1/2 ton. Why? Because of more competition to make a better, cheaper product and the unnecessary challenges would be removed.

@Big AL

Al from OZ would "love to see a 2.7 EcoBoost Ranger. I'd bet the FE would be very good. Why? Because the engine will suit the vehicle..."

Big Al, the price of fuel has fallen with a thud during the last 2 years. FE is only determining a small number of truck buying decisions today. The buyer wants value and comfort. FE is well down the list.

This is not my opinion, it is based on the trucks that dealers are selling. They trucks dealers sell are based on what their customers are buying. It's a system that works very well.

Where you live (in your mind) the government should make all these decisions and give people choices based upon what some clerk in the department of (fill in blank here) thinks everyone should have.

This is not my opinion, it's based on reading your comments during the last three years.

People lining up for the the new Tacoma. All backordered on waiting lists. Dealers can't get them on the lot. Factory production can't keep up with demand. That is what Ford was dreaming of with the new 1/2 ton. I didn't happen.

Its a neat idea but not for everyone. Glad Ford has come up with it because once you try it you might just like it and wonder why someone hasn't done this before. But like they say, gm and ram will have it before too long or something similar and then it will be the best thing since sliced bread.

If you can back a loaded hay wagon (with steerable front wheels) up a barn bridge and into the barn with an old tractor without power steering, you don't need electronic gizmos. Some time back I asked here if Ford's system would work with a goose neck trailer. Anyone know? Does Ford just assume if you pull a big trailer you know what your doing?

Wow, Big Al must have no life over there in Australia. He must be very poor to solely concentrate on fuel economy. Someday he will learn that not every North American buys trucks solely on fuel economy so his rants to us are useless and pointless. He thinks he understands the Noth American truck buyer, but the sales figure numbers proves him wrong time and time again.

Btw Big Al, where are you on that apology? Will I get it before the year's end?

I find it rather odd that if Ford comes out with something like this it gets bashed. Just like having the 360 view on the F150 and Superduties. Ram added a bed camera and you have people praising it like it is some sort of break through in technology. I guarantee that if everyone posting here had their favorite brand at the top of the page it would be the greatest thing. But if it is not, it is pure junk. The funny thing is, is people here seems to really believe that everyone is being forced to pay for stuff they don't want. This is what makes it quite obvious that the majority of posters here have no truck or nothing even remotely new. If you did, you would know that all this stuff is part of upgrades that you pay for. So if you don't want it, guess what, you do not have to buy it. It may be part of some upgraded trim package but hey, you are buying an upgraded trim package. Some people may find this useful and quite frankly no body here even knows how it works. NO One. I have not even messed with it yet. But I have plenty of friends in the dealership world where I will be. During the summer I tow a trailer almost everyday. So I am quite capable of towing and backing in a very tight space. Shorter trailers are more of a challenge than larger ones so this may be useful to some people and some it may not. It is great to see car companies trying new things and expanding technology. If they do not push the limits how will anyone know what works and does not. At least Ford is pushing the limits on technology and it does seem to be widely accepted. It is proven by both GM and Ram following. A great example is Ford coming out with Sync. Sure it was trouble prone but it surely was widely accepted. Guess what, GM and Ram followed with similar technologies. And I am not talking about just a blue tooth connection for a phone, Sync did a lot more than just connect a phone in its early years. But hey, guess what, even to this day if you do not want to have it, in many trim levels you do not have to buy it.

With every new wonderbutton the skills of learning to do something and getting good at it diminishes. In a decade or so they'll be no need for driving. Get in and tell the computer where you want to go. Not for me cause I love to drive. After 28 years of truck driving there's still a feeling of satisfaction when I can put this trailer where it needs to be

Wow, Big Al must have no life over there in Australia. He must be very poor to solely concentrate on fuel economy. Someday he will learn that not every North American buys trucks solely on fuel economy so his rants to us are useless and pointless. He thinks he understands the Noth American truck buyer, but the sales figure numbers proves him wrong time and time again.

