chevys Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Dont shoot the messenger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Wow, look................ its exactly what people said it would be. Why would anyone shoot anyone over what we already knew??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted September 11, 2008 Author Share Posted September 11, 2008 Wow, look................ its exactly what people said it would be. Why would anyone shoot anyone over what we already knew??? I honestly did not know what to expect from the 5.4. The 4.6 was easy to figure out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 I apologize if I "assumed" that you were around when all of the speculation............. and inside information was floating around. It just confirms what was already stated. Really, the only thing we did not know, was the fuel economy figures. That said, I do like the torque figures for the 5.4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted September 11, 2008 Author Share Posted September 11, 2008 I apologize if I "assumed" that you were around when all of the speculation............. and inside information was floating around. It just confirms what was already stated. Really, the only thing we did not know, was the fuel economy figures. That said, I do like the torque figures for the 5.4. No problem at all. :shades: I really didnt know. The reason I put in the disclaimer about not shooting the messenger was because I realized I was posting on BON and you know how it gets in here sometimes. I wonder what they did to get an extra 25 ft lbs out of it? The six speed is probably responsible for the gain in mileage. At least that is my assumption. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8 Ford Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Wow, the 5.4 will have 331.5lb-ft of torque @ 1500RPM. For comparison, the the Chevy 5.3L V8 peaks at 338lb-ft @ 4400RPM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted September 11, 2008 Author Share Posted September 11, 2008 (edited) Wow, the 5.4 will have 331.5lb-ft of torque @ 1500RPM. For comparison, the the Chevy 5.3L V8 peaks at 338lb-ft @ 4400RPM. Thats what I was thinking although I could not remember the 5.3 numbers. I think the hp on the 5.3 is 330?? The 5.4 does really well against the 5.3. The 6.2 that GM has is in another league all together. Here is a link to the GM 5.3. Curve still looks pretty good but not as stout as the 5.4. http://media.gm.com/us/powertrain/en/produ...5_Silverado.pdf Edited September 11, 2008 by chevys Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 What they did for the extra power and torque, I don't know. However, I do know that the cableless throttle system in the 5.4 never worked well with the old 4-speed auto trans. This is why the Expedition was so much faster than the old Expedition, even though the power numbers were the same. The 6-speed just works with the 5.4, instead of against it. I would imagine that the driving experience of the '09 5.4 F150 will be worlds better than the '08's. The truck should not feel sluggish anymore, and people should stop complaining that the engine does not feel like it has 300hp and 365lb ft of torque. Amazing what a good trans can do. Of course, the extra 20hp and 25lb ft is a bonus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Wow, the 5.4 will have 331.5lb-ft of torque @ 1500RPM. For comparison, the the Chevy 5.3L V8 peaks at 338lb-ft @ 4400RPM. Fffffffft. Okay, here's what's wrong with you, you cheerleader: 1) The displacement is the same, therefore, Ford didn't do JACK with the 5.4L. It's the same engine!@!!!!!! 2) I won't believe those numbers. Ford PR has been known to lie. 3) 390lb-ft of torque? Dodge makes 407. That's over 4% more!!!!!!!! 4) Torque doesn't count, horsepower does. That's what you do brake stands with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stpatrick90 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Fffffffft. Okay, here's what's wrong with you, you cheerleader: 1) The displacement is the same, therefore, Ford didn't do JACK with the 5.4L. It's the same engine!@!!!!!! 2) I won't believe those numbers. Ford PR has been known to lie. 3) 390lb-ft of torque? Dodge makes 407. That's over 4% more!!!!!!!! 4) Torque doesn't count, horsepower does. That's what you do brake stands with. I hope you are kidding with this post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford-150 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 (edited) Thats what I was thinking although I could not remember the 5.3 numbers. I think the hp on the 5.3 is 330??The 5.4 does really well against the 5.3. The 6.2 that GM has is in another league all together. the 5.3 has 315hp at 5200 rpm so the 5.4 is now pretty much past the 5.3s competition and the new 5.4 makes 390 lb-tq at 3500 vs the 6.0's less tq(375) at a higher rpm(4300) and worse mpg(but thats expected) what is more important in trucks....hp or tq? plus as far as i know GM is still using the 6.0 vortec in their 1/2 tons, i have heard they might put the 6.2l in the 1/2 tons but i have not heard an official statement, the same with the 6 speed that i heard GM was going to put in their 1/2 tons.....but if they did have an official statement, please link me to it the 6.2l is in another league but the 6.0 is not P.S. im not going after you in this post....im just saying Edited September 11, 2008 by Ford-150 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8 Ford Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 (edited) The 6.2 is in the Sierra Denali, but that's it for the 1/2 tons. Fffffffft. Okay, here's what's wrong with you, you cheerleader: 1) The displacement is the same, therefore, Ford didn't do JACK with the 5.4L. It's the same engine!