03 F250 Lariat Crew Cab Fx4 4x4 4wd 6.0 Diesel Gray Heated Leather New Parts on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford halves summer shutdown, ramps SUV production

For the third consecutive year, Ford is reducing the length of its summer shutdown for several factories to keep up with high demand for some models. This year, the decision means 40,000 more units of popular trucks and crossovers like the F-Series, Edge, Escape, and Explorer. Rather than the normal two-week break, workers at the Chicago, Dearborn Truck, Kansas City, Kentucky Truck, Louisville, and Oakville factories will only get a week off starting on June 29. Additionally, 10 plants for producing components to support these assembly lines will also have the shorter vacation. The rest of the Blue Oval's manufacturing locations will shutdown from June 29 to July 10 for maintenance and retooling. According to Ford, the decision comes because of low inventories and high demand on some of its popular models. The 2015 F-150 is lasting around 20 days at dealers, and the Edge spends an average of 10 days before being sold. Ford is hardly alone in deciding to keep locations open during the normal summer break, though. FCA recently made the decision not to shutdown four assembly plants and all of its factories for components to keep up with demand for models like the Jeep Cherokee, Grand Cherokee, and Dodge Durango. Related Video: FORD REDUCES SUMMER SHUTDOWN TO MEET DEMAND FOR FORD F-SERIES TRUCKS, EDGE, ESCAPE AND EXPLORER JUN 2, 2015 | DEARBORN, MICH. In response to increased customer demand, Ford will add capacity this summer to produce its most popular trucks and utilities Ford will shorten its summer shutdown from the traditional two-week summer shutdown to one week for a majority of North American assembly plants, increasing production by close to 40,000 units In April, Ford F-150 was turning at just 20 days on dealer lots, Edge sales were up 78 percent, and Escape and Explorer remained in tight supply. 2016 Explorers are now hitting dealer lots In response to customer demand for Ford's newest products, the company this year will produce close to 40,000 extra units by idling select plants for only one week during what has been the traditional two-week summer shutdown.. "To meet surging customer demand for our top-selling trucks and utilities, we are continuing to run our North American facilities during the traditional two-week summer shutdown in order to add close to 40,000 units," said Bruce Hettle, Ford vice president, North America Manufacturing.

2020 Chevy Silverado HD vs. 2019 Ram, Ford heavy duty trucks: How they compare on paper

Last year was all about the latest in light-duty full-size pickup trucks, so this year, Ram, Ford and Chevy are launching the heavy-duty variants. The first out of the gate is the redesigned 2019 Ram 2500 and 3500 HD, and Ram dropped all the pertinent specs with the reveal. Chevy followed with the new Silverado HD in Chicago, and Ford revealed updates to the Super Duty at the same show. Ford hasn't released details on output, payload capacity, towing capacity or pricing for the updated Super Duty. As such, we'll be comparing the current Super Duty with the all-new Silverado HD and Ram HD. Both Chevy and Ram have revealed full specs for each of their respective trucks, leaving out only pricing, which we've estimated based on the outgoing models. You can see the raw details in the chart below, followed by extra information and analysis. Some things to keep in mind: These specifications cover all versions of the Ram HD, Silverado HD and Super Duty, such as 2500 and 3500 models, and all the way up to F-450. Specifications can vary widely based on engine, drivetrain, cab and bed configurations, so be sure to take a close look at the specific model you're interested in when you get particularly serious about buying. And of course, be sure to check out our car comparison tool if you'd like to look at other trucks on the market. Engines and drivetrains All three of these trucks offer gasoline and diesel engines, but only the Ram has two versions of the diesel. Starting with gas engines, Ram's 6.4-liter V8 has the power advantage with 25 more horsepower than the next-most-potent Super Duty, but the new Silverado HD's 6.6-liter V8 takes the torque crown at 464 pound-feet, nearly 35 more than the other two gas engines. The Ram is also the only one to pair an eight-speed automatic with the gas engine, whereas the Ford and Chevy make do with a six-speed. With diesel engines, horsepower is a weak point for the Ram. The Ram's entry-level turbo 6.7-liter inline-six is the weakest, as the only one with under 900 pound-feet of torque and under 400 horsepower. Even the high-output version only makes 400 horsepower, while the Chevy makes 445 and the Ford 450. But the tables turn with torque, as the Ram makes a best-in-class 1,000 pound-feet followed by the Ford's 935 and the Chevy's 910. Both the Ram and the current Super Duty diesels each get a six-speed automatic, but the new Silverado HD's diesel gets a 10-speed unit.

Ward's calls out Ford's EcoBoost engines for their crummy fuel economy

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. In its testing of all four engines, Ward's editors never came even remotely close to matching the 2.7's claimed 26 miles per gallon (for two-wheel-drive models), with the truck's computer indicating between 17.6 and 19 mpg over a 250-odd-mile run. Calculating the fuel economy manually revealed an even more depressing 15.6 miles per gallon. Criticisms with the 2.3-liter four-cylinder focused on its strange soundtrack, although it was business as usual with the 1.5-liter and 3.2 diesel, with Ward's criticizing the fuel economy of both engines. The 1.5, which Ward's claims is sold as a hybrid alternative, failed to get over 30 miles per gallon, while the five-cylinder turbodiesel's figures couldn't stand up against FCA's 3.0-liter EcoDiesel. The entire column really is worth a read, especially if you were disappointed in Ward's decision to only salute Ford's three-cylinder EcoBoost while shunning the rest of the company's new turbocharged mills.