Ford Introduces Three New Light-Duty Engines for 2011 F-150 - Page 2 - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


General Ford Discussion General discussion of Ford vehicles not pertaining to the Ford Ranger.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #26  
Old 08-13-2010
01_ranger_4x4's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Muskegon, Michigan
Posts: 3,585
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04blackedge View Post
I agree, numbers are one thing but how they actually drive in real-world is another.
yep and i know alot of people bash the 5.4 saying its under powered but i disagree. its not a fast motor but its a puller for sure. my buddys silverado has the 5.3 that makes 15 more HP than my 5.4 but mine makes almost 40 more FT pounds of torque that come in 700 RPM sooner than the 5.3 peak torque. he will eat me up unloaded but if you hook a few thousand pounds on the back, my 5.4 will pull circles around his. its all where the numbers fall within the RPM range and if the gearing in the trans/ rear end is engineered to take advantage of it.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-13-2010
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Ford's Ecoboost Technology:

1


2


3


4


5


6


7


8
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 08-13-2010
brianjwilson's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon
Posts: 3,650
Quote:
Originally Posted by 01_ranger_4x4 View Post
yep and i know alot of people bash the 5.4 saying its under powered but i disagree. its not a fast motor but its a puller for sure. my buddys silverado has the 5.3 that makes 15 more HP than my 5.4 but mine makes almost 40 more FT pounds of torque that come in 700 RPM sooner than the 5.3 peak torque. he will eat me up unloaded but if you hook a few thousand pounds on the back, my 5.4 will pull circles around his. its all where the numbers fall within the RPM range and if the gearing in the trans/ rear end is engineered to take advantage of it.
I agree in general, except the 5.3s I have driven are slugs. I still think the 5.4 is a stronger motor where it matters, pulling.

And the 5.0l is suppose go replace the 4.6l, not the 5.4l as I understand. We will have to wait and see, but I don't like that peak torque is going to be at higher rpm with the 5.0.

Nice pictures Bob!
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 08-14-2010
Yessick's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: mobile,Alabama
Posts: 842
Wish wed get a 3.5 or the 3.7 in the rangers.. Would be an amazing improvement but I'm just dreaming i know their is not a chance in hell that will happen.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 08-14-2010
Level I Supporter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianjwilson View Post
I agree in general, except the 5.3s I have driven are slugs. I still think the 5.4 is a stronger motor where it matters, pulling.

And the 5.0l is suppose go replace the 4.6l, not the 5.4l as I understand. We will have to wait and see, but I don't like that peak torque is going to be at higher rpm with the 5.0.

Nice pictures Bob!
Thanks Brian!
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 09-24-2010
Fx4wannabe01's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (23)
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Boring, Oregon
Posts: 21,721
So this is what happens when a Raptor rapes an STX.... I believe this can be considered wincest. hehe.

Ford to campaign F-150 EcoBoost in Baja 1000 — Autoblog



Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-24-2010
01_ranger_4x4's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Muskegon, Michigan
Posts: 3,585
i was on the ford site last night looking at the specs of that 3.5 EB V6 and im impressed. it makes its peak TQ of 420 FT pounds at 2500 RPM!! that is insane to get that kind of power down that low with a small displacement V6 turbo. it makes more torque at a lower RPM than the 6.2 V8 that they are putting in the raptor.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 09-24-2010
djfllmn's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: York, PA
Posts: 5,796
i was just reading that too...that is crazy for a v6...i want to see what the 6.2 v8 is like
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-24-2010
04DSGMike's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 485
damn thats pretty impressive!
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-25-2010
bucky919's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Minot, ND
Posts: 1,943
Rumor has it, theirs one going to be in town here tomorrow for the dealership to drive, the owner called me today and said to have the tractor that weighs over 13k loaded up on the trailer ready to go and to expect a call before lunch time. So we will see, its loaded up behind my F150 right now....
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-26-2010
brianjwilson's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon
Posts: 3,650
Quote:
Originally Posted by bucky919 View Post
Rumor has it, theirs one going to be in town here tomorrow for the dealership to drive, the owner called me today and said to have the tractor that weighs over 13k loaded up on the trailer ready to go and to expect a call before lunch time. So we will see, its loaded up behind my F150 right now....
Okay turd, did it show up!?
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-27-2010
bucky919's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Minot, ND
Posts: 1,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianjwilson View Post
Okay turd, did it show up!?
ya it did the guy didn't want me to take any pictures of it even know you wouldn't be able to tell it from a 2010 other than a v6 under the hood, I assume it was cause he did want ford to see that he was pulling someone elses trailer with it . It pulled well but I would compare it to what people say about the 2011 6.7l it doesn't make alot of noise so it must be slow. But the torque it puts down low is amazing. Going up the same littler hills Ive drove with my F150, mine would down shift and the eco boost would be build alittle more boost and hold the gear. So it pulled better than my F150 thats forsure, just would take some getting use to the v6, cause you have to get the rpm's up to get to the torque like everyone with gas motors is use too. Even the guy from Ford said its going to be a tough sell to the traditional truck guys, cause even my grandpa said theres no way a v6 can pull that. So it will take time for Ford to build a reputation on this eco boost, they have high hopes for it, but I think they realize that the 6.2l is going to be there bread and butter for the time being.

