Ford’s Crown Jewel, the F-150, Has a Big Problem

[John_Conrad]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2...-after-overhaul

long read, and i haven't read it all but thought i would post for all to dissect.

"Detroit automakers don’t know if they can comply with the regulations at an acceptable cost to customers and shareholders, according to people familiar with the situation."

 

[CarbonSteel]

How is this "big problem" only restricted to Ford? It would seem that all automakers have a hurdle to cross with relation to trucks and fuel economy standards in the years to come.

 

[John_Conrad]

not sure why they titled it as such, but in the article there are references to other auto makers:

"Detroit automakers don’t know if they can comply with the regulations at an acceptable cost to customers and shareholders, according to people familiar with the situation."


"GM -- which is bashing the durability of F-150 aluminum beds in new ads -- will be forced to join Ford in using more aluminum to save weight in components including engine blocks, transmission cases, fenders and doors, said Mark Stevens, a retired GM vice president for engineering and manufacturing."

 

[itguy08]

That article was devoid of most facts and relies on lots of conjecture.

What are the 2016 standards that the F150 doesn't meet? We're 1/2 way through 16 and the 16's have been on sale since, what, last September? Why are we just hearing about it?

The F150 gets similar MPG ratings to its competitors in MPG - so why just them?

AFAIK there are no "Gas Guzzler Tax" placed on ANY F150 model so they seem to meet standards just fine.

Like I said, very shoddy "journalism".

 

[John_Conrad]

there's this:

"Ford is scrambling because about 40 percent of its new aluminum-body F-150s don’t comply with the 2016 mandates, according to Duleep. The four-wheel-drive, 3.5-liter SuperCab –- a high-volume variation -- falls 1 mile per gallon short and emits 15 grams of CO2 per mile more than allowed, he said"

 

[itguy08]

So then why is that configuration for sale? It is 2016 and doesn't meet the 2016 mandates it shouldn't be sold or there will be a tax on it. Yet there is none.

So it is either [censored] journalism or the gov't is looking the other way... I vote for the first.

 

[Ethan1]

The aluminum lightweighting of the F-150 leaves lots of headroom for fuel economy issues to be fixed through software updates with little effect to performance.

 

[John_Conrad]

itguy08,

ford may be paying penalties on not meeting the mandates or they asked for a "relief", that is my guess.

 

[NavyVet88]

Originally Posted By: Ethan1
The aluminum lightweighting of the F-150 leaves lots of headroom for fuel economy issues to be fixed through software updates with little effect to performance.


+1

 

[GiveMeAVowel]

Originally Posted By: Ethan1
The aluminum lightweighting of the F-150 leaves lots of headroom for fuel economy issues to be fixed through software updates with little effect to performance.


Just don't expect the bed to hold up to heavy use.

 

[Trav]

This CAFE and CO2 boiler room scam needs to come to an end before we end up with the Cardboarda pickup powered by electric motor.

 

[OneEyeJack]

The bricks in the bed test would have better represented the real world with a proper bed liner.

I would certainly have done something like a Line-X bed liner before taking on that kind of a load.

What will GM's position be on the subject when they are forced into using aluminum?

Forcing pickups out of the market will not help people that work for a living and need a pickup for that work.

 

[loneryder]

Originally Posted By: Trav
This CAFE and CO2 boiler room scam needs to come to an end before we end up with the Cardboarda pickup powered by electric motor.


+1

 

[GiveMeAVowel]

Originally Posted By: OneEyeJack
The bricks in the bed test would have better represented the real world with a proper bed liner.

I would certainly have done something like a Line-X bed liner before taking on that kind of a load.




Except a lot of businesses don't use bed liners. Why should they, you never had problems with this kind of use before Al beds.

 

[Olas]

If we assume the journalist to be correct, and the vehicle does exceed allowed emissions, will Ford come under as much scrutiny as VW did with their diesels? Or is it ok to break the law if you don't hide it?

 

[John_Conrad]

good question olas,

according to the article:

“On fuel economy, the regulators allow you to pay a fine if you fall short. But on greenhouse gas, they don’t. You either meet the standard or they shut you down.’’

 

[nthach]

Originally Posted By: John_Conrad
itguy08,

ford may be paying penalties on not meeting the mandates or they asked for a "relief", that is my guess.

Mercedes and BMW were gladly paying the EPA fines for not meeting CAFE - but you can't pay your way out of GHG emissions - which is why they were the first with start/stop and downsizing. Ford and GM are doing the same.

 

[Garak]

Maybe they just need to relax emissions regulations a bit on work trucks, or at least give work trucks a bit of delay. By work truck, I mean trucks with carpet and radio delete, vinyl seats, and so forth, trucks that people won't be using as their version of a tall, four wheel drive Town Car.

 

[John_Conrad]

nthach
yup, olas me helped to understand that difference with his question.

these requirements seem to get tougher...

"President Barack Obama agreed to it in July 2011 when he announced a 54 percent increase in the corporate average fuel-economy requirement -- to 54.5 mpg in 2025 from 35.5 in 2016. He also mandated a cut in average greenhouse-gas emissions to 163 grams of CO2 per mile from 250."

 

[John_Conrad]

Originally Posted By: Garak
Maybe they just need to relax emissions regulations a bit on work trucks, or at least give work trucks a bit of delay. By work truck, I mean trucks with carpet and radio delete, vinyl seats, and so forth, trucks that people won't be using as their version of a tall, four wheel drive Town Car.


Garak:

here is something interesting that the original article i linked did not talk about, and is relevent to itguy's questioning...

http://www.caranddriver.com/features/how-automakers-will-meet-2016-cafe-standards


"Just as they do today, the rules will allow automakers to average their fuel economy across a number of models. A guzzler that doesn’t meet the standard can be “canceled out” by one or more vehicles that better the mpg standard. However, the government’s 2016 fuel-economy numbers of 37.8 mpg and 28.8 mpg are projections because, unlike today, when every car and truck fleet must meet the same mandated average, the future requirements will be instead based on the size of each vehicle in a manufacturer’s fleet."

on edit: above is an older article though...