Motor Trend Names the 2018 Ford F-150 Truck of the Year

2018 Truck of the Year Finalists (1) copy II

As part of the unofficial opening of the 2017 Los Angeles Auto Show, Motor Trend, which is headquartered in Los Angeles, announced the winners of the its annual car, truck and SUV awards.

Finalists in the pickup truck category were the mid-size 2018 Chevrolet Colorado ZR2, the half-ton 2018 Ford F-150 and the heavy-duty 2018 GMC Sierra 3500 Denali. Of those finalists, the updated Ford F-150 came out on top.

Motor Trend reports it had four F-150s for the judging: a Raptor SuperCrew, a 4x4 Platinum SuperCrew, a 4x4 Lariat SuperCrew and 4x2 XL SuperCab. The judges were impressed by the two new naturally aspirated, direct-injection engines; the aluminum body; increased safety technology; and the breadth of the offerings. It's worth noting the F-150 was eligible for the coveted award in 2015 when it was an all-new vehicle, but that year the all-new Chevrolet Colorado won the top honor. The F-150 was eligible for the 2018 award because its mid-cycle freshening included significant improvements.

Motor Trend named the 2018 Alfa Romeo Giulia the Car of the Year and the 2018 Honda CR-V the SUV of the Year.

On a related note, PickupTrucks.com will announce the five pickup trucks that are eligible for our Best Pickup of 2018 Award in early January, with the winner announced the evening of Jan. 16.

Motor Trend images

 

2018 Truck of the Year_preview II

 

Comments

Girls, girls, please... you're both pretty...

Ford won...

again...

deal with it...

again.

You should be used to it after 40+ years of 2nd at best and 1 bankruptcy.

Try harder if you wanna win... or even just stay in business without foreign take over or socialist gov funding.

Till then its just more of the same.

@papajim
Aside from the cosmetics and the B&O sound system, only the 3.3 and 10 spd tranny are “major” changes. It’s not unreasonable to extrapolate a similar reliability for the 2018 vs 2017. I’d consider the changes made to the 5.0 and 2.7 EB motors minor updates (primarily dual injection) The 3.5 EB has no updates for 2018.

GM fans sound like the tweeter in chief always crying like a little girl. Ford, the best never rest!

@Clint,

Agreed, they cry like a bunch of babies when we say something bad about they beloved GM Trucks. It's quite funny and entertaining to see old people lie about what truck their friends and family own.

It's really pathetic, it only comes from GM people, sheep, I tell you and since GM make tons of garbage, their are tons of them.

@grnzel1

You trust the media WAY more than I do.

@papajim
Nope- just trying to be objective. We’re both making guesses. Time will tell.....

@ froadin

Cry babies?? All I see are people basically saying MT Truck of the year doesn't matter and why Ford shouldn't have won. All they did was a face lift?

You ford fanboys come out like cockroaches when your precious F150 junk makes front pages. You drink there LIES up like alcoholics!

Facts
Duramax destroyed your shitty Super Duty in ALL PERFORMANCE CATEGORIES plus it embarrassed it on the Dyno where YOU fanboys brag all the time that Ford is king of HP and TQ...yet it clearly isn't!!!! Yet then you fanboys defend your beloved super duty by saying it has more tech!!! Who cares!! I want a truck that performs instead of looking flashy

GM makes the best smallblock V8s available that beat or compete evenly with your unreliable junk eco-bust V6s. Plus they make the best NON TURBO V6 truck engine compared to your car based v6.

Your high grade military aluminum can bodies are a huge fail to try and save weight. All the upper trim models weigh more or are within 100 lbs of all the GM trucks. What a joke!!!

Now...give us GM boys some facts about your facelifted, grille copying, ford lies best selling truck for 42 years bc of fleet sales please!!!

Remove your blue oval glasses and take another look.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Nov 29, 2017 2:12:27 PM

Put down the crack pipe and you look again. The 2018 F-150 looks NOTHING like a 99' Chevy. You're delusional dude....

