AD #1507 – Infiniti Concept Wins Award, F-150 MPG Falls Short, Tesla & BMW in Talks

November 24th, 2014 at 11:56am

Runtime: 7:02

- Ford F-150 MPG Falls Short
- Tesla & BMW in Talks
- Used Car Prices to Soften
- Audi to Launch Mobility Service in U.S.
- Wild & Crazy Concepts
- IndyCar’s New Aero Kits

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone and Dow Automotive Systems.

»Subscribe to Podcast | iTunes | RSS | Listen on Phone Stitcher | YouTube

Thanks to our Partners for embedding Autoline Daily on their websites: Autoblog and

40 Comments to “AD #1507 – Infiniti Concept Wins Award, F-150 MPG Falls Short, Tesla & BMW in Talks”

  1. G.A.Branigan Says:

    I wasn’t surprised by ford’s not impressive mpg numbers for the new f150′s.They will eventually see the light…..diesel light that is.

  2. Mike Says:

    Your comments about Ford missing the MPG mark must be very disappointing in Dearborn. People do buy trucks for multiple reasons and purposes; It is not all about MPG. That said, fleet buyers have their spreadsheets humming and they won’t like these numbers at all.

  3. Chuck Grenci Says:

    Aerodynamics are great for efficiencies, both speed and handling (even fuel economy), but I hope with future design parameters that interferences to the other race cars (whether F1, Indy, NASCAR, etc.) can be reduced (or equalized) in order to have better racing (so the lead car doesn’t get an almost insurmountable advantage by being upfront). It helped ruin NASCAR IMO and I’m sure effects most other high speed racing.

  4. Patrick Says:

    Regarding the F150 look at the whole picture. yes, fleet buyers will have their spreadsheets churning and seeing that an F150 with the non-turbo V6 has 1900 lbs payload, the Ram non-turbo V6 is 1500 lbs payload. Automakers have to strike a balance all MPG = no capabilities, ie Prius.

  5. Buzzerd Says:

    Re – trucks, we once again see that there are no magic bullets when it comes to truck mileage. Trucks seems to require a certain amount of energy to accelerate and or maintain and that isn’t going to change, where’s that fabled magic 100mpg carburetor when you need it.
    Disels help but then you have the problems that come with them.

  6. Kit Gerhart Says:

    4, Prius having no capability? You’ve got to be kidding. It carries 4 people reasonably comfortably, and will carry 5 if they are not too big. With the back seat folded down, it has a longer load floor than many, or most of the smaller crossovers. Meanwhile, under most driving conditions, it uses half as much gas as those crossovers, and uses about a third as much under severe stop-and-go driving.

    As far as pickups, to most buyers, the 1900 pound vs 1500 pound payload makes no difference at all, since most pickups carry zero payload most of the time.

    For fleets, the engine choice will depend on the usage, but I suspect big fleet buyers will stay away from the 2.7 turbo in the F-150 for light duty use, and will go for the NA 3.5, or the V8.

  7. RumNCoke Says:

    Looks like the new Colorado/Canyon twins would be a slam dunk with a small diesel. Why aren’t we seeing one? Maybe it would cannibalize the big boys’ sales?

  8. MJB Says:

    …Makes you wonder what type of mpg gains we’d see with an aluminum light body on that RAM.

  9. bob Says:

    For trucks to get better mpg they need to be more aerodynamic, which seems to be in direct conflict with what the public wants a truck to look like… apparently we like them to look like jumbo bricks, and that’s just about how aerodynamic they are.

  10. Kit Gerhart Says:

    We’ll have to wait and see the actual weights of various configurations of the new F-150. Those “700 pounds lighter” claims were in regard to the heaviest version, a crew cab, vs the old F-150. The old F-150 happens to be about 300 pounds heavier than the Chevy, so the new one should be about 400 pounds lighter. That is for the crew cab. The difference will be smaller for the other body styles.

  11. MJB Says:

    Commenting on the Tweel from yesterday’s show:

    It’s nice that John Deere is going to be offering those Tweels on an upcoming model. I’m certain Michelin and J.D. have a non-compete clause preventing Michelin from offering the tweel via any other outlets during the first year of production, but I’d sure like to be able to pick up a set of those at my local Home Depot to put on my Cub Cadet right now.

