6.2L V8 Discuss the 6.2L V8

6.2 V8 vs. 6.8 V10 vs. ??? (gas engines) thread

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #76  
Old 12-28-2012, 10:55 AM
Super08's Avatar
Super08
Super08 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Mine fits through my 7' door with about 2" to spare. It is a SRW 4WD CC SB 4.30's with the heavy suspension package. Just click on the link under my name where it says 2011 Ford F350 for pictures. The trailer we tow is 13K loaded.
 
  #77  
Old 12-28-2012, 11:03 AM
vinny8's Avatar
vinny8
vinny8 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Super08, that is great to know, both with the 4x4 height and the heavy suspension package height, and you're coming in under 84 inches. Do you by chance have clearance lights as well? I think they take up an inch of height. Can you tell me a bit about the heavy suspension package? Do you feel your truck is a bit higher and do you find the ride extremely rough? As mentioned, I love my current truck and don't want to feel that I'm giving anything up, other than the V10 Why did you get the heavy suspension package and why the 4.30 gearing v.s. the 3.73?
 
  #78  
Old 12-28-2012, 11:28 AM
Super08's Avatar
Super08
Super08 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I have the camper pkg which gives me heavier springs front and rear. It rides fine. I got both the heavy suspension and 4.30 gears because of the size of our trailer. It gets much better mileage than my 05 V10 got by far. Does not have the low end torque the V10 had but still pulls like a mule. The torque curve is just a bit higher in the rpm band. I don't have the cab lights but I would still get it in OK if I did. They don't really add much as they are on the forward curve of the roof line.
 
  #79  
Old 12-28-2012, 12:16 PM
2000silverbullet's Avatar
2000silverbullet
2000silverbullet is offline
Lead Driver
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Gilbert
Posts: 5,326
Received 8 Likes on 7 Posts
I'm at 82" with my 2.5" leveling kit and 35" tires.
 
  #80  
Old 12-28-2012, 12:20 PM
vinny8's Avatar
vinny8
vinny8 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Chicago area
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Silver Bullet! Wow...so it's likely, even with 4x4 and heavy suspension and clearance lights, that I'm not gonna come close to 83 inches...based on your modes and tires and you're at 82. That's great news. Thanks!
 
  #81  
Old 12-28-2012, 12:34 PM
kmonty2's Avatar
kmonty2
kmonty2 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Sterling Heights, MI
Posts: 1,318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Mine is stock height and stock size tires with clearance lights, mine fits in the 7' garage door opening with about 1" to spare. It just does not fit in my garage length wise. I did get 8' doors on the house I building just to make sure there are no problems later.
 
  #82  
Old 09-10-2015, 07:01 PM
JD0x0's Avatar
JD0x0
JD0x0 is offline
New User
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
First post here, and I realize this thread is old, but I'd like to point out, even after all this time, currently the Triton V10 is STILL offered in brand new Fleetwood Class A and C gas motorhomes.

Recently purchased a 99' 29' on a E350 SD chassis. It has the 2 valve V10 which IMO may be the superior engine, in some ways. Yes, the 3 valve seems to make a tad more power, but it needs to rev quite a bit higher to use it. From what I can tell the current Fleetwood line has similar output specs to the 2 valve V10 305HP, 420ft/lbs. The difference seems to be the 2 Valve has peak torque at ~2850RPM while the 3 valve makes it at 3250. I think I'd rather be turning less revs to make similar power, less frequent firing of the cylinders means, in theory, less gas being used. The 2 valve is like a tractor motor, if I'm light on the gas it says in the higher gears and turns really low revs without much struggle (mine has a diesel 4 speed auto, and seems to make the engine rev closer to that of a diesel, which works well with the 2 valve's power band, IMO)
I've been contemplating an ECU tune to get a little more juice out of it, but right now, I'm more concerned with squeezing some more MPG's out of it. I'm probably averaging roughly 10mpg, but I try to keep it under 60MPH because the vehicle is less aerodynamic than a similarly sized brick.
 
  #83  
Old 09-13-2015, 11:23 AM
Strokin-A-2010's Avatar
Strokin-A-2010
Strokin-A-2010 is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,237
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by JD0x0
First post here, and I realize this thread is old, but I'd like to point out, even after all this time, currently the Triton V10 is STILL offered in brand new Fleetwood Class A and C gas motorhomes.

Recently purchased a 99' 29' on a E350 SD chassis. It has the 2 valve V10 which IMO may be the superior engine, in some ways. Yes, the 3 valve seems to make a tad more power, but it needs to rev quite a bit higher to use it. From what I can tell the current Fleetwood line has similar output specs to the 2 valve V10 305HP, 420ft/lbs. The difference seems to be the 2 Valve has peak torque at ~2850RPM while the 3 valve makes it at 3250. I think I'd rather be turning less revs to make similar power, less frequent firing of the cylinders means, in theory, less gas being used. The 2 valve is like a tractor motor, if I'm light on the gas it says in the higher gears and turns really low revs without much struggle (mine has a diesel 4 speed auto, and seems to make the engine rev closer to that of a diesel, which works well with the 2 valve's power band, IMO)
I've been contemplating an ECU tune to get a little more juice out of it, but right now, I'm more concerned with squeezing some more MPG's out of it. I'm probably averaging roughly 10mpg, but I try to keep it under 60MPH because the vehicle is less aerodynamic than a similarly sized brick.
The V-10 is also offered in the current F450 and F550.
 
