Next Generation F-150. (What would you like to see?) - Page 7 - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums



2009 - 2014 F150 Discuss the 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 Ford F150

Next Generation F-150. (What would you like to see?)

Reply
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #91  
Old 08-23-2011, 12:42 AM
640 CI Aluminum FORD 640 CI Aluminum FORD is offline
Posting Guru
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,140
640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dilas View Post
Telescoping wheel would be sweet especially for over six footer drivers like myself. Not sure if it's available on any trims in 09-current generation.
It is avaliable. My 2011 FX4 has a Telescoping steering wheel.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 08-23-2011, 07:19 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine, Virginia
Posts: 25,182
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
Perhaps we should replace the word "bigger" with Heavier. These new trucks are maybe an inc wider and taller than their previous siblings but considerably heavier.

My '88 F150 4x4 weighed approx 3900 lbs while my '11 weighs about 5600. Had my old one been an Scab like my new one, it may have weighed 4500 lbs. But, my new one is still more capable and gets better MPG's than my old one ever dreamed of.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 08-23-2011, 07:24 AM
shortride's Avatar
shortride shortride is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: 46th State
Posts: 700
shortride is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.shortride is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tseekins View Post
Perhaps we should replace the word "bigger" with Heavier. These new trucks are maybe an inc wider and taller than their previous siblings but considerably heavier.
The cab on a 2009-'11 SuperCrews are 7 to 8 inches longer than the 2004-'08 model F150's.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 08-23-2011, 08:53 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine, Virginia
Posts: 25,182
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by shortride View Post
The cab on a 2009-'11 are 7 to 8 inches longer than the 2004-'08 model F150's.
Longer yes, but how much shorter is the front clip? It may be an illusion but the front clip on the '08 gen trucks seems longer than on the '09 gen truck.

The reg cab and Scab models remained the same as the '08 gen trucks.
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 08-23-2011, 09:12 AM
shortride's Avatar
shortride shortride is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: 46th State
Posts: 700
shortride is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.shortride is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tseekins View Post
Longer yes, but how much shorter is the front clip? It may be an illusion but the front clip on the '08 gen trucks seems longer than on the '09 gen truck.

The reg cab and Scab models remained the same as the '08 gen trucks.
You are correct. I should have clarified that I was only referring to the SuperCrew cabs being longer.

I don't know this for sure but I would imagine the front clips are the same. Everything in the engine compartments are the same and probably require the same amount of space. The only thing I can think of that could possibly affect the length of the front clip is the fact that the newest generation have electric fans and may not need the extra space that a belt driven fan might need. They will try to cut weight were ever possible. If Ford made the front clip shorter it would have require all new tooling.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 08-23-2011, 08:38 PM
dilas dilas is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Santa Fe
Posts: 434
dilas is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 640 CI Aluminum FORD View Post
It is avaliable. My 2011 FX4 has a Telescoping steering wheel.
Nice.... I have a telescoping wheel on my Altima, found this much more comfortable to drive and handle while being seated way back of the driver's seat.
Wished that my 07 Lariat had it, that was the only gripe I had when purchasing it back in June.

Finding this odd, my very first vehicle, 1969 Olds 98 had the telescoping wheel. It hasn't even made this standard on most vehicles while the power windows/locks are almost standard on all nowdays.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 08-25-2011, 05:10 AM
640 CI Aluminum FORD 640 CI Aluminum FORD is offline
Posting Guru
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,140
640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tseekins View Post
Perhaps we should replace the word "bigger" with Heavier. These new trucks are maybe an inc wider and taller than their previous siblings but considerably heavier.

My '88 F150 4x4 weighed approx 3900 lbs while my '11 weighs about 5600. Had my old one been an Scab like my new one, it may have weighed 4500 lbs. But, my new one is still more capable and gets better MPG's than my old one ever dreamed of.
I'm sure you already know Tim. But the main reason for the weight gain in the 2004+ model years was because Ford added a heavier higher strength frame to the new trucks mainly for safety reasons was my understanding. But if you take a look at the offset crash test ratings for a 2000 F-150 and compare them to the offset crash test ratings of a 2004+ F-150 its no contest. Though the 2004-2008 models might get a mpg or two less than a comparably sized 2000 model F-150, they make up for it in safety, towing stability and ride comfort.