Btw Big Al, where are you on that apology? Will I get it before the year's end?

Posted by: Cummins | Nov 26, 2015 9:33:06 AM

I personally do not know anyone that buys a truck for FE. They buy it because they need to haul or tow stuff. And they want a truck that is capable and safe doing so. If the market was purely driven by FE in the truck world it would be very apparent that the mainstream engine choices would be the base engines in the trucks that get the best MPGs. When in fact they are hard to find those engines on most lots. So people seem to be more biased towards having more capability over FE.

I have yet to drive any of the Ram trucks with the 3.6L or GM 4.3L but I have driven an F150 with the 3.7L and quite frankly it has plenty of power and performance. Towing is minimal but FE is pretty darn good. But yet people still choose the 5.0L and the 3.5 EB engine. Now they are going with the new option of the 2.7L. I would like to see actual numbers on each engine option but I guess we will just have to rely on Fat Alberts fake numbers for now.

With every new wonderbutton the skills of learning to do something and getting good at it diminishes. In a decade or so they'll be no need for driving. Get in and tell the computer where you want to go. Not for me cause I love to drive. After 28 years of truck driving there's still a feeling of satisfaction when I can put this trailer where it needs to be

Posted by: roadram | Nov 26, 2015 9:58:23 AM

Quite frankly having a computer do the driving for some people is probably a very good thing. If you are a truck driver odds are you have seen some very stupid people on the road. Even to this day people are so confused about round abouts. They have no clue on how to use them. For 3 weeks now I have seen morons stop in the middle of the round a bout to let people in. One person did this for me and it made me mad. Do not hold up traffic to let someone in, keep going and I will fit in when there is room. I also had someone slam on their brakes on the express way to let someone on the highway. It is the merging persons responsibility to find a spot to enter. It makes it hard because I choose a spot and if some moron slows or speeds up it causes you to have to recalculate your entry point. Not fun when I'm in the motorhome trying to enter the hwy at all.

@Dan
It's not for me. I wouldn't want it for free. It would take just extra room at the dashboard. I am sure, that many customers will buy it ,thinking, that even his wife will park the travel trailer in the tight campground spot . It's not going to happen, when you don't position your truck with trailer moving forward properly before you back up.
Your front end will end up in the woods or trailer in the trees. This is not for tight spots, but huge parking lot for demonstration , like ford did. I can't wait to see this campground show and swearing ford owner. LOL.

for you fuel conscious folks check out the link and see fuel vs truck http://powerstrokearmy.com/forums/showthread.php?t=17133

papajim,
Re-read my comment. You will see what I'm discussing....... It has little to do with the price of fuel.

If that were the case then there would be a much larger share of V8s sold.........doh!

Hint..........papajim. I'm discussing the use of the EcoBoost engine. Not only in Ford, but many manufacturers are turning to turbo gas as well.

You tend to be very narrow when making an assessment. Just because you see a white pickup doesn't mean all pickups are white.

I really think, instead of making people more stupid with these machines, make a towing endorsement a requirement to be able to tow. Having better skill and knowledge is safer and safer for the rest of us. Too many idiots just hooking up and towing with no idea of how to tow safely.

Lmao you are right about road idiots. Nearly everyone wants to be in front and they'll endanger themselves, their passengers and everybody around them to get there. Where I park my truck the town took out 2 red lights and built 3 roundabouts. Made it harder getting out of the truckstop cause dumbasses don't know how to use em.

Can you say MT Truck Of The Year, oh that's right the Ford F150 did not win. The Chevy Colorado won again for the second year in a row.

LAMO, aka DenverMike,
What's is even more disappointing is you responded to it.

What's even more disappointing is your feeble attempt at a troule, expecting an apology?????? Hmmm......

This is not an apology. As you guys have always known I do think the aluminium wunder trux from Frod are only competitive.