@!!!!!! 2) I won't believe those numbers. Ford PR has been known to lie. 3) 390lb-ft of torque? Dodge makes 407. That's over 4% more!!!!!!!! 4) Torque doesn't count, horsepower does. That's what you do brake stands with. You spelled out :cheerleader: and didn't finish it off with an :P Edited September 11, 2008 by V8 Ford Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 what is more important in trucks....hp or tq? For Ford? Both...to move all of that weight. And since you are lazy, here is a link to the 6.2 in the 1/2 tons... FE.GOV Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 (edited) The 6.2 is in the Sierra Denali, but that's it for the 1/2 tons. Ummm...no. Not according to FE.GOV for the 2009 models. Edited September 11, 2008 by P71_CrownVic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford-150 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 The 6.2 is in the Sierra Denali, but that's it for the 1/2 tons. yeah i know that and i love that truck(besides its interior which i have sat in and it felt smaller than my 03 f-150) but thats a luxury truck and its sales aren't much of anything Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Reynolds Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 :happy feet: This should do more to pull more customers into the fray and keep F-150 owners pleased. Oh and Ford LOL, make sure you take note of the plethora of airbags, next time you want to whine about them not being available. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Reynolds Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 For Ford? Both...to move all of that weight. And since you are lazy, here is a link to the 6.2 in the 1/2 tons... FE.GOV Actually a proper way to manage that power has always been a major shortcoming. The 4 speed was a lame duck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford-150 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 For Ford? Both...to move all of that weight. And since you are lazy, here is a link to the 6.2 in the 1/2 tons... FE.GOV thanks for clearing that up you were an ass about it but thats expected of you thanks P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted September 11, 2008 Author Share Posted September 11, 2008 So the 6.2 is available in the Denelli. I stand corrected because that is a very small segment of 1/2 ton sales and not what the majority of buyers are going for. The 6.2 is not going to be an issue among most buyers. A 5.4 would be stout in a 2wd reg cab short bed. Im wondering about the six speed. Would that thing not shift itself to death in town cause accelerated wear?? I know autos have come a long way but with a stick you really only have to worry about the clutch and its pretty cheap to replace. When an auto goes south its big money and I drive my cars till they die. Im not the guy that trades at 60K. Longevity is very important to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 you were an ass about it Just trying to fit in... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Looking at those numbers, I can't figure out why Ford even offers the 4.6 2V, unless they are going to put a substantial markup on the 3V. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford-150 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 So the 6.2 is available in the Denelli. I stand corrected because that is a very small segment of 1/2 ton sales and not what the majority of buyers are going for. The 6.2 is not going to be an issue among most buyers. A 5.4 would be stout in a 2wd reg cab short bed. Im wondering about the six speed. Would that thing not shift itself to death in town cause accelerated wear?? I know autos have come a long way but with a stick you really only have to worry about the clutch and its pretty cheap to replace. When an auto goes south its big money and I drive my cars till they die. Im not the guy that trades at 60K. Longevity is very important to me. i don't think it will be a problem it should actually make it easier on the transmission and engine i could be wrong though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8 Ford Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Ummm...no. Not according to FE.GOV for the 2009 models. Oh, it'll be available on the Silverado along with the 6.0 for the 09 Model. I stand corrected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chevys Posted September 11, 2008 Author Share Posted September 11, 2008 Looking at those numbers, I can't figure out why Ford even offers the 4.6 2V, unless they are going to put a substantial markup on the 3V. That and just a guess but maybe they have plenty of them laying around from the cars. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P71_CrownVic Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 That and just a guess but maybe they have plenty of them laying around from the cars. No...it's because the 4.6 2V is reliable...the 3V is not. (LOTS of spark plug issues) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.