2013 Ford F250 Review

2013 Ford F250 4x4 6.7 turbo diesel from North America

Model year2013
Year of manufacture2013
First year of ownership2013
Most recent year of ownership2013
Engine and transmission 6.7 turbo diesel Automatic
Performance marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.0 / 10
Distance when acquired32 miles
Most recent distance5000 miles

Summary:

An ox.

Faults:

Nothing went wrong; unsurprising given the mileage.

General Comments:

This was a rental that I drove several thousand miles, including heavy towing and true (as opposed merely off-pavement) off-road conditions. I hope that a review based on renting is acceptable, given the miles and circumstances.

The most notable feature is the enormous torque (800 ft. lbs.) that made towing 14,000 lbs effortless. I have never driven a truck with better towing mannerisms.

Fuel efficiency is decent, considering. About 17-18 MPG without a load and on the highways. With a heavy tow-load, MPG dropped to around 13-14 MPG, average.

The four-wheel drive is good: again, with this amount of torque, the truck reliably slogs through sand and mud -- even with a big load attached. Note that this particular truck came with manual hubs; I appreciate manual hubs, but some consider them a chore. No complaints.

Handling is fine, I guess. I'm not a fan of the school bus feel that most full size trucks now have, but this particular model is built for serious work, and not for racing, playing, or commuting.

Acceleration is slow while the turbo lags, and just fine after that. The engine accelerates well on the highways and scoffs at steep climbs.

Until truck stops start serving better food, I would rather not have to stop, so a larger fuel tank would be greatly appreciated.

The interior is spacious and well designed/assembled. I have put a lot of miles on a lot of trucks, and while I don't have a preference among the major American truck manufacturers, I think Ford gets the win where interiors are concerned.

Outside of the conspicuous consumer, this truck is going to appeal to owners/operators of large land (ranch, farm, logging, mining, construction etc..) that can afford and/or write-off the expense. From a purely work-based perspective, I have not driven a better truck.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 22nd September, 2013

17th Nov 2013, 09:50

Original poster here.

Put another 1500 miles on this model, including a good deal of mild off-road conditions (and yes, I mean actually not on roads... when did gravel roads come to mean "off road"). I have a few more things to add:

Highway acceleration is very good. Passing on rural highways with limited line of sight is less dangerous with almost instant acceleration from 45-50 mph to 80 mph.

The engine revs too high in 4-low. Mainly just annoying.

Four wheel drive is acceptable, but is too eager to bind in tight spaces.

Again, it could use a bigger fuel tank.

Passengers will moan about stiff suspension in rough terrain. It's built to handle loads, so this is a feature.

29th Nov 2013, 21:37

Revving too high in 4lo is a good thing. It means the truck has a low gear ratio and a good gear reduction in the transfer case. Exactly as a real truck should.

7th Dec 2013, 11:40

This one howls like a bull when traveling at a near-idle crawl. Like I said, it's mainly just annoying. I actually wondered if it was a computer feature -- like, the engine is sent different commands when 4-Lo is engaged, with the assumption being that it has a large load attached? Didn't bother reading up on it.

I run trucks in 4-Lo quite often in the course of working. None of them make such a racket as this one. My own old beater 4x4 Toyota has much lower gearing from T-case to diffs and a puny, high-revving engine. Compared to the Ford, it whispers in 4-Lo.

Average review marks: 9.0 / 10, based on 1 review