New 2024 Ford F-150 First Look: If It Ain't Broke, Add Stuff

[securityguy]

New 2024 Ford F-150 First Look: If It Ain't Broke, Add Stuff | Edmunds

The 2024 Ford F-150 gets a minor refresh that adds tech, power, new looks and new trims. Click here to get all the details on what's new with Ford's most important product.

www.edmunds.com

 

[theblet]

It’s trying to be a bronco

 

[Eighty]

Is it just me, or does it look like this Ford is experiencing explosive diarrhea? Just add the aisleway of a Delta plane in the background

 

[Darksteel165]

36 gallon tank now standard.
New tailgate, like the Ram MFT.

Even the raptor is getting additional power with it's v8 engine, more then we can say for the TRX that is getting deballed.

I don't see the problem?

 

[jimothy]

There are a few things Ram could adopted: standard LED headlights across the board, something to compete with BlueCruise, and the 30+ gallon gas tank standard. Not new, but the Pro Power Onboard sounds cool, especially on the—don't hate me—hybrid.

 

[theblet]

There are a few things Ram could adopted: standard LED headlights across the board, something to compete with BlueCruise, and the 30+ gallon gas tank standard. Not new, but the Pro Power Onboard sounds cool, especially on the—don't hate me—hybrid.

Hybrids would be better than full EV. At least you have options, and can really take advantage of the electric motor torque.

 

[jimothy]

Hybrids would be better than full EV. At least you have options, and can really take advantage of the electric motor torque.

Yep, hybrids make a lot of sense, a lot more than BEVs. If the goal is to reduce CO2 and other pollutants, car companies should stop making EVs, and put the limited battery capacity to hybrids.

For every one F-150 Lightning (98-131 kWh), Ford could make 65-87 hybrid trucks.

Let’s take the midpoint, 76. If 75 F-150 drivers kept their 5.0 V8s, and one switched to a Lightning, this would save 790 gallons of gas a year total, assuming 15,000 miles and 19 mpg (EPA combined estimate for the 5.0).

On the other hand, if they all switched to hybrids, the total gallons saved would be over 22,000.

Toyota’s CEO and Stellantis’s previous CEO have made the same point: if we want to reduce emissions, we need more hybrids, not electric vehicles. PHEVs are better than BEVs, but regular hybrids and even mild hybrids make a bigger impact per kWh of battery than both BEVs and PHEVs. So long as battery production is a limiting factor, this is a crucial point that keeps getting missed.

Which is why it’s particular stupid that the bigger the battery, the bigger the tax incentive. I’d rather my tax dollars not be used to subsidize any vehicles, but if they must, those dollars would go a lot further encouraging many people to drive hybrid vehicles with relatively small batteries than a few people to drive EVs with massive batteries.

Anyway, I didn’t mean to make this thread into an anti-EV rant, but I would like to see a hybrid Ram. Especially after my wife got a hybrid Hyundai Tucson, I’ve been impressed how they improve both mileage and performance at a reasonable cost.

 

[theblet]

Yep, hybrids make a lot of sense, a lot more than BEVs. If the goal is to reduce CO2 and other pollutants, car companies should stop making EVs, and put the limited battery capacity to hybrids.

For every one F-150 Lightning (98-131 kWh), Ford could make 65-87 hybrid trucks.

Let’s take the midpoint, 76. If 75 F-150 drivers kept their 5.0 V8s, and one switched to a Lightning, this would save 790 gallons of gas a year total, assuming 15,000 miles and 19 mpg (EPA combined estimate for the 5.0).

On the other hand, if they all switched to hybrids, the total gallons saved would be over 22,000.

Toyota’s CEO and Stellantis’s previous CEO have made the same point: if we want to reduce emissions, we need more hybrids, not electric vehicles. PHEVs are better than BEVs, but regular hybrids and even mild hybrids make a bigger impact per kWh of battery than both BEVs and PHEVs. So long as battery production is a limiting factor, this is a crucial point that keeps getting missed.

Which is why it’s particular stupid that the bigger the battery, the bigger the tax incentive. I’d rather my tax dollars not be used to subsidize any vehicles, but if they must, those dollars would go a lot further encouraging many people to drive hybrid vehicles with relatively small batteries than a few people to drive EVs with massive batteries.

Anyway, I didn’t mean to make this thread into an anti-EV rant, but I would like to see a hybrid Ram. Especially after my wife got a hybrid Hyundai Tucson, I’ve been impressed how they improve both mileage and performance at a reasonable cost.

I agree. The push for everyone to have only full EVs when it’s not practical for most and doesn’t save the planet anyway. it’s ludicrous. Plus the infrastructure is not there, and it makes us very dependent on China, which we don’t need.

 

[1BADRAMLIMITED]

I’m not mad at it and seriously interested.

My favorite features

All trims come standard with the 12” infotainment and digital cluster

Multifunction tail gate seems very practical

Tail gate assist up and down

Payload scale

36 gallon tank

All trim levels come equipped with LED lighting

Power outlet in the bed

Just to name a few..

 

[habu987]

I think it's a slightly underwhelming midcycle update, but Ford continues to show substantially more development than Ram.

I was sort of expecting Ford to come out with a PHEV, though, since that's an untapped market in the truck realm. Maybe they're saving that for the F-200 or for the next gen, who knows.

 

[CalvinC]

Ford CEO Jim Farely mandated a massive cut to their discrete materials and parts in an effort to increase quality & reduce warranty claims (odd he didn't mention also reducing cost!). So I think the way they've gone about that by giving erery trim premium features like LED lights, Digital IP, Big touchscreen etc. is actually kinda cool.

And and the Hybrid PowerBoost is a no-charge option over the 3.5... reminiscent of the e-Torque pricing strategy change.

What's not so cool is continued reduction in interior color choices.
Like RAM, pretty much every option is all black now.
Contrast doesn't kill, people!

 

[jimothy]

Ford CEO Jim Farely mandated a massive cut to their discrete materials and parts in an effort to increase quality & reduce warranty claims (odd he didn't mention also reducing cost!). So I think the way they've gone about that by giving erery trim premium features like LED lights, Digital IP, Big touchscreen etc. is actually kinda cool.

And and the Hybrid PowerBoost is a no-charge option over the 3.5... reminiscent of the e-Torque pricing strategy change.

What's not so cool is continued reduction in interior color choices.
Like RAM, pretty much every option is all black now.
Contrast doesn't kill, people!

Agreed 100% on interior color! It seems to be an issue across all mainstream manufacturers, regardless of product type (sedan, SUV/CUVs, truck): Any interior color you want, as long as it's black. There are exceptions, of course; Longhorn and Limited in Indigo/Sea Salt being among them. But let's get more greys, tans, browns, reds, and more back in interiors.

But more importantly, as you said, give us contrast. Seat color and dash color don't have to match!

 

[Biga]

It has some nice features, but it's still long in the tooth to me. They've changed the headlights and grill like 6 times now but the rest of the truck is still the same old slab sided body they've been using for years now.

 

[Jus Cruisin]

The 2024 isn't much of a refresh. All kinds of problems with the Powerboost not starting with "stop safely now" message. I owned a 2021 F150 Powerboost and it was the worst Ford I've owned. If I lose interest in my GMC I'll look at Ram again after the 2025 refresh with the new engine.