By on May 31, 2019

As rival General Motors prepares to tempt a broad swath of pickup buyers with its late-arriving 3.0-liter Duramax inline-six diesel, Ford Motor Company is changing its tactics. When the company’s 3.0-liter Power Stroke turbo-diesel V6 launched for the 2018 model year, Ford saw fit to relegate its new engine to truck buyers with deeper pockets.

This has now changed. Starting right away, the company plans to offer diesel propulsion to the mainstream (read: volume) truck buyer.

Announced Thursday, the Power Stroke V6 will soon appear in pickups bearing XLT lettering — Ford’s most popular F-150 trim. Until now, the oil burner was only available on the loftier Lariat, King Ranch, and Platinum trims, pushing the out-the-door price of those models even higher.

Making 250 horsepower and 440 lb-ft of torque, the mill’s output falls behind that of the Duramax, which boasts 277 hp and 460 lb-ft. However, the Power Stroke is available to order today.

Speaking to Roadshow, Ford’s truck communications manager, Dawn Mckenzie, said, “Customers and dealers told us they wanted the diesel on XLT, so we decided to expand the offering. Now, the 3.0-liter Power Stroke diesel will be available on 75 percent of our offerings, including XLT, which is our most popular series.”

Getting into an XLT diesel is not as simple as checking a box for the engine and its associated 10-speed automatic. The buyer must select an equipment group that brings to the table things like heated front seats, remote start, 18-inch wheels, and chrome trim. Ford’s not about to offer a diesel stripper.

While the price floor for an F-150 XLT is $35,755 after destination, the diesel isn’t available in regular cab models. Just SuperCab and SuperCrew. A base XLT SuperCab 4×2 retails for $38,655 after destination. Adding the diesel and 302A package brings the price of the cheapest sparkless F-150 to $46,255 — a price just above that of a Lariat SuperCrew with a 2.7-liter Ecoboost engine.

Still pricey, just not as pricey as before.

[Image: Ford]

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

Recommended

18 Comments on “Ford’s F-150 Diesel Goes Downmarket...”


  • avatar
    dukeisduke

    When are they going to turn that on? I just tried building an XLT SuperCrew, and was offered the 2.7l EB (standard), or the 3.5l EB (add $1600) or the 5.0l Coyote (add $1000). Moving up to a Lariat, the 3.0 PSD adds $4000.

    They should offer it all the way down on the XL, and get the price down a little lower.

    • 0 avatar
      JimZ

      they do make XLs but you need a FIN (fleet buyer ID) to order them and I don’t know if there’s a minimum quantity.

      that said, I drove a couple of these some months ago, and I dunno. I get that not everyone wants to put up with a racket going on underhood, but these are just *too* quiet. from inside you’d probably never know it’s a diesel apart from the initial “lag” when stepping on the go pedal. There’s a minor bit of nattering at idle you can hear from outside, but that’s about it.

      I’m not saying it should be as raucous as a 1994 7.3 Powerstroke, but a diesel should have at least a little bit of clatter as if to say “hey, I’m workin’ up here!”

      • 0 avatar
        dukeisduke

        I went to fueleconomy.gov to look at the EPA ratings, and the 3.3l base V6 is rated at 19/24, the 2.7l EB at 19/25, the 3.0 PSD at 22/28. I would think that fleet operators would like the higher fuel economy, assuming that the higher option cost and maintenance costs down the line don’t eat up the fuel savings.

        I wish my ’13 Tacoma got better than 15-16 around town. I’d take a turbo diesel to get, say, 22 or 23 around town, and 28 or 30 on the highway. 20.3 is the best I’ve ever gotten, according the the Fuelly app.

      • 0 avatar
        285exp

        Jim, they’re already pumping fake engine noise into the F150 and Mustang, all they have to do is add the diesel clatter option.

        I’d like mine to sound like a Detroit Diesel 6-71, they could add the oil leak option too.

        • 0 avatar
          HotPotato

          Hell, let’s go all-in with the 2-stroke diesel nostalgia: add a black cloud every time you get into the throttle too fast, a non-sychromesh manual with a linkage seemingly made of rope, and snail-like acceleration.

          I love me a screaming Jimmy (I spend WAY too much time watching Bus Grease Monkey videos on YouTube), but I’m glad we’ve moved on.

    • 0 avatar
      Higheriq

      These are available for order now. The configurator should be set up within a few weeks.

  • avatar
    Jerome10

    Im glad the choice for consumers is there but I still don’t see the point of diesel outside regular towing. So at least trucks there seems to be a use case, unlike passenger cars.

    Still I wouldn’t touch this thing.

  • avatar
    EBFlex

    Ford is so stupid. Do they really think people are this dense?

    ““Customers and dealers told us they wanted the diesel on XLT, so we decided to expand the offering.””

    Really? All you focus grouping you did prior to offering this diesel that you said was not needed and you just now realize that offering it to more people is probably a good idea?

    Ford and Tesla. Both are in a race to out stupid the other one.

    • 0 avatar
      conundrum

      Does anything anywhere suit your otherworldly criteria? Like, what bag o’ sh!te do you deign to daily drive yourself?

    • 0 avatar
      deanst

      I suspect that the engine costs more than Ford can charge for it, so they’re only willing to take the hit if you’re willing to buy a high margin truck.

    • 0 avatar
      JREwing

      I’m sure this was more about limiting production until Ford could ramp up engine assembly, and preserving the marketing aura by making it exclusive until they could push out higher volumes.

      If you only have X number of units you can push out the door at one time, make the most profit you can on them.

    • 0 avatar
      MiataReallyIsTheAnswer

      I was going to post the exact same thing. As if no XLT buyers told you they wanted it 2 years ago. Idiots. In any case, 250 HP is a joke when it costs MORE than the 400 (plus) HP options. Yeah yeah, torque blah blah…..

      • 0 avatar
        DenverMike

        If you could only have one spec, the torque figure says way more vs. “HP” alone that leaves you with questions. This is true on gas engines too.

        It’s a $6,000 engine all day long but $3,000 almost sounds rational, if you were going to get mid/upper trim loaded with gadgetry and bling anyway. Then it’s the price of the EcoBoost or just a $1,000 hit over the V8.

        It’s mind games, but if I wanted the diesel in a base/base stripper (retail buyer), even with a required long bed (for safety), I’d offer to pay the $6,000 to have it built, or a final $4,500 after rebates.

Read all comments

Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Recent Comments

  • MrIcky: “more displacement, less turbos” – which competes against mileage, possibly driving up...
  • FreedMike: There’s ruching, and then there’s this: https://i.pinimg.com/origin...
  • Menar Fromarz: They are rapidly becoming the Ford of the mid 1920’s. Maybe they will just offer the F150 in...
  • Stanley Steamer: Boring is cheap. All those extra creases means more steel and higher tooling costs.
  • dal20402: Failsegment. If you’re going to sacrifice dynamics for packaging, which is the purpose of FWD, then...

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributors

  • Timothy Cain, Canada
  • Matthew Guy, Canada
  • Ronnie Schreiber, United States
  • Bozi Tatarevic, United States
  • Chris Tonn, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States
  • Mark Baruth, United States
  • Moderators

  • Adam Tonge, United States
  • Corey Lewis, United States