v10 in a ranger - Page 5 - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


New Ideas Have a new idea for your Ford Ranger? General discussion of new ideas for the Ford Ranger.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #101  
Old 07-18-2011
Josh40601's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 376
you really do add some of the dumbest posts i have ever seen. Well no **** you'd take a performance V8 over a v6.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 07-18-2011
theelcaminoman's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Olney, IL
Posts: 514
I was going off what Masteratarms said dumb sheat
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 07-18-2011
Josh40601's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 376
Thanks for that. I'm glad we have resorted to name calling....

I knew where you got it from. Although it had nothing to do with what he typed. He was referring to the differences between the Ford and Chevy cylinder displacements of the past and present.

The LS1 is a 5.7L and at the time it came out, the Mustang GT used a 4.6L. This was in 1998.

Here it is 2011, and there is still over 10 liters difference. 6.2 is the LS3 in the Camaro SS. 5.0 is the Coyote.









How in the **** does 383 and 4.0 have anything to do with that??
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 07-18-2011
theelcaminoman's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Olney, IL
Posts: 514
Sorry, I get caught up in the moment. Youd think Ford would ge ttheir heads out of their lower colons and make a good engine. Dont get me wrong, the Coyote is a good engine (so far) but Ford hasnt developed a good, large displacement engine for awhile now. Even the Shelby gets its power from the old 5.4L
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 07-18-2011
Josh40601's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 376
I'm digging the Ecoboost motors. Although they are not throaty V8's, they are pretty bad ***. I have been following along the Ultimate Adventure 2011 and they are running an Ecoboost F150, and its pretty awesome. Again, just too pricey right now. Once they come down in price, they will be well worth looking into for swappers.

As far as V8's, the Coyote is great for what it is. Small V8 with great power and good gas mileage. Not sure how it does with pulling a trailer or something like that, but its perfect for a sports car.
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 07-18-2011
Masteratarms93's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Goose Creek SC
Posts: 4,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by theelcaminoman View Post
I was going off what Masteratarms said dumb sheat
Quote:
Originally Posted by theelcaminoman View Post
Sorry, I get caught up in the moment.
Please go play in traffic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh40601 View Post
Thanks for that. I'm glad we have resorted to name calling....

I knew where you got it from. Although it had nothing to do with what he typed. He was referring to the differences between the Ford and Chevy cylinder displacements of the past and present.

The LS1 is a 5.7L and at the time it came out, the Mustang GT used a 4.6L. This was in 1998.

Here it is 2011, and there is still over 10 liters difference. 6.2 is the LS3 in the Camaro SS. 5.0 is the Coyote.

How in the **** does 383 and 4.0 have anything to do with that??
Thank you lol
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 07-18-2011
rolsmojave3's Avatar
Level III Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 2,852
Quote:
Originally Posted by theelcaminoman View Post
Sorry, I get caught up in the moment. Youd think Ford would ge ttheir heads out of their lower colons and make a good engine. Dont get me wrong, the Coyote is a good engine (so far) but Ford hasnt developed a good, large displacement engine for awhile now. Even the Shelby gets its power from the old 5.4L
Why do they need a large displacement engine? 6.2 with both torque and Hp over 400 seems decent to me.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 07-18-2011
theelcaminoman's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Olney, IL
Posts: 514
There's no replacement for displacement. And you can only get the 6.2 in trucks
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 07-18-2011
rolsmojave3's Avatar
Level III Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 2,852
Funny, the 5.0 in the 'stang and 6.2 in the camero have identical 0-60 times. A little 5.9 Cummins can pump out some massive power, and the old 2.3l Turbo Fords can run 800+HP all week on Hotrod magazines power tour
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 07-18-2011
Josh40601's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 376
5.9 cummins is not little by any means....

As far as the camaro vs mustang, that's another opinion for another thread. I am impressed by the new 5.0

I have driven the new Camaro, and i must say, they are seriously lacking in the acceleration department. We ran my 01 SS against a 11 SS and i left him. Not saying i am a great driver or anything of that sort, just showing where i was not impressed.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 07-18-2011
theelcaminoman's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Olney, IL
Posts: 514
But if you put the same money that u put into that 2.3 into a new stang or camaro, I'm sure u can crank out close to the same hp
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 07-19-2011
rolsmojave3's Avatar
Level III Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 2,852
5.9 is little...only 360 cubes. Elcaminoman you just said there is no replacement for displacement, then you partially agree with me? I'm not sure you would need $35-40K to make a 2.3 turbo with 400hp. I'm guessing it would be substantially less.
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 07-19-2011
theelcaminoman's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Olney, IL
Posts: 514
But a diese lalso has little in common with a gas engine. Diesels are ridiculously easy to make power... to a certain point.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 07-19-2011
rolsmojave3's Avatar
Level III Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 2,852
It was you that said there is no replacement for displacement, you didn't specify gas or diesel. Set the pipe down man.
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 07-19-2011
Timberwolf's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: East coast Canada
Posts: 706
Wirelessly posted (Timberwolf)

How in the hell does this thread have 1700+hits?! 3/4's of it is trash talk. Lol
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 07-19-2011
Masteratarms93's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Goose Creek SC
Posts: 4,685
I was hoping it would die but noooooo, of course not
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 07-19-2011
theelcaminoman's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Olney, IL
Posts: 514
^^^ lol that wouldnt be any fun.
And once again, diesels have nothing in common with gas. No replacement for displacement is a big block vs small block term. Theres no such thing as a big block diesel... there all big blocks lol
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 07-19-2011
Masteratarms93's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Goose Creek SC
Posts: 4,685
Quote:
Originally Posted by theelcaminoman View Post
Theres no such thing as a big block diesel... there all big blocks lol
4bt big block? riiiiight
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 07-19-2011
Jimmeh's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbia Falls, MT
Posts: 3,224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Masteratarms93 View Post
4bt big block? riiiiight
I lol'd.

Excuse me while I try to erase 7 pages of retardation from my memory.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 07-19-2011
theelcaminoman's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Olney, IL
Posts: 514
Lol well its got a bigger block than a gas 4 banger
Reply With Quote
  #121  
Old 07-19-2011
theelcaminoman's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Olney, IL
Posts: 514
Ya aint gonna erase any retard from your mind while im around lol. Soon as you forget, ill remind ya
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 07-23-2011
BLK02's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: BC
Posts: 1,350
Quote:
Originally Posted by theelcaminoman View Post
Ya aint gonna erase any retard from your mind while im around lol. Soon as you forget, ill remind ya
I really think you need to spend a month on wikipedia to get some facts straight haha and explain how Shelby uses the "old" 5.4 in his cars
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 07-23-2011
-spilly's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: langley, BC
Posts: 408
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh40601 View Post
you really do add some of the dumbest posts i have ever seen. Well no **** you'd take a performance V8 over a v6.
I was thinking the exact same thing

But this thread is comical
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 07-24-2011
theelcaminoman's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Olney, IL
Posts: 514
Lol well theres a iron block 5.4 and an aluminum block 5.4. Thats different. And isnt there a 2V and a 3V 5.4?
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 07-24-2011
djfllmn's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: York, PA
Posts: 5,796
Quote:
Originally Posted by theelcaminoman View Post
Lol well theres a iron block 5.4 and an aluminum block 5.4. Thats different. And isnt there a 2V and a 3V 5.4?
there is also a 4V 5.4
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pics of my 93' XLT and dads v10! dan24 General Ford Ranger Discussion 18 04-18-2010 07:32 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 08:01 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.