  #84  
Old 01-07-2016, 02:51 AM
stvenkng's Avatar
stvenkng
stvenkng is offline
New User
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
6.8 replacement???

Originally Posted by STEELHQ
I give it 2 more years then a 6.2 3 valve will come out thats what ford always does!Ill wait until the 3 valve comes out and then ill buy it!
I'm waiting for the 8.8 liter 2 cylinder w/8 valves each, 4 cams, 2 plugs per, 5 inch exhaust w/electric cutout before the cat and 2 great big ol' turbos stuffing those cylinders w/massive gulps of nitrous oxide infused air/fuel pushing the power meters off the scale when it spools up the drums on the dyno.. til then I'll keep the ten cylinder "stocker" in my 4x4, 2004 Excursion Limited!!!??....
Hi ev'ry body, just found this place while I was cruising for some info on my "X'Treme" plaything. Poked around a bit and it looks like I've found the answers and then some. I'm an "old" Ford guy from way back, couple of trucks, two old Harleys and a few Mustangs including an 03 SVT Cobra convertible... More later.
 
  #85  
Old 01-07-2016, 03:40 AM
stvenkng's Avatar
stvenkng
stvenkng is offline
New User
Join Date: Jan 2016
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by 03 SVT VERT
The 6.2L Boss is at the same point in it's development cycle that the V10 Triton was in the late 90's/early 2000's. We still have some time yet before we see what it is truly capable of.

I have no doubt we'll see some form of Boss architecture replacing the Triton V10 in the F450/F550/F650/F53/F59/etc. More than likely, I'd expect something in the 6.6L-7.0L range (which the Boss is easily capable of by design).

The other thing they might do is an Ecoboost version of the 6.2L for those heavier class applications. However, I really doubt it. It would cost them a lot in development for relatively few vehicles sold and subsequently would do little to help their CAFE rating (unlike the Ecoboost in the F150, which sells in huge numbers). With that in mind, I would really be shocked if they went for it, versus just going with an increase in displacement and some other tweaks.
So, One '03 SVT Vert owner (mines Dark Shadow Grey) to another... Ford will probably eco-boost everything they stick between a set of frame rails in the next few years, but they never forget what brought them to the dance... I see the extensive catalog of "crate" engines gaining considerable heft in that same future..
 
  #86  
Old 01-08-2016, 12:23 PM
Bugzilla46310's Avatar
Bugzilla46310
Bugzilla46310 is online now
Laughing Gas
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: DeMotte, IN
Posts: 1,200
Received 280 Likes on 151 Posts
This is the simple and definitive answer void of all technical data. In America more is better. V10 is 2 more than V8. I am an American in America. Thus V10 is better than the V8. It's an ego thing!
 
  #87  
Old 01-12-2016, 08:34 PM
Squisher's Avatar
Squisher
Squisher is offline
Laughing Gas
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 1,024
Received 23 Likes on 20 Posts
Well on that same note how can a country that loves nascar not value a v8 capable of 6k over any sluggish, err I mean torquey v-10?
 
  #88  
Old 01-14-2016, 02:00 PM
dkf's Avatar
dkf
dkf is offline
Hotshot
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Pa
Posts: 10,101
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes on 17 Posts
Having seat time in both I just feel the 6.8l is a better truck engine that the 6.2l. I don't care about the cylinder count just the power band. If Ford would up the displacement of the 6.2l to around 7.0l I think they could probably do better to increase the torque output down lower in the rpm range. I will say though the stock tuning on the 6.2l trucks is really bad.
 
  #89  
Old 01-15-2016, 06:17 AM
don123's Avatar
don123
don123 is offline
Laughing Gas
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 1,046
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
After driving both,I'd rather merge on to a highway with my 6.2 than a v10. Better acceleration and better mpg!
 
  #90  
Old 01-15-2016, 06:59 AM
MDSuperDuty's Avatar
MDSuperDuty
MDSuperDuty is offline
Cargo Master
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,991
Received 49 Likes on 17 Posts
Originally Posted by don123
After driving both,I'd rather merge on to a highway with my 6.2 than a v10. Better acceleration and better mpg!

Did you come from a 2 valve or 3 valve V10?

I feel like my dually V10 (3V) is a rocket when unloaded and the pedal smashed. But I have not driven a 6.2 so not much I can offer in comparison.

I do like the exhaust note of the 6.2. Much more "grumbly".
 


Quick Reply: 6.2 V8 vs. 6.8 V10 vs. ??? (gas engines) thread



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:20 PM.