I think the weight gain can be fought by cutting out alot of gizmo's and electronics trucks come standard with these days. Power Windows, Power Locks, Power Seats, Power everything basically. It all adds to the curb weight and none of it is necessary...Its all strictly for convince. I too had an old Ford, a 1990 F-150 2WD Extended cab...Never knew excatly what its curb weight was I always guessd around 4,000lbs or so. My 2011 FX4 Extended Cab weighs about the same as you're truck 5600lbs. And I'm getting on avarage about 5mpg better in my 2011 than I ever got outta my 1990. It really goes to show how far we have come in engine/transmission technology.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 08-25-2011, 07:23 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine, Virginia
Posts: 25,182
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by 640 CI Aluminum FORD View Post
I'm sure you already know Tim. But the main reason for the weight gain in the 2004+ model years was because Ford added a heavier higher strength frame to the new trucks mainly for safety reasons was my understanding. But if you take a look at the offset crash test ratings for a 2000 F-150 and compare them to the offset crash test ratings of a 2004+ F-150 its no contest. Though the 2004-2008 models might get a mpg or two less than a comparably sized 2000 model F-150, they make up for it in safety, towing stability and ride comfort.

I think the weight gain can be fought by cutting out alot of gizmo's and electronics trucks come standard with these days. Power Windows, Power Locks, Power Seats, Power everything basically. It all adds to the curb weight and none of it is necessary...Its all strictly for convince. I too had an old Ford, a 1990 F-150 2WD Extended cab...Never knew excatly what its curb weight was I always guessd around 4,000lbs or so. My 2011 FX4 Extended Cab weighs about the same as you're truck 5600lbs. And I'm getting on avarage about 5mpg better in my 2011 than I ever got outta my 1990. It really goes to show how far we have come in engine/transmission technology.
Understood and I agree bro. I was making a comment regarding the use of size versus weight. For the exception of the Screw, these trucks are no bigger or marginally bigger than previous gen trucks but substantially heaver for the reasons you stated above.

The beds are a tad bit deeper and the roof lines are a little higher to accommodate the air canopy. I wouldn't trade these safety features for anything at this stage in my life.

It's just that over and over again people post about these rolling behemoths and they're really not that much larger in size than the previous gen trucks. Anyway, I'm not ranting just sayin'.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 08-25-2011, 11:12 AM
Jason Lewis's Avatar
Jason Lewis Jason Lewis is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Central,Texas
Posts: 1,453
Jason Lewis has a good reputation on FTE.Jason Lewis has a good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tseekins View Post
Understood and I agree bro. I was making a comment regarding the use of size versus weight. For the exception of the Screw, these trucks are no bigger or marginally bigger than previous gen trucks but substantially heaver for the reasons you stated above.

The beds are a tad bit deeper and the roof lines are a little higher to accommodate the air canopy. I wouldn't trade these safety features for anything at this stage in my life.

