By on September 24, 2015

17FordF450Platinum_3059_HR

Ford on Thursday rolled out its newest Super Duty truck — 350 pounds lighter than the outgoing model — complete with aluminum-alloy body, high-strength steel frame and new 6-speed transmission for its V-8 engine.

According to Ford, the truck’s frame is up to 24 times stiffer than the outgoing frame, and the company reportedly used high-strength, military-grade aluminum alloys — which are separate from civilian grade because they use more of it before 9 a.m. than we’ll use all day. Or something.

The Super Duty truck can be fitted with either a 6.7-liter V-8 turbocharged diesel, a 6.8-liter V-10 gasoline or 6.2-liter V-8 gasoline engine, with the latter being mated to a new TorqShift-G six-speed transmission. 

17FordF450Platinum_3152_HR

The Super Duty will reportedly come with up to seven cameras for better visibility around the truck, including a cargo-light mounted camera for easier gooseneck trailer hitch coupling; a combination, bird’s eye camera for nearby objects; and an available trailer camera from the factory to improve visibility when towing.

New driver assist technologies including blind-spot monitoring and steering assist will be available on the new truck. According to Ford, steering assist will help owners more easily navigate slow-speed maneuvers and will limit the truck’s sensitivity at high speeds.

17FordF450Platinum_2413_HR

Ford says that all three cab configurations — SuperCab, Regular Cab and CrewCab — would be longer than the previous generation, although exact dimensions weren’t specified. Five trims — XL, XLT, Lariat, King Ranch and Platinum — will be available in the new Super Duty.

17FordF450Platinum_3161_HR

Ford said the 2017 Super Duty models would go on sale next year, but didn’t specify pricing.

We will have a full review of the previous Super Duty next week.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

137 Comments on “Ford Unveils New Aluminum 2017 Super Duty Pickup...”


  • avatar
    highdesertcat

    Highly recommend the V10. Had one in a 1999 F250, and loved it.

    No replacement for displacement.

    Would consider giving up my Tundra 5.7 for one of these, if I actually needed it.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      So the V10 is coming back for sure now? That’s just fine. The 6.2 is a more livable engine–better MPG if you’re not towing 90% of the time–but nothing beats the V10 for towing with a gasser.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        There will be a V10. I’m sure a big fleet customer demanded it (U-Haul?).

        • 0 avatar
          highdesertcat

          Probably that’s because not everyone is into a Diesel or TurboDiesel.

          But from my personal experience with my 1999 V10, talk about ease-of-towing! Set on cruise, and forget. No drama. Just low-rumbling thunder and effortless cruising, over hill and dale.

          Gas mileage sucked, for sure, but maybe they’ll incorporate variable-valve timing and cylinder-deactivation in this new crop of V10s.

          BTW, the V10 is Chassis version is/was/may continue to be widely used in the Motor Home industry, like Monaco’s Monarch, Winnebago, et al.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            I love the V10. I haven’t driven one in awhile. Maybe now is a good time.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            I’m guessing here, but a 4dr F250 V10, LongBed 2wd, with a middle’n trim, not top, not bottom end, should retail for upwards of $70K.

            And that puts it right there, costing more than our Sequoia which stickered for $67K.

            Add another $5K if you need 4×4 and another $5K on top of that for the Dually version.

            Yet I have no doubt that Ford will sell every single one of the V10s they make.

            That kind of expense is hard to take though, if you don’t have a real use and/or real need for it.

            Still, instead of a 2016 Tundra 5.7, I feel some tugging at my heart strings for a 2017 Ford F250 V10 4-door 4×4 shortbed.

            And then they can bury me in it when I kick the bucket.

          • 0 avatar

            @ highdesertcat $70k? Not a chance. A 2016 XLT F350 DRW 4×2 is only $44k starting. A 4×4 F450 Lariat MSRP is $65k. They don’t (and never would) make a DRW F250 as they cap out for DOT purposes at 10k. The V10 if it made a light duty pick up return would not have that much of a markup from the 6.2.

          • 0 avatar
            highdesertcat

            Frantz, does that mean that there is hope for me or will my 2016 have to be a Tundra 5.7L 4-dr 4×4?

          • 0 avatar

            Of course there is hope! And if hope can get you into elected office, it darn well better be able to get you a nice truck. My guess is Ford will do what they did with the F150 and keep XL and XLT about the same and do a few grand bump on the fancy trucks.

