twintornados Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 I will buy my retirement car next year, and the Mustang is one of four cars I will look at. :happy feet: ...what are the other three?? :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 (edited) The 3.7 F150 with an 8 foot bed would make an excellent V6 Ranger replacement, maybe this is what Ford has in mind....... It wont get 28 mpg... :reading: The 4 cylinder 5 speed manual Ranger only gets 27 mpg on the highway ! The V6 get 21 mpg and I'll bet a 2 door, 2WD, short bed F150 with a 3.7L will match that ! Heck of a lot more truck and better ride. Edited January 13, 2010 by theoldwizard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 ...what are the other three?? :shades: 2011 335d (I support diesels and BMW make balanced cars), 2011 or 2012 'Vett (Always wanted one.. as a young kid, I would sit in the '68+ 'vetts in show rooms until I was told to leave), or SHO (All I own right now are Fords and it would be the most comfortable) . Mustang would be the lowest price option right now. What I buy depends mostly on what the market and how my Citi Bank © and American Capital (ACAS) stock does. If they do great, 'Vett. Nothing like seeing an old guy in a new Vett. If they do so-so, 335d or SHO. If they stall or close, 3.7 Mustang. One more: If the market collapse, Fiesta. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue II Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 It wont get 28 mpg... :reading: Neither will a 4.0 V-6 Ranger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atvman Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 I think Ford has already confirmed that the F150 is getting the 3.5L EB by the end of this calendar year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 Neither will a 4.0 V-6 Ranger. I can attest to that...i went from a 5.4 F-150 4x4 supercab which I loved to a 4.0 4x4 supercab Ranger....it was an absolute pig in comparison, foot was ALWAYS in the throttle to get anywhere and ended up getting the SAME mileage...18. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 If I were in the market for a new Mustang, I would pick the new 3.7L V6 Mustang over the GT even with 400hp+. I believe the V6 Mustang is a better all around vehicle now. Lighter, probably a better handler, cheaper, better fuel mileage, and great bang for the buck. It will probably break 6 seconds in 0-60 time and is plenty fast enough with its 300hp V6. Ford has also improved the looks of the V6 Mustang so that it now has a cleaner, upscale look than the GT. I predict that for 2011, the V6 Mustang will outsell the GT on a 75% to 25% basis. I also think the F-150 with the new 3.7L 300hp V6 will be a good seller for Ford. Adequate power for light duty, and better fuel mileage for a cheaper price. Buyers out there are very value conscious right now and looking at best bang for the buck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FordBuyer Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 I can attest to that...i went from a 5.4 F-150 4x4 supercab which I loved to a 4.0 4x4 supercab Ranger....it was an absolute pig in comparison, foot was ALWAYS in the throttle to get anywhere and ended up getting the SAME mileage...18. I guess you nailed it in giving good reason why the Ranger run is about over. The only thing I would miss is the Ranger's smaller foot print. The F-150 has gotten so damn big. I'm a car driver and my Taurus sits even lower than a Fusion, and big pickups are great at blocking your vision with their huge footprint. It's surprising how much higher the beltline is on cars now compared to my 2002 Taurus. Thank god Ford is still lower than most though. New GM vehicles have belt lines so high that it looks like driver is sitting in bathtub and needs a periscope to see. The new LaCrosse is especially bad along with the new Camaro. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mackintire Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 (edited) Neither will a 4.0 V-6 Ranger. Sven, who worked for Ford's engineering division, had prototype DOHC cylinder heads for his 2005 4.0 extended cab 4x4. With minor computer program changes the engine dyno'd 268HP. He was getting 23 MPG with an otherwise stock truck. A minor port and polish job on the factory heads will get you near 20HP and another 2 MPG. You just need to focus on efficiency and low end torque. Edited January 13, 2010 by Mackintire Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted January 13, 2010 Author Share Posted January 13, 2010 Sven, who worked for Ford's engineering division, had prototype DOHC cylinder heads for his 2005 4.0 extended cab 4x4. With minor computer program changes the engine dyno'd 268HP. He was getting 23 MPG with an otherwise stock truck. A minor port and polish job on the factory heads will get you near 20HP and another 2 MPG. You just need to focus on efficiency and low end torque. And this can meet EPA regs for emissions and be massed produced? I don't think so Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 And this can meet EPA regs for emissions and be massed produced? I don't think so well it was Sven...hes Sveedish..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 I can attest to that...i went from a 5.4 F-150 4x4 supercab which I loved to a 4.0 4x4 supercab Ranger....it was an absolute pig in comparison, foot was ALWAYS in the throttle to get anywhere and ended up getting the SAME mileage...18. Now THAT is depressing ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 Now THAT is depressing ! tell me about it...I absolutely LOVED the F-150....but I sacrificed so wifey ( now ex ) could have her "image" car....granted the Ranger NEVER gave me any issues, but same mileage, less space, less comfort, foot was seemingly ALWAYS to the boards to get comparable pickup, less utility, noisier.....I mean I could go on ( if I havent already ) but I rank it as my biggest buying mistake.