rider56AK

new lightning sounds pretty legit right?

google it. or wikipedia

ok, so a 1995-2000(?) vortec 5.7 makes 260hp and over 300 ft/lbs of torque at the rear wheels. and if you take my 2006 5.4's 300 flywheel hp and subtract 15% that would be at 255....thats horrible considering the chevy is 10 years older. ford needs to step their game up

okay. i just want to know what my f-150 makes at the rear wheels. thats how this convo got started!! BUT what im pissed about is that if i went to go buy a new car, all they would tell me is how strong the engine itself is, not the car. i could really care less what the ENGINE BY ITSELF WOULD MAKE...when was the last time you used your car's engine when it wasnt in your car....ill wait.... see never..i want to know how strong the vehicle as a whole is, not with parts missing. maybe its just me thats concerned about this but whatever..

how would weight not matter?

ok so say you go to a car lot and you look at a 6.7 f-250 single cab and a 6.7 f-350 crew cab. ford is going to post the same numbers based on the engine size but you know for a fact that the truck its self is not going put down the same power as its big brother. so why would you even want to waste your time looking at the numbers that the engine itself makes. if i bought a new truck i want to know the hp and torque that particular model makes. shit, even the leather heated seats could play a weight factor in the dyno testing.

its misleading. alot of people believe thats the actual horsepower and torque. i hate trying to explain to people that when you put an 8,000 pound truck in btween the engine, youre going to lose a bit of power. they just dont get it

whats the rwhp of my stock f-150? and why arent the RWHP numbers being advertised instead of the flywheel numbers? its false advertising if you ask me

he sold the dodge for a 2010 powerstroke but you will have to take my word for the 19 mpg. thats what it said. i didnt believe it either. i got to drive it around when he was on vacation and it dropped to 16mpg haha i rallied it everywhere. it was fun and fast diesel but horrible interior layout. it felt funny driving it, the mirrors sucked, and had blind spots like no other but it was great! as long as you drove it in a straight line and you didnt have to look out your side windows! the explorer could be a 4.6, whatever it is. its a v8 thats all i know.

the mpg from the dodge was done from the built in computer thing in his truck. but idk if he ever tested it by hand. and he also drives like an old grandpa and over doesnt even go over 55 on the highway in the winter. and well youre lucky that you can get 14-15 cause i just tested another tank of gas in my f-150 and im still getting 10mpg. i dont ever go over 2000 rpms and i still get shit gas mileage. i let it warm up for about 10 minutes cause right now its been from -5F to 20F above. but i bought the truck in the fall when it wasnt cold and it was getting horrible too. it cant even make it to 300 miles to the tank. im averaging about 270 before the fuel light comes on. im not poor at maintaining it either just got a check up and its perfectly fine..only has 44k miles on it. my sisters explorer tho gets pretty shitty too. but its an explorer so thats what we were expecting when we bought it? what should i do about my f-150 take it back to the chevrolet dealer and complain that something might be wrong with it? i have a 50,000 warranty on it from them or should i bring it to a ford dealer? any help will be appreciated

well thats just it. most of the people who buy trucks dont need them at all. they think they need a big 1 ton, diesel to haul a couple of four wheelers. i always hate listening to people brag about the MASSIVE 800 lbs they towed with their souped up f-350. its completely unecesary and looks retarded seeing a big lifted truck pulling a tiny little load. . haha im guilty too cause i have f-150 and the most i ever haul is a few of my dads fourwheelers a couple times a year. other than that i really dont need a truck except its nice to have in the winter and to get around on the shitty alaskan roads. i just like to have all that power. and plus i got it for a decent price..

does anyone else hate the look of the new f-150s? i think they look fucking stupid. like, they couldnt choose one concept design so they went with a concoction of all of them. none of the parts seem to flow together. especially those headlights. i hate 'em.

haha i like your ram slogan. kinda ridiculous that dodge chose to do that

the new explorer isnt really a truck tho like these older ones. its more of a crossover. and i think ford did that cause they realized that no one was using it for what is was made for. your wife doesnt need a v8 to drive around town and pick up the kids from soccer practice!

whats the difference? and either way 19 mpg in the winter time is good. ford nor chevy could even go near that with any big truck.

you dont like the new headlights? thats weird. i thought they looked pretty sick with the front grille. makes it look edgy. but the back end looks like a Volvo to me. not looking closely, the D O D G E looks like V O L V O

my dad had an 2006 dodge 6.7 cummins 3500 megacab that got 19 mpg in the city. completely stock. how is this possible?? and why arent more companies after an engine that can do this. -his new 2010 6.4L f350 gets 10.5 mpg. and about 9.9 in 4wd. my 06 5.4L f-150 gets 10 mpg city and my sisters 02 4.2L explorer gets 11mpg..SOMEHOW, i mean thats the same mpg as a big expedition with a bigger engine and its a bigger truck completely. why cant ford build more fuel efficient vehciles?

i like it but the front grille kind of looks like a Transformer. like what chevy is doing with their camaros.