          • 0 avatar
            DevilsRotary86

            Can confirm. Not the towing part, but my dad has a Ford 6.8L V10 in his E-450 based motor home, and it’s a sweet engine. There is something to be said for having the high-revving/high power nature of a gasoline engine. And yes, I know the latest 6.7L Ford diesel engines get more horsepower than the V10, but I stand by what I said. I love my engines to be able to “wind up”.

        • 0 avatar
          Lou_BC

          I can’t see the V10 being offered in anything other than chassis cab trucks. It has been an option there for a while.

    • 0 avatar
      redmondjp

      All of you V10 lovers should try driving a 1988+ fuel-injected 460. It has diesel-like torque so no need to wind it up, as it should be in a truck.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        I had one for a long time. It was our company “towing truck” for a decade. ’96 F350

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          The fuel injected 460s came with a restrictor plate to sells more diesels, possibly. My ’97 pulled like you wouldn’t believe, minus the restrictor. Miss that truck.

          It would do 0-60 in 10 seconds or something crazy, loaded or unloaded. No turbo lag to wait for, just instant off-idle power.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The restrictor plate was gone by the time we bought it. It was a better engine than the 7.3L. There. I said it. The FI 7.5 gas V8 was better than the legendary 7.3L Powerstroke.

    • 0 avatar
      raph

      Damn, I thought that old MOD V10 had been consigned to the trash bin! If only they would have stuck a few in the Mustang it would have been glorious.

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        The V10 has been alive and well in commercial F-450 to 750s. It’s been an excellent alternative to investing in a diesel. So thankfully smaller Super duty buyers now get to enjoy it too.

        • 0 avatar
          Drzhivago138

          Is there any talk of it actually coming back to the pickups, though? Everything we’ve heard so far says it’ll continue just in the 450s and up.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            I only see info about the V10 in the CC. Ford hasn’t really said much about engines except that they are carrying over. They have basically a year to slow burn the power numbers and specs out there.

            From the Ford press release:

            “The second-generation Ford-designed, Ford-built 6.7-liter Power Stroke® V8 diesel engine is available for pickup trucks and chassis cabs providing the highest combination of horsepower and torque ever.

            The 6.2-liter V8 gasoline engine comes equipped with the new TorqShift-G transmission for the F-250 pickup – allowing for improved capability.

            The Super Duty chassis cab lineup offers a choice of 6.7-liter Power Stroke V8 diesel, 6.8-liter V10 gasoline or 6.2-liter V8 gasoline engines.”

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            I just understood it to be true from this article. It made too much sense to not be true, but the diesel option seems too expensive even it was *free*.

    • 0 avatar
      daericks

      I recently put a winning bid on a 2008 F250 Superduty with the V10. It has the towing package. The engine is a beast. Driving along on the highway I looked down and saw I was doing 90mph. Glad to see all the positive comments on the engine. The truck had been assigned to one of the Fire Chiefs in the city. Near as I can tell it was only used to haul donuts and coffee from the roll out bed.. It even has the full vinyl interior with the rubber floor mat. I just hope my 2009 Town Car doesn’t get jealous.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    The fender vent looks like the mounting point for where a wall sconce used to be.

    I liked previous Super Duties, but not really this one. So ugly!

    • 0 avatar
      DeadWeight

      HUGE complaints about wavy body panels and poor fit/finish with new F Series on many forums –

      Just one of many threads:

      http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3862250/Re:_2015_F150_body_tooling_qua

  • avatar
    bumpy ii

    Bye bye vertical door pulls. That will mess some people up at first.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      Yeah. It’s the same cab as the F150 now.

      • 0 avatar
        Drzhivago138

        So if you wanna know how big the cabs will be, just look at a new F-150. That’ll be pretty much the same inside.

        • 0 avatar
          bball40dtw

          I wouldn’t think that anyone would have an issue. The current cabs on the F150 are nice places to be. I’m glad you can get the 180 degree SuperCab doors on the Super Duty now.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            I mentioned this on “the other car website,” but I believe the move to rear-opening doors on extended cabs rather than the more practical clamshell doors had just as much to do with “following the leader” as it did with safety standards.

          • 0 avatar
            CoreyDL

            I hate those clamshell doors! Plenty of experience with them on my grandpa’s 02 Sierra.