So it pulls better than my '05 but I would have a hard time if I was buying not to just get the 6.2 over the eco boost.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-27-2010
chainfire's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Mission B.C.
Posts: 3,126
I think its the fuel millage that gets me. If I invest in a full size, I am not going to tow alot. But to have the option to pull pretty much all I wanted, then get 25+ mpg's unloaded, that really makes me seriously consider one.

Hmmm, I am supposed to get a company truck by Xmas, wonder if it will be out then....
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-27-2010
brianjwilson's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon
Posts: 3,650
Interesting. Myself, I would go for the 6.2L as well probably.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-28-2010
04DSGMike's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Riverside, CA
Posts: 485
Can you imagine if they Sold the Ecoboost in a Single Cab Short bed, you could turn that into a pretty damn nice sports truck, I.E. your own 2011 Lightning
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 09-28-2010
zabeard's Avatar
who?
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianjwilson View Post
Interesting. Myself, I would go for the 6.2L as well probably.
16 spark plugs and a mess of emissions. sounds like fun.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 09-28-2010
brianjwilson's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon
Posts: 3,650
Quote:
Originally Posted by zabeard View Post
16 spark plugs and a mess of emissions. sounds like fun.
Mess of emissions? I don't know about that, I doubt it's different from any other gasser...? Diesels are the ones getting hit hard by emissions. The 2v 6.2L is probably much more simple than the ecoboost. Although the more I read about the 3.5L ecoboost, people seem to really like it. Testers were getting sub 7 second 0-60 runs with a crew cab fx2, and 21-24 mpg highway. Not too bad for such a heavy truck.

I think you are just sour because you got a bad apple.

Either way I'll be holding on to me "weak" 5.4 that has been proven over many years, aside from that pesky spark plug deal. hrm... lol
It isn't super fast, but 0-60 runs are around 8 seconds with 35s and it has plenty of passing power. I got 14mpg two tanks ago, and the last two were 13mpg! haha

Either way I think I'll drive the new engines because they've got me curious.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 09-29-2010
zabeard's Avatar
who?
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
Nick gave a little bit better technical description but he didnt seem to think very highly of the 6.2L, I had heard it was already giving issue to customers. But I am not really sure. Time will tell!
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 09-29-2010
brianjwilson's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hillsboro, Oregon
Posts: 3,650
haha
I haven't read much on the details yet honestly, a few reviews with customers that only had a few hundred, maybe couple thousand miles on their 6.2.
Time will tell, like you said. Engines and emissions are no doubt getting more complicated, but the technology is getting better too. Remember some of the early years of electronic fuel injected engines? What a nightmare!
I think a lot of the issues recently (primarily with diesels) is that the government is placing ridiculous requirements on emissions quicker than the technology can be well adapted. So there is some stuff out there that may be under tested and under engineered.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Report: Ford to keep producing Ranger Indefinitely. New models, and engines coming crawford60 General Ford Ranger Discussion 17 04-01-2010 10:54 AM
First Drive Review: 2011 Ford F-Series Super Duty brianjwilson General Ford Discussion 2 03-08-2010 01:17 PM
Ford Announces 2011 F-Series Super Duty Power and Pulling Specs brianjwilson General Ford Discussion 13 03-01-2010 10:33 AM
f-150/super duty mirror fraser19 General Technical & Electrical 6 10-20-2009 06:28 PM
New York Introduces Bill to Ban the Use of Grille/Brush Guards FMD General Ford Ranger Discussion 32 04-12-2007 07:04 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:51 PM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.