I have shown why Ford is not number one and will stay and possibly slip further when the aluminium SuperDuty arrives.

It will take more than electronic gizmos to make these aluminium trucks more palatable to a larger audience.

The fundamental issue is the trucks themselves, not the bling available to them, or for that matter their load and tow.

The aluminium Ford pickups needed to show quite an appreciable improvement in FE, been more refined in quality for the car/SUV set.

It's not that Ford has produced a bad pickup, but the vehicle that once laid Ford's golden eggs now lays silver eggs.

One only needs to look at the proportion of SuperDutys now sold in the F Series lineup .......... and they are old school steel pickups.

Ford has lost it's way, and I blame management.

https://youtu.be/uCXzSHEekJ0

Excellent video of the new 2015 F150 Platinum

@greg, was Ford in that Motor Trend award deal??

LMAO- I do agree that there are many that should not have a driver's licence. Statistically that is around 35%.

I do not know of a single pickup buyer who listed MPG as their first metric or even top 3 for making a purchase decision.

I have driven a Ram 1500 with the Pentastar V6 in a short box 4x4 crew. I was impressed with its power for its size but the truck was empty when I drove it. It had little in the way of compression braking. Rode nice too.
I was not impressed with an intermittent violent downshift from 2nd to 1st at stop lights. I was not impressed with a few rattles coming from the back box area of the truck.

The first thing I look at now are JD Power, Consumer Reports along with as many other 3rd party research groups for durability.

Greg, Silverado and Sierra didn't win either and they were both up for th the award. Silverado got beat by the Colorado! That's pretty bad. At least the F-150 has a defense as it wasn't eligible this year.

WHERE'S THE GAS MILEAGE?
WHERE'S THE GAS MILEAGE?
I thought the F-150's best feature was its great gas mileage?
Did Ford forget about that?
Oh! Gas prices are coming down so nobody worries about gas mileage anymore.
So gas prices are going to stay low forever?
The Ram with the 5.7 HEMI gets "BETTER" MPG than the F-150 with the 2.7 EB
The HEMI is MORE than TWICE the size and it gets better MPG?

That ain't Lou.

I agree with Big Al.

I agree with Lou_DC.

You loyal brand owners who bag on other guys simply because they prefer another brand crack me up.
Do you really believe a brand has any loyalty towards you?
Any? At all? Really?
If you do, you're delusional and really need to take a breath and look around.

Lou BC,
If you want a truck and not a car, then expect a few rattles, expect a stiffer ride.

The Ram you drove is a car/SUV alternative vehicle. So, if you buy a Raptor do you expect it to carry 3 000lbs in the bed?

If you want a car/SUV alternative without those trucklike qualities don't expect to use a car replacement and expect it to be a truck.

Big Al - I'd buy a Raptor is they weren't close to $ 80K Canadian and could carry around 1500 lbs.

Lou BC,
If you want a truck and not a car, then expect a few rattles, expect a stiffer ride.

The Ram you drove is a car/SUV alternative vehicle. So, if you buy a Raptor do you expect it to carry 3 000lbs in the bed?

If you want a car/SUV alternative without those trucklike qualities don't expect to use a car replacement and expect it to be a truck.

Posted by: Big Al from Oz | Nov 27, 2015 1:24:42 PM

Hmmmm, stiffer ride than a car yes but rattles not so much. My sister has an 05 F350 with a 6.0L and 275K miles on it. Still quiet in side. One of my work F350's, one I drive most of the time is also rattle free. Both trucks are 4x4s. Obviously our newer 2013-2015s are rattle free. When I worked for a dealer the majority of older higher mileage Superduties were rattle free. But as a disclaimer the ones that were taken care of. Some people really destroy their vehicles where they are just beat up inside.

Of course they are all Frauds.

Al, your ignorance continues to be your dominate feature. please grow up and try and find some friends. Maybe one day you will go outside and step away from the internet all day.