            Always end up with feelings of LET ME OUT OF HERE.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            The rear opening doors on extended cabs don’t do any better in crash tests than the clamshell doors on the F-series. It probably had to do with some focus group test.

            It may also have something to do with cost.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            Hah! I knew it. See, Dodge did it in the first place because they had no crew cab to compete with Ford in 2002, but they wanted to trick people into thinking they did. Then Toyota did it in ’07 because they were still in the “hey, let’s just do what everyone else is doing” stage. I have no idea why GM switched.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Ford customers have told Ford not to get ride of the SuperCab. It’s a differentiator from the rest of the market now.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            We’ll have to see what Nissan decides to do with the non-XD (normal half-ton) Titan.

          • 0 avatar
            DenverMike

            Clamshell doors are meant for the use, benefit of the driver/owner, not the poor saps, kids that have to ride back there. I’ve yet to hear any of my passengers or dogs complain. They’re perfect for loading/offloading/strapping-in everything and everyone not going in the bed.

            Plus the benefit of a spot to change into different clothes/gear at the trailhead or parking garage/lot. I’ll pull over on the side of the road to relieve myself and it looks like I’m just looking for something on the passenger side or attending to a kid.

          • 0 avatar

            The front hinged doors are better when the kids get older. Single guy or little kids need to be strapped in I would prefer the clamshell. Now that my 4yr old and 9yr old can get in and out by themselves the regular doors on my Father Inlaws Tundra really do work better.

  • avatar
    dal20402

    So they went from

    [=]

    on the last truck, to

    [= =]

    on this truck.

    It’s still the first and only thing I see when I look at the truck from the front.

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    I have decided that gold cream metallic would look good on a new MKC.

  • avatar
    honda_lawn_art

    It’s ok, they took most of the steel out of the little Tonka trucks too.

  • avatar
    Drzhivago138

    More than just having unique side stampings, the SD bed appears to be shorter than the F-150 bed (notice the bed side is slightly lower than the window). This is good because it’ll be a little bit easier to get into the bed, but also not good because it means that after 20 years, we’re still gonna need to have two different lines of toppers/camper shells/whatever you wanna call them between the F-150 and the Super Duty.

  • avatar
    Lack Thereof

    So, Ford went to a fancy all-aluminum alloy body, a thinner, lighter, high-strength steel frame, which enabled them to make it… as light as the current generation steel-bodied GM trucks.

    Bravo.

    • 0 avatar
      Big Al from Oz

      Lack Thereof,
      Ford have made the correct move. Ford needs to recoup all those billions of dollars invested in aluminium. I’m not stating that Ford’s move to aluminium was the wisest.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        Ford needed to lighten their trucks and if their PR is correct, the new boxed frame is going to be the stiffest in the industry.

        @Big Auntie Aluminum from Oz- too early to tell if Ford’s decision was wise or not.

    • 0 avatar
      Compaq Deskpro

      I’ll never understand why everyone here hates the new GM full sizers. They have the best motors, the best weight, the best real world gas mileage of trucks you want to actually buy (not baby diesels or little turbo motors), fantastic interiors, and they have those awesome stacked headlights, which Ford has just knocked off. Let’s not even get into the full size SUV’s. GM’s trucks are so so good, I don’t know what they could improve.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        I don’t think they do. I have great respect for the GM trucks. I’m not a huge fan of the interiors or styling, but that doesn’t mean I hate them. I am a fan of the Ford 3.5TT, but the LT V8 is a glorious powerplant.

        (the F-series stacked headlights have been set as the design for awhile. I wouldn’t call them a knock off.)

        We live in a time where Ford, GM, and Ram all make great trucks (probably Toyota too).

      • 0 avatar
        highdesertcat

        Compaq, not to be obtuse, but in the scheme of things, people who tow and haul, usually place Ford as #1, RAM as #2.

        The GM trucks have their fans, but I believe that people in the know will favor any Ford over any comparable GM product.

        Several of my fellow Elks Brethren have over the years migrated from GM to Ford Banks TurboDiesel to haul their travel trailers, and some even to RAM 3500 Cummins. But then the O2 sensor problems with the Cummins detracted from their following.

      • 0 avatar
        Drzhivago138

        All three are great, with their advantages and disadvantages. I just prefer Fords because that’s what I’m most familiar with.