Very confused after reading the Motor Trend award write-up on the new F150!
According to their editors, the 2.7 Ecoboost only trims a half second off the 0-60 and 0-70 times for the base 3.3 liter V6. Why pay the extra 900 bucks for a 10 speed/2.7 to simply get a half second?
I realize that drag-racing isn't the only reason why someone would buy a pickup, but an acceleration test surely reveals a lot about the character of the drivetrain.
Somebody at Ford needs to have a chat with the guys at MT

Posted by: papajim | Nov 29, 2017 1:13:57 PM

I agree. I have never seen the 2.7 tested so slow. Usually testing any where from 5.8-6.5 sec 0-60. Also, the Raptor usually test in the 5.5 0-60 range. Maybe their test is more accurate with the every day person and other test really squeeze out the best times by power braking, sport mode, traction control off etc.? The 3.3 Did do decent for being in a Supercab truck. I still think it should only be available in 4x2 (as tested) and regular cab 4x4 trims.

2.7EcoBoostRoost

Don't be confused.

My wife has a 3.0 turbo BMW that betters the 2.7 by 300 CCs displacement.

Hers is about equal to a normally aspirated 5.0 V8 pulling that X5 SUV around. 300 hp, 300 lbs/ft torque.

I'm not expecting a 2.7 to be a drag racer, but the slim difference in performance relative to the big difference in price is surprising.

I'm not expecting a 2.7 to be a drag racer, but the slim difference in performance relative to the big difference in price is surprising.


Posted by: papajim | Nov 29, 2017 7:56:46 PM

700lbs difference isn’t insignificant there genius.

Oh, and another thing there (un)smart guy.

WEIGHT TO POWER 15.7 lb/hp ( Supercab 3.3L ) 16.2 lb/hp ( Supercrew 2.7 EcoBoost )

Comic all the GM shills whining about the 2018 F150 eligibility ( claiming the truck isn’t “ significantly “ changed etc, yet are silent about the less updated HD Sierra 3500 that was in the TOTY comparison.

Biased fools.

2.7EcoBoostRoost
Don't be confused.
My wife has a 3.0 turbo BMW that betters the 2.7 by 300 CCs displacement.
Hers is about equal to a normally aspirated 5.0 V8 pulling that X5 SUV around. 300 hp, 300 lbs/ft torque.
I'm not expecting a 2.7 to be a drag racer, but the slim difference in performance relative to the big difference in price is surprising.

Posted by: papajim | Nov 29, 2017 7:56:46 PM

You said you were confused, but told me not to be confused? That's confusing. I am simply saying the test is not on par with any other test I've read. The 5.0 even had 3.31 gears vs 3.55 for the 3.3 and 2.7 In a Motor Trend towing test the 2.7 beats the 5.3 Chevy, I would assume it would best the 5.0 Ford as well. The torque is a very truck healthy on the dyno. over 20 seconds to 100mph? All of the numbers they posted are respectable, but not even in the same ball park as previously tested is all I'm saying. I am very impressed with the 3.3 numbers. I wouldn't buy one, but it put good numbers up.

"Facts
Duramax destroyed your shitty Super Duty in ALL PERFORMANCE CATEGORIESYour high grade military aluminum can bodies are a huge fail to try and save weight. All the upper trim models weigh more or are within 100 lbs of all the GM trucks. What a joke!!!
Now...give us GM boys some facts about your facelifted, grille copying, ford lies best selling truck for 42 years bc of fleet sales please!!!

Posted by: TNTGMC | Nov 29, 2017 6:02:30 PM"

Your "deystroyed" "facts" from the HD test:
0-60: GM 8.14 VS 8.27 Ford
0-60 w/4,200lbs payload: GM 10.55 VS 10.94 FORD
Davis Dam w/19,200lbs gooseneck: GM 10:28 @ 62MPH VS 10:34 @ 62 Mph Ford
1/4 : GM 16.05 VS 16.13 Ford
1/4 w/payload: GM 17.56 vs 17.86 Ford