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White99GT Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 If I were in the market for a new Mustang, I would pick the new 3.7L V6 Mustang over the GT even with 400hp+. I believe the V6 Mustang is a better all around vehicle now. Lighter, probably a better handler, cheaper, better fuel mileage, and great bang for the buck. It will probably break 6 seconds in 0-60 time and is plenty fast enough with its 300hp V6. Ford has also improved the looks of the V6 Mustang so that it now has a cleaner, upscale look than the GT. I predict that for 2011, the V6 Mustang will outsell the GT on a 75% to 25% basis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 13, 2010 Share Posted January 13, 2010 tell me about it...I absolutely LOVED the F-150....but I sacrificed so wifey ( now ex ) could have her "image" car....granted the Ranger NEVER gave me any issues, but same mileage, less space, less comfort, foot was seemingly ALWAYS to the boards to get comparable pickup, less utility, noisier.....I mean I could go on ( if I havent already ) but I rank it as my biggest buying mistake.... Can you imagine what that same Ranger would be like with a 3.7L ???!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Can you imagine what that same Ranger would be like with a 3.7L ???!!!!!! yup, great engine in a dinosaur....its about as unrefined a vehicle as Ford makes/left alone.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atvman Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Rangers aren't anything special, I've owned one for almost nine years now. Yeah, it is a durable and reliable little truck, but a half ton is a much better package. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 yup, great engine in a dinosaur....its about as unrefined a vehicle as Ford makes/left alone.... About as good as putting the 3.7L in the Panther.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 About as good as putting the 3.7L in the Panther.... Hey, good idea! It'd last another 20 years then..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 About as good as putting the 3.7L in the Panther.... There was some old kook on another board that was absolutely convinced Ford would rule the automotive world if they would just build a diesel powered Crown Vic........ All kidding aside, a 3.7L V-6 F-150 is a great idea and will find a lot of buyers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 (edited) There was some old kook on another board that was absolutely convinced Ford would rule the automotive world if they would just build a diesel powered Crown Vic........ Mlhm + P ?????!?!?!???! Edited January 14, 2010 by rmc523 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 14, 2010 Share Posted January 14, 2010 Mlhm + P ?????!?!?!???! add a little Armada Master, taxman and chucky2......8 hours in a CROCK pot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggs32 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Any thoughts on how much less a 3.7L model will cost compared to a comparably equipped V8 model?. I'd definitely be interested in replacing our Escape or Flex with a SuperCrew F-150 if the price is right. A V6 option with good power would be ideal being that I don't tow. I'm thinking the V6 may be roughly $2k less than a V8 model but will they produce them in volume? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Any thoughts on how much less a 3.7L model will cost compared to a comparably equipped V8 model?. I'd definitely be interested in replacing our Escape or Flex with a SuperCrew F-150 if the price is right. A V6 option with good power would be ideal being that I don't tow. I'm thinking the V6 may be roughly $2k less than a V8 model but will they produce them in volume? Look for Ford to use the 3.7 as the base engine and drop the 4.6 2V with the prices remaining the same. 5.0 would then take the place of the 3V 4.6 with the 6.2 option only for high end models like Harley Davidson, Platinum, King Ranch, and Raptor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggs32 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 Look for Ford to use the 3.7 as the base engine and drop the 4.6 2V with the prices remaining the same. 5.0 would then take the place of the 3V 4.6 with the 6.2 option only for high end models like Harley Davidson, Platinum, King Ranch, and Raptor. That's what I assume but I worry that they will be scarce on the lots because I found it very hard to find a copy with the 4.6L around here. Pretty much all of them had the 5.4L when I looked, and I looked often. We went with the Flex (lease) because even at $38k it was the better buy for many reasons but I'd love to have a well equipped SuperCrew for around the same price. Especially after the 30+ inches of snow we just had. The Flex, even with AWD, just can't handle that much soft snow and I was wishing we still had the Explorer it replaced at times because it would go through anything. You can get a lot of extras on the F-150 for around $2k. Not quite what the Flex has but most of what we have in it is just fluff and not necessary. Really nice, but overkill for us. 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.