    Snow (and ice) between the spokes would be a concern when using ones tractor for plowing the driveway, as some people already pointed out. But I would imagine an ‘all season’ version would simply have CV boot-like baffles sealing both ends.

  12. G.A.Branigan Says:

    @ #7: The gm midsize twins will have a 2.8L diesel available as an option in the 2016my.Why they wanted to wait ayear is beyond me.

  13. pedro fernandez Says:

    Prius seems to be the bull’s eye for criticism by all those who think a vehicle to be worth anything has to be American and use up fuel as if it will never run out and will continue to be reasonably cheap.

  14. Kit Gerhart Says:

    12, Either it “isn’t ready” yet, or they might be saving it with the idea of getting a second sales boost after the initial spurt subsides. Car companies do things like that all the time.

  15. BobD Says:

    #12 – It makes sense to delay features on new vehicles. GM will likely be able to sell every mid-size PU they can build for the 2015 MY, so holding back an option that will create new demand in 2016 is just good marketing and allows GM to put off development and production investment until needed to fill orders. Likewise, the ZR2 “concept” they showed off at the LA Auto Show will boost demand in 2016 (or whenever it is rolled out).

  16. Bradley Says:

    No Toyota on the MPG Truck list.

  17. HtG Says:

    F150 mileage

    Here’s my cynical autolunchline comment. Did Ford planners envisage making mileage figures for the aluminum truck just like they had been doing for their other cars? Remember how their claims had to be adjusted? Well maybe today’s unremarkable figures are the result of the current more realistic testing procedure.

  18. Kit Gerhart Says:

    16, Toyota would be quite embarrassed. The best version of Tundra for 2015 is the 4.6 V8, 2wd, which gets 15/19 and 16 mpg combined. There was a 4.0 V6 in 2014 model year, but it only got 16/20, and 17 combined.

  19. Kit Gerhart Says:

    17, I was thinking the same thing. Maybe they have decided that it would be better to have more customers satisfied with the mileage they are getting, relative to the ratings, than to have unrealistic ratings and get embarrassed about it as with the C-Max.

  20. Bradley Says:


    Roger That, I still would have included them.

  21. Bradley Says:

    As “Shame” and “Embarrassment” hold more weight in Japan.

    We Americans have lost the value in “shame” and “embarrassment”.

    At least that is my understanding.

  22. Chuck Grenci Says:

    If you go to the show transcript and click on the Ford headline the Toyota’s are listed in the Ford data (they don’t really compete, fuel wise, but if you really look at the data most of the numbers are within 10% so people are still going to pick their ‘pickups’ from preference, not specifications). Ford also lists trailer capability and load range from them and their competition. No ‘slam-dunk’ by any means, and Kit is correct in stating that the Ford’s 700 lb reduction is coming from the heaviest of the fleet (to begin with), so net difference, is sometimes 3 to 4 hundred pounds (again about ten percent).

  23. Kit Gerhart Says:

    20, If Toyota wants to increase market share with the Tundra, I’d think they would need to be competitive in mpg. Maybe they are happy with the current sales numbers of the Tundra (and Tacoma), and are content to “build what they are building” and let them sell as they will.

  24. Kit Gerhart Says:

    In CR’s mpg test at a steady 65 mph, all of the big pickups were pretty close, except the Ram 1500 diesel which did much better. The gas ones ranged from 20 (Toyota) to 23 (Chevy), both V8′s, with the Ford 3.5 turbo in between at 22. The Ram V8 got 21, and the diesel got 27. All of the gas ones got 10-11 in CR’s rather severe “city” test.

    Sorry about all the numbers, but when it gets to reality, if someone is buying one of these big, and pricey trucks, they should just buy what they like, and not worry too much about mpg.