      • 0 avatar
        Lou_BC

        Compaq Deskpro – the GMT900’s were crap. My brother has had multiple HD’s of that era. Solid drivetrains but the truck looked like hell real quick, door seals sucked and interiors were not up to par of Ram or Ford.
        The new GMTK2XX 1/2 ton pickups took a while for the marketplace to accept them. They were sluggish out the gates and eventually GM (like everyone else) started piling up rebates. Some felt the Chevy was too retro and others felt the Sierra was too much like the previous one.

        If I were to get a diesel HD it most likely would be a GM product. If I wanted a gasser I’d lean towards a Ford. The 6.2 has more balls than the 6.0.

  • avatar
    Big Al from Oz

    I do think this is uglier than the aluminium F-150, even though it’s based on it. That grille looks like a vent on some cheap Chinese airconditioning unit. It might even be made in China.

    I do foresee the aluminium SuperDutys having a negative impact on Ford’s F Series popularity. Ford sold around 250 000 HDs in the last 12 months or around 21 000 per month.

    GM has improved a little under 20% in total against Ford F Series over the past year. The Ford SuperDutys improvement has been in line with the improved GM numbers. This shows how poorly the aluminium F-150 is performing in sales.

    I wonder if this wonder truck will have a similar impact on the F Series as the aluminium F-150 had.

    The move to aluminium might just have made Ford the number two pickup supplier in the US.

    Maybe the high tensile steel Ranger could give Ford a little bit of a boost.

    Ford will have challenges like the V8 Cummins Titan. Any sales loss to any Ford pickup at the moment will hurt Ford.

    But, Ford decided to move to aluminium. Some think this move is great. But the numbers are showing otherwise.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      Well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        Must…Not…Respond…To…Al

      • 0 avatar
        Big Al from Oz

        Drzhivago138,
        We’ll see.

        I have taken this line since the announcement of the aluminium F trucks.

        There is not much wrong with an aluminium pickup. The problem is it is an expensive vehicle to develop, manufacture and repair. I have even went to a body shop family friend and he showed me all of the $50 000 dollars of Ford cordless riveting and repair gear he had to buy to repair aluminium F-150s.

        He stated the costs, plus time for training alone makes any repair to the F-150 a lot more expensive, prior to performing the repair. So Ford are even spinning the potential repair costs. That came from a body shop owner/operator.

        My opinion is based on data and not Ford spin and data.

        Look at the numbers closely. I’m serious. SuperDutys have kept pace with GM’s improvement. Ford has slipped. So where are those lost numbers coming from? It ain’t that hard.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          @BAFO – Your “opinion” is based on, once again, ignoring key elements that (shockingly!) proves you wrong. Like for instance, Ford stating 90,000 lost F-150 sales for the year, from stopping production to retool/train/etc.

          Those lost F-150 sales were forced into the “Fleet” category, as Ford has been focusing on turning out premium F-150s *1st* , and letting GM and Ram feast on Fleet ‘scraps’. This is where GM and Ram pickups have been increasing sales of their fullsize pickups… Fleet Sales!

          And with a large increase of Super Duty sales, for obvious reasons. Those F-150 (late adopting) consumers hanging back and waiting for maximum rebates at the end of the year, are wise to do so.

          Now we’ve told you this on several occasions, so are you a troll or just plain stup!d??

          But no way does it take $50,000 to work/rivet/weld aluminum. Body shops should already have this capability. And if not, spread the added costs over several years. Techs buy/provide their own tools anyway.

          • 0 avatar
            rocketrodeo

            I haven’t even seen a fleet-grade P552 F-150. Heck, I’ve rarely seen a supercab. Just about all of them have been highly optioned supercrews. My understanding is that KCAP didn’t come on line until March, and only Kansas City does the 8 foot beds and the single cabs. That’s the way it was for the P415 launch when I worked in the Dearborn Truck Plant, following closure of the Ontario and Norfolk truck plants.

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      I do foresee multiple posts by Big Auntie Aluminum from Oz talking about aluminium SuperDuty’s and F150’s having a negative impact on Ford’s F Series popularity.

    • 0 avatar

      There has not been a true market test of the sales of any of Fords latest offerings. Ford has not kept up with demand for the new F150 and SuperDuties have been greatly delayed as well. There simply hasn’t been enough Ford trucks this year to really use sales figures as a way to gauge market response.