It's just that over and over again people post about these rolling behemoths and they're really not that much larger in size than the previous gen trucks. Anyway, I'm not ranting just sayin'.
To heavy curb weight, my 96 F-1 rolls at 3,800 full size V8 auto and its a strong truck, how heavy do these trucks need to be? new supercrews over 5K lbs when will auto makers reallise, you have these modern engines that are fuel efficient but are not because the weight of the truck is to heavy, the new ecoboost truck gets 22 HWY, thats nothing the old 7.3 got mid 20's !
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 08-25-2011, 09:16 PM
Gary Atsma Gary Atsma is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hanford, Cali
Posts: 318
Gary Atsma is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Lewis View Post
thats nothing the old 7.3 got mid 20's !
Maybe on a 6% downgrade w/a tailwind. It's pretty well known that, despite the problems w/ the 6.0, it does get pretty good mileage, BETTER than the vaunted 7.3. My 6.0 gets about as good of fuel mileage as any of them, about 20mpg @ 70mph. I know a LOT of guys w/ 7.3's, and none of them, or any that they know of, ever gets over about 17-18mpg under the same conditions. Warn us before your next post so we can put our waders on.....
Oh, and you might learn a little spelling before then, too.....
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 08-25-2011, 09:35 PM
Jason Lewis's Avatar
Jason Lewis Jason Lewis is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Central,Texas
Posts: 1,453
Jason Lewis has a good reputation on FTE.Jason Lewis has a good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Atsma View Post
Maybe on a 6% downgrade w/a tailwind. It's pretty well known that, despite the problems w/ the 6.0, it does get pretty good mileage, BETTER than the vaunted 7.3. My 6.0 gets about as good of fuel mileage as any of them, about 20mpg @ 70mph. I know a LOT of guys w/ 7.3's, and none of them, or any that they know of, ever gets over about 17-18mpg under the same conditions. Warn us before your next post so we can put our waders on.....
Oh, and you might learn a little spelling before then, too.....
What did i miss spell? I am amazed your 6.0 is still working and has not blown up yet, My point was new trucks are to heavy nowadays and ford praising the ecoboost getting 22 on the hwy is just funny, put a new ecoboost in my 3,800 lb 96 f-150 truck and i would get upper 20's easy. These new trucks need to go on a diet !
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 08-25-2011, 10:06 PM
Gary Atsma Gary Atsma is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hanford, Cali
Posts: 318
Gary Atsma is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Lewis View Post
What did i miss spell?
I rest my case.... And I too am amazed my 6.0 is doing as well as it is, though I spent 3G's last year on a new ICP module and high pressure oil pump, plus this year it needed a new EGR valve. Don't worry, I'm seriously considering trading it off in a few months.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 08-25-2011, 10:14 PM
Jason Lewis's Avatar
Jason Lewis Jason Lewis is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Central,Texas
Posts: 1,453
Jason Lewis has a good reputation on FTE.Jason Lewis has a good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Atsma View Post
I rest my case.... And I too am amazed my 6.0 is doing as well as it is, though I spent 3G's last year on a new ICP module and high pressure oil pump, plus this year it needed a new EGR valve. Don't worry, I'm seriously considering trading it off in a few months.
Damn i missed that one, lol
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 08-26-2011, 06:45 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine, Virginia
Posts: 25,182
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Lewis View Post
To heavy curb weight, my 96 F-1 rolls at 3,800 full size V8 auto and its a strong truck, how heavy do these trucks need to be? new supercrews over 5K lbs when will auto makers reallise, you have these modern engines that are fuel efficient but are not because the weight of the truck is to heavy, the new ecoboost truck gets 22 HWY, thats nothing the old 7.3 got mid 20's !
I've made this identical point a number of times since I've been a member here. And I still agree. The new engine technology on a lighter truck would make for some very capable and economical machines.

But, the 7.3 is no longer with us thanks to the G and epa. With the ecoboost, people have to realize that not everyone needs a 3.73 axle to have a capable truck. In the new diesel SD's, the 3.73 is not common at all.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 08-26-2011, 07:48 AM
MCDavis's Avatar
MCDavis MCDavis is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: RVA
Posts: 10,320
MCDavis has a superb reputationMCDavis has a superb reputationMCDavis has a superb reputationMCDavis has a superb reputationMCDavis has a superb reputationMCDavis has a superb reputationMCDavis has a superb reputationMCDavis has a superb reputationMCDavis has a superb reputationMCDavis has a superb reputationMCDavis has a superb reputation
Quote:
Originally Posted by tseekins View Post
In the new diesel SD's, the 3.73 is not common at all.
3.31 and 3.55 are the available SRW diesel engine gearing options. Have to step up to DRW to get anything beyond 3.55
Reply With Quote
 
 
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
18' Navigator Concept...thoughts or things to add/change dlcorbett 2015 + Expedition & Navigator 0 03-23-2016 09:03 AM
Question of the Week: Thoughts on the aluminum next gen Super Duty? Patrick R. General Automotive Discussion 1 10-05-2015 06:21 AM
What Changes Would You Make To The Next Gen Super Duty? troverman 1999 to 2016 Super Duty 151 04-06-2014 10:00 PM
Possible Unibody F-150 for 2014? 640 CI Aluminum FORD 2009 - 2014 F150 53 08-20-2012 06:57 PM
Future of the V8 engine. Uncertin? or Solidified? 640 CI Aluminum FORD 6.2L V8 9 05-29-2012 10:53 PM


Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums >

Tags
150, 2011, diesels, f, f150, ford, future, gen, generation, gm, half, lightning, ton, truck, trucks

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 On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:00 AM.


This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.