  25. G.A.Branigan Says:

    @ Kit: I’m sure many pu buyers go with what they want,not really what they need,and more and more now the mpg’s are starting to phase the buyers.Ram was the first in several gens to reintroduce a modern small clean diesel,soon to be followed with the new gm twins.Nissan will have the all new frontier with a diesel option as well as an all new titan also with a diesel option.It won’t be long before the team at ford and chevy,(gm)will follow suit.They really won’t have much choice,imho.Over stuffing small gassers is not a good row to hoe in the long run.

  26. cwolf Says:

    Despite milage numbers, the die-hard Ford guys around here say they like the new one even more! The reason: They say they handle better perhaps due to a lower center of gravity. The contractors lean towards the 6 or V8, but the few with the small turbo seem most satisfied.

  27. cwolf Says:

    I forgot to mension one thing I noticed about the hand full of new Fords the contractors recieved. Every one of these trucks will have added to them the steal tool boxes and racks from the old trucks that have been replaced. I wonder if these guys will be as giddy once all this weight is added to them?

  28. Kit Gerhart Says:

    The new Ram 1500 diesel is selling well, and it will be interesting to see how the diesels do when there are more of them on the market, and the Dodge won’t be the “only game in town.”

    When you do a reality check, they won’t make sense for many people. The EPA combine mileage of the Ram diesel and a gas V6 F-150 or Silverado are only 3 mpg apart, at 23 and 20. The V8 Chevy gets 19. In CR’s tests, the gap widens a little. Still, the diesel fuel costs a lot more money; in my area, it usually costs from 15-20% more than regular gas, nearly negating the savings in fuel cost, and you pay a lot extra for the diesel engine.

    Still, people “like” diesels, and if you don’t like they sound of engines revving, they are generally lower rpm engines than similar size gas engines.

  29. Kit Gerhart Says:

    27, I don’t think I’ve seen a new Ford pickup yet. Are they at the dealers?

  30. Brett Says:

    GM may also realize that they are not capable of meeting the demand for a diesel mid-size truck at roll-out. Also, a year of sales will allow them to better judge needed production capacity for the diesel engine plant.

  31. cwolf Says:

    Kit, I haven’t seen any new Ford trucks on the lots either. The handful I know of were ordered long ago.

    From the pics, I like the looks of the WV diesel wagons that are coming. As for the new Prius, I’m not nuts about the new front end…from the pictures. The Japanese seem to be following the same concept, as far as front ends go.

  32. HtG Says:

    29+31=holy moly

    Kit, my local Ford dealer has ordered a pair of 2015 F150 trucks. They’re not in yet, but Jeevus are they loaded. Do peeps in this price range care about gas mileage?

  33. HtG Says:

    keeping score

    This dealer has also ordered 3 Mustangs. The prices will range from 44-48K, two sticks, all 5L V8 motors. Yipes, if you must be the first on the block.

  34. Kit Gerhart Says:

    32, 33
    Holy crap, especially the Mustangs. A zero option Corvette is starting to look like a bargain, considering a zero option ‘Vette has everything I’d want, and then some. I thought it would take a Shelby GT500, or whatever they will call it, to get to near $50K.

  35. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Facing reality, though, I’m still having fun with my oldish Corvette, with less than 20% as much wrapped up in it as a new ‘Vette or loaded Mustang.

  36. pedro fernandez Says:

    Kit hang on to that Vette and use your hard earned money wiser, like cruising and such!

  37. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Pedro, I’m sure you are right.

  38. C-Tech Says:

    Perhaps GM could offer the Chapperral as a kit car? Pleeeeze!

    Welcome back Kit.

    Ford better find a silver lining to these trucks pronto.

    You got me, Htg :)

  39. Kit Gerhart Says:

    38, The Ford faithful will buy the trucks, no matter what. If serious problems arise with them, it could hurt sales, but that would surprise me. I expect the trucks to be good, likely best-in-class regarding how they drive, but I’ll be surprised if they are so wonderful that they are a major game changer. The aluminum A8 hasn’t forced M-B into aluminizing the S-class.

  40. Wayne Says:

    AS far as Ford trucks are concerned, I beleive they will still sell! Look at the 6.0 L and 6.4 L Diesel that Ford made. They were terrible! No reliability with many many problems, and thousands of Buy Backs, yet Ford Truck buyers continue to purchase Ford Trucks