  • avatar
    Carlson Fan

    Well at least Ford has an HD PU now with a body that doesn’t look like it’s 15 years old. Honestly I’ll never figure out how they continued to own the HD market with that dinosaur they’ve been pushing for what seems like forever. It actually looks halfway decent now.

    • 0 avatar
      bball40dtw

      Because they were using SuperDuty profits to get through the tough times. The old a$$ truck was selling over 200K units a year and paying for The Way Forward and One Ford.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      More like it actually *was* 15 years old–or rather, 17 years old with just enough updates and a slick new coat of paint to make it look new. (And 17 years is forever in the automotive world.) But they owned the HD market because the HD market is less dependent on new tech; dinosaurs are perfectly fine as long as they’re cheaper than anyone else’s.

      • 0 avatar
        bball40dtw

        Also because 6.2 and 6.8 last forever and get the same MPG no matter what.

        • 0 avatar
          Drzhivago138

          Apparently, the 6.2 gets better MPG unloaded. Our 6.8 gets somewhere around 8.

          • 0 avatar
            bball40dtw

            Yeah. The 6.2L gets better MPG unloaded, but it isn’t changed that much towing. The last V10 I drove got between 8 and 9 no matter what happened. Uphill, Downhill, loaded, unloaded, with a box, with a fox, towing a boat, towing a goat.

          • 0 avatar
            285exp

            I’ve got a 2001 F250 V10, and it gets 8-9mpg in town, 12-13 at interstate speeds, unloaded. Towing a loaded 2 horse trailer at 65mph it’s 8-9.

            Great engine, loads of torque at low rpm, no turbo lag, cheap to maintain. If this one ever dies I’d get another.

      • 0 avatar
        Carlson Fan

        “But they owned the HD market because the HD market is less dependent on new tech; dinosaurs are perfectly fine as long as they’re cheaper than anyone else’s.”

        Yep I’m sure I could have picked-up a similar Ford HD for much less than my GMC in April 2004. But I could have never been happy with the Ford. The body, interior, chassis and powertrain on the GMC IMO was light years better than the Fords. I absolutely detested the way the HD Fords drove & rode. Awful, awful, awful compared to the GMC. Maybe they’ve gotten better after 12 years.

  • avatar
    PrincipalDan

    Good god, can you imagine what a beast the old Excursion would be if it had lived to see this sheet metal?!?!?

  • avatar
    VoGo

    “According to Ford, the truck’s frame is up to 24 times stiffer than the outgoing frame”

    I just want to reinforce DW’s frustration with manufacturer claims of additional stiffness without any benchmarking or point of reference. If the 2017 is truly 24X stiffer than its predecessors, then I can only assume that literally millions of workers in the US are hauling and towing in F-250s that are essentially wet noodles.

    • 0 avatar
      highdesertcat

      It will be a fully-boxed frame with the 2017. Heard the Ford man say so on Bloomberg this morning.

    • 0 avatar
      turf3

      They said “up to” 24 times stiffer. 0.9 is less than 24, thus “up to”.

      Marketeer-speak, which has no technical meaning.

      It may mean that one small bracket that constantly failed on previous versions is now 24 times stiffer, and other measures of stiffness range from 75% as stiff to 25% stiffer.

      As I said, there is no technical meaning to this statement.

  • avatar
    jetcal1

    Aluminum is a wonderful material. I hope that the engineers have given this alot of thought. I can see three types of corrosion coming that while familar in the aerospace world, will be new to the Ford Tech at the dealership.
    1. Filliform
    2. Intergranular
    3. Fretting
    Not to mention the thrill unleashed by a leaking exhaust upon a nice damp chassis where a steel bolt attaches.

    I’m not against aluminum, far from it.
    It’s the readiness of the dealerships to deal with new problems related to materials decisions made by the engineers and subjected to changes made by accounting that have me wondering.

  • avatar
    CJinSD

    350 lbs in weight savings from going to some special grade of aluminum? That’s between 4.6 and 5.8% of curb weight on an F350. Is that a worthwhile benefit for the expense at purchase, insurance, and repair times?

    • 0 avatar
      Lou_BC

      CJinSD – I doubt purchase price will be much higher than standard year to year price increases. In my region the costs of insurance haven’t changed. Repairs to the body is something I have no direct information about.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      We haven’t seen the insurance industry panicking over the f-150, nor charging much more to insure one. But what ever it costs more to insure or buy, is marginal, looking at the whole picture. Except aluminum trucks will be worth substantially more when steel pickups of the same vintage are rusting.