Your calling a tenth of a second or a few tenths at most getting destroyed? C'mon man! The Duramax is a beast, there's no denying that, but the Power Stroke and Cummins put up very capable and respectable numbers. Yes the Dyno numbers look bad for Ford and I'm not sure what the deal is there. For comparison 5star tuning ran a dyno on a 5.3 Chevy and 2.7 EcoBoost. The results? From the article: "Let’s start with numbers, the EcoTec3 5.3 liter V8 is rated at 355 horsepower and 383 ft-lb’s of torque and the EcoBoost 2.7 liter V6 is rated at 325 horsepower and 375 ft-lb’s of torque. Looks like the 5.3 liter has it beat right? Not so fast. When we look at dyno numbers from a recent test 5-star tuning conducted the EcoBoost comes out ahead. With the GM 5.3 liter coming in at ~245 horsepower and ~265 ft-lb’s of torque and the Ford 2.7 liter coming in at ~260 horsepower and ~325 ft-lb’s of torque. "
"So to see if these numbers make sense, let’s take a look at some other tests. Motor Trend has tested both of these trucks in the sprint from 0-60 mph, both loaded and unloaded (7,000 pound trailer). The Chevy 5.3 does this in 6.9 and 19.5 seconds respectively. The Ford does this in 6.5 and 16.2 seconds. That’s .4 and 3.3 seconds faster than the Chevy, looks like that corroborates 5-star’s dyno numbers! Let’s look at something a little more real-world, 45-65 mph performance, loaded and unloaded again, Chevy: 3.6/15.5 seconds, Ford: 3.2/9.4 seconds. The Ford sets itself apart even further here."

Now that would be considered getting "deystroyed"!!!!! These are real FACTS, based of test results and not my opinion. You try this for a little credibility.

@ 2.7EcoBoostRoost

You might have missed my point. The 3.3 looks like Ford's value leader in terms of 0-60 performance and "highway passing" test that CR did.

CR's tests usually do not involve gimmicks like power-braking the motor at the start.

The driver just lifts the foot off the brake and floors the throttle. This approach favors the little 3.3 because there's no turbo lag. Just my hunch. The six speed trans might offer a small advantage in 0-60 runs too.

At 2.7L

Good facts! I agree but u are using 2 turbos to create your power. 5.3L is naturally aspirated!!! Your little engine will not last as long as a V8 while doing truck duties!! Any common sense automobile person can realize this!! It will not survive the wear and tear of pulling!!! Maybe that's why they are blowing timing chains like crazy!!!

@ 2.7L

And yes it destroyed your Super Duty because the Super Duty wasn't even at its Max paylaod...It was at the Duramax's Payload! So it would have been even more embarrassing for the Super Duty if it was loaded to what your FORD LIES says it can do!!! That's a fact!!!

Glad to see that the judges were also impressed with the "Military Grade" aluminum body. They must also be drunk on the blue oval Kool-Aid. :)

@ 2.7L

Look at the fuel economy also while pulling!! The 5.3L beats the 2.7L while pulling. Don't say FE doesn't matter because that's what Ford Lies Marketing is all about and why they went to these junk gerbil engines.
I know, my stepdad has the 3.5L and its sucks gas like crazy pulling! I have a 5500lb boat and I get 14 mpgs all day long running 70-75 down interstate to lake house! He pulls 2 Kawasaki 3 person jetskis with double trailer that weighs maybe 2500lbs and can't get 12 mpg.

Reading all these comments makes me embarrassed to own a GM product. I had no idea some were this bad.

-CT

Comic all the GM shills whining about the 2018 F150 eligibility ( claiming the truck isn’t “ significantly “ changed etc, yet are silent about the less updated HD Sierra 3500 that was in the TOTY comparison.

Biased fools.

Posted by: GMSRGREAT | Nov 30, 2017 12:07:43 AM

@2.7 ecobust: The new Duramax HD Sierra 3500 needs no defending, it's the only choice in 3500 series class.

@ papajim the 2.7 they tested did weigh 700 lbs more than the 3.3 they tested,also the 2.7 was a way better optioned truck the 3.3 price as tested was $36,285 and the 2.7 $60,475. So .6 faster to 60 I would say is not bad

Dang it Ford, you win again!!!!

Dang it Ford, you win again!!!!

Posted by: GMRSGREAT | Nov 30, 2017 11:42:21 PM

In about an hour or 2 we will see who's winning in the truck sales #'S. LOL!

the 3.3 price as tested was $36,285 and the 2.7 $60,475.
So .6 faster to 60 I would say is not bad Posted by: David | Nov 30, 2017

@David

If you don't mind, then I don't.

I just won't be spending damn near 2x for the 2.7 when the 3.3 XL comes within a hair of outperforming the $60k truck. Don't get nervous about the math!

The XL will not be selling for anywhere NEAR $36k for a stripped supercab.



The comments to this entry are closed.