SoonerLS

He was talking about if the "no NG" regulations moved across the country and how it would be a non-starter in the Great Plains states.

Can't say I've ever been in a G6, but I look at vents just like those every time I get into my truck.

Also, if you want to see how they're modernizing it, compare that radio to the radio controls (under the "tablet") in the pic in the first post.

Those vents are straight out of a 12th Gen F-150.

You know, my first thought is that there's no way Ford will spend dollars to chase pennies, other than to add it to the Ford Performance catalog. This Mod Center that Fuzzy confirmed, well, that does change things, doesn't it? I don't know if Ford will want to go through the expense of the safety certifications, etc, but at least that eliminates the assembly line-related costs.

I saw a convoy of Asplundh Ford mediums rolling down I-44 the other day. They were led by an F-150 or F-250 (can't recall which). I remember looking for the PSD badge, but I don't remember seeing it. There was one medium of another make in the convoy (I don't recall what it was), but there were four or five Ford mediums, at least F-550s.

I would like to get a car where the top of the wheel could block something at the base of the windshield. For me, even in its full-up position, the wheel normally blocks the top of the instrument cluster.

Except that the F-Series uses electric fans. I'm pretty sure their engines and radiators are bigger than the Ranger's... My guess is that it's cheaper, may be more robust, and is just cheaper. Also, it probably costs less.

I can't say that I could tell you which side the speedo and tach occupied on the last several vehicles I've driven. Heck, if I were under oath right now, I couldn't tell you with 100% certainty which one is on which side in my truck. Maybe it's a product of having started my driving career going among several vehicles, but gauge placement just isn't that important to me; I can look at the dash and see which one is which.

I dunno--I'd argue that a half-shaft that got bent merely from driving on a crappy road and not from something impacting on it must've had a defect in materials.

Is there a way to make the editor not completely suck in Safari on iPadOS 13.3? If I get a quote of another message in there, I can't get rid of it without leaving the thread, and sometimes it stuffs my reply into the quoted message (especially if I've trimmed the quote) and won't let me out. And I can't even simply paste a YouTube link into the message--I have to use the link icon in the toolbar. It's frustrating as hell. At least I used to be able to turn the "smart" part off and deal with the BBCode to fix problems, but now I just seem to be stuck with them... FWIW, I don't seem to have nearly as much trouble with the editor in Firefox under windows or in Safari on my iPhone, but my iPad is what I use the most for BON...

The original Bullitt Mustang sells for $3.74 mil. (Hammer falls at $3.4 mil; I guess the rest must be the vig for selling the car.) https://youtu.be/Y1kzTyqcN9U

My dad used to get 2-3mpg better than my mom did in their Freestyle, all due to their different driving styles. According to the EPA, my truck's average fuel economy is 17MPG. At almost 125K miles, running a 5Star tune, and with a toolbox full of tools and junk and stuff in the bed, I'm averaging closer to 18MPG. Maybe I should complain about those inaccurate EPA numbers?

Didn't the Explorer get the SOHC version of the 4.6? I think that's a bit narrower than the DOHC Coyote. Regardless, I hope someone has gotten it sorted and been able to make the case in Dearborn...

Might also have something to do with fiscal year timing. I don't know about the po-leese, but when I worked for a state agency, our fiscal year ran from July 1-June 30. Our spending on bigger projects tended to happen more in late spring/early summer, when the budget situation was more solid (you didn't have to worry, f'rinstance, about a sudden spike in winter energy costs knocking a big hole in your available funds).

I've been looking at Super Duties because I'm looking at towing some stuff that's beyond my F-150s performance envelope, but I don't particularly want a diesel as a daily driver. There's no way I could justify the added purchase, fuel, and maintenance costs, and the gassers would do fine with the hauling I need to do.

CAFE is probably a bigger hurdle, but there's also having to do the safety certification process on yet another variant. Also, being able to accommodate a 60-degree V6 on the assembly line doesn't automatically mean that it can also accommodate a wider 90-degree V8.* If someone can make the business case for it, it'll get done, but my suspicion is that there aren't enough buyers who will spend enough to justify the expenditure for Ford. *Not that there isn't something enticing about the idea of seeing a 7.3-powered Ranger Rolling off the line...

Yeah, I think he's missing the point of the 7.3, and if he wasn't using numbers from the accounting firm of Smoking, Crack, & How, he'd realize that those dyno numbers show that Ford is seriously underrating the 7.3. If you go with the 20% loss figure, you're over 500ft-lbs of torque; if you go with the 15%, you're at 490ft-lbs, still well over the advertised 475ft-lbs. Heck, it wasn't that long ago when having those torque numbers meant you were filling up at the diesel pump...

Thanks for posting it--I was actually waiting for it. I think that torque curve is about what we should've expected, given what the lead engineer said about the engine and its design parameters. It looks pretty consistent, getting the torque up low in the revs and keeping it there, plus it's a nice bump over the 6.2. I think you're right--the 6.2's days are numbered. There will be guys who will miss it (just like there are guys who miss the 5.4), but I don't think anyone who drives a 7.3 will be wishing they had a 6.2.

And I was confirming what you said, not trying to be disagreeable...

I'm thinking you meant to quote a different post? I was just commenting on the wide-angle distortion in the video that made the block look like a scale model...

Only torque is measured. HP is calculated from torque at a given RPM.

By all accounts, they've already changed the frame to accommodate V engines. It was required for the new Bronco, and likely for the future success of the Ranger in NA.

Holy fisheye, Batman! For the love of Pete, take a step back and go to a more neutral zoom level!

If it were as easy as dropping it into the engine bay, somebody would be doing it. My guess is that it involves significant modifications in the engine compartment (probably bodywork, almost certainly rerouting of plumbing and modifications of wiring harnesses). It makes economic sense in Oz because there's no F-Series above it--it doesn't matter if it ends up costing F-150 Raptor money because there's no F-150 Raptor to buy.