      350 lbs is enough for one more pallet of goods on every trip, meaning thousands in added revenue a year. Not to mention decreased wear and tear on the truck and components.

      Lots of not so spectacular reasons for aluminum trucks, you’re missing. Going aluminum was an update for the longterm. Why does it have to set the world on fire instantly?

  • avatar
    Kyree S. Williams

    Where the new F-150 looks svelte and well-designed, this is just straight-up cartoonish.

    That said, it looks like Ford put a lot of clever engineering into this truck.

  • avatar
    RHD

    The grille looks awfully like a horse with blinders on it. What is that all about?

  • avatar
    NoGoYo

    Ford just keeps making their trucks uglier and uglier, I don’t get it.

  • avatar
    DenverMike

    “Fugly” is the way all trucks are going, to try to keep up with the hideous look of cars. Except recent trucks always look completely different and 1,000 times better in blacked out, monochrome base trucks. It’s as if the original sketches were right on, but then the concept got douched in chrome on top of chrome.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      Yeah, well, that’s just, like, your opinion, man.

    • 0 avatar
      matador

      I saw a new F150 XL (I assume) with the black grille. It actually looked pretty good.

      I do agree that they’re making trucks with more chrome and lights than a Luke Bryan video, but what would I know? Out here, work trucks are always a few years old anyways….

      • 0 avatar
        Drzhivago138

        It might’ve been a Sport package on either the XL or XLT. They’ve kinda replaced the old STX and FX2/4 packages.

        Semi-related: I just went to Ford.com to see which F-150s had black grilles, and there’s now a gallery up for the new SDs that includes a SuperCab short bed, a regular cab XL 4×2, and several chassis cabs. Very neat.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          The STX was an XL, but with color-key bumpers and grill-surround, along with alloy wheels, V8 and the normal mono-chrome of XLs. Similar to the Ram Express. The XLT looked like a downgrade with too much chrome. It was regular cab and Super cab only, but Crew cab STXs were added towards the end of steel F-150s. Now the STX is gone.

          Too good of a bargain, and the dealer near me would order them with a variety of options to pick from, including 4X4, power windows/group, fog lights, rear slider, limo tint, tow package and limited slip.

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            The STX really did become a good bargain towards the end of its run. IMO the only thing wrong with it was that you couldn’t get it with an 8′ bed. But it was never intended to be that kind of pickup anyway.

  • avatar
    SaulTigh

    Dear Ford,

    I’m in love. I’ll take a 2WD F250 regular cab XL with a V10 please, in that lovely shade of blue.

    I’m serious Ford, I’ll sign the papers tomorrow, you just have to make it.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      Sorry, it looks like the V10 is chassis cab only.

      • 0 avatar
        NoGoYo

        I dunno why you can’t special order a chassis cab truck with a bed.

        Unless short wheelbase F450s/F550s that are commonly used for dump trucks are still too long to fit an 8 foot dually bed.

        • 0 avatar
          Drzhivago138

          That’s partially it. Chassis cab models are sized by their cab-to-axle measurements so aftermarket companies can make one-size-fits-all-brands. The cab-to-axle is kept at round numbers (60″ and 84″ for all 3 cabs and 108″ and 120″ for the regular cab), the disadvantage being that you then have 8 different wheelbases.

          More than just that, though, is also that the inside track of a chassis cab might be different from a pickup. If it’s any narrower, it’s a no-go for putting a pickup bed on.

          Also, I could be wrong, but I think maybe the flat frame rails couldn’t accept a pickup bed even if the WB and track were the same.

          Semi-related: while perusing some chassis cab brochures just now, I saw that among the “fleet exclusive” options are A/C delete and radio delete. Wow.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          They won’t sell you an F-450/550 cab/chassis with a bed, and yes there would be a 3″ bigger gap in-between. But just to buy the bare cab/chassis, you have to go through a legit upfitter

  • avatar

    I’ll let you know when my dealer principle buys the first one in Florida. Fo’ real. He has a 2015 Platinum now. I texted him these photos on the way to the sale this morning and he already wants to know when he can order one.

  • avatar
    jthorner

    A 350 lb. weight reduction in trucks of this size class hardly seems worth the extra expensive of aluminum construction.

    The styling is horrific.

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      They were already gonna share the cab with the F-150, so it would’ve actually cost more to make the same cab but in steel. Styling is subjective.

    • 0 avatar
      Carlson Fan

      Us people that live where they generously salt roads every winter will happily take the benefits of an aluminum bodied truck over a steel one. The better corrosion properties alone are worth it. The weight reduction is just icing on the cake. Heck, If I was looking to buy a new GMC & knew an aluminum bodied truck was coming I’d probably hold off on that purchase until it was available.

  • avatar
    Vulpine

    The first thing that came to my mind when I saw that image was the 1982 Ford Futura. That is now the ugliest pickup truck in the WORLD!

    • 0 avatar
      Drzhivago138

      When I look at all those holes in the Platinum grille, I immediately think “1965 F-Series.” Hey, maybe it’s a 50th anniversary edition!

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      No matter the truck, half will hate the looks, half will like it. Ok none will LOVE it, but good thing it’s a truck, where looks take a minor role. Although the 82′ Futura was the most handsome midsize car until then.

      • 0 avatar
        CJinSD

        The only people that hated the looks of the ’94 Dodge pickup were brand loyalists of Ford and GM that were green with envy.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          Seriously, the ’94 Dodge doesn’t count. That can’t happen again. And it was contrasted by a severely outdated Dodge from the early ’70s.

          • 0 avatar
            matador

            I’ll get shot for saying this, but the Dodges of the 1980s seemed pretty good to me. The revised character lines made them look a little like the GM trucks of the era, and the interior was really well laid out.

            By 1993, it was an obsolete design. But, my 1986 Dodge doesn’t seem any worse than the other 1986 options.

            The 1994 was really a game changer, though. I think the new RAM trucks (Except for the Rebel) look pretty good, though….

          • 0 avatar
            Drzhivago138

            The revised ’81s (which were the first to be called Rams, IIRC) were a much-needed aesthetic improvement over the vintage-1972 Fuselage trucks. But the bullnose Fords will always be my favorite “old” truck.

      • 0 avatar
        turf3

        Are you seriously saying the 1982 Ford Futura was better looking than:

        1964 Chevelle
        1966 Chevelle
        1970 Chevelle
        1965 GTO
        1969 Ford Galaxie
        1969 Barracuda
        1975 Dodge Dart
        1970 AMC javelin

        ?????

        Whatchu been smokin’?

      • 0 avatar
        Vulpine

        If you say so, DM. But personally I think the Mustang looked better and the Firebird better yet. Trucks? The Nissan over all others in ’82 but I ended up buying a Mitsubishi in ’83.

        • 0 avatar
          DenverMike

          Of the ”80 to ’82 ‘anything’ (mainstream/everyday) the Mustang, Camaro had to the best looking out there. At least to my “80’s child” eyes. I still think so. But I was talking midsize sedans. The Fox platform was ahead of everyone else, looks-wise, first showing up for the ’78 MY.

  • avatar

    I love the 94 Dodge (I’m biased) I do think Fords design has gone down hill I really liked the previous f-150 and the original Super Duties (1998) but the new ones seem pretty ugly. Like their trying to out ugly the Tundra. I know it’s subjective but hey almost everything in the comment section of a blog is subjective.

    • 0 avatar
      DenverMike

      The ’94+ Cummins equipped Dodge trucks may never die, the way it’s looking. Same with the previous gen w/Cummins, but I’ve got a ’98 gasoline Dodge extra cab I’m hording (bad trans) and now I know why. I has a prefect rust-free body and it’s parts will be worth something in no time.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • mcs: “A wiser use of battery electric at the current time than general population vehicles needing to operate...
  • brn: Ol Shel, Please inject your political opinion into every topic. Thank you.
  • Old_WRX: Judging by all the the todo in the “news” lately the next CV shutdown will be coming to a state...
  • Ol Shel: Companies shouldn’t be allowed to tell the public that they’re taking steps that please most...
  • Inside Looking Out: Porsche is lost in darkness. Suddenly there is no future. No light in the end of tunnel.

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Who We Are

  • Matthew Guy
  • Timothy Cain
  • Adam Tonge
  • Bozi Tatarevic
  • Chris Tonn
  • Corey Lewis
  • Mark Baruth
  • Ronnie Schreiber