Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Newer Light Duty Trucks > 2009+ F150
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


2009+ F150 Discuss the 2009 through 2014 Ford F150 SPONSORED BY:

Welcome to Ford-Trucks Forums!
Welcome to Ford-Trucks.com.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Ford-Trucks Forums community today!





 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-27-2011, 01:45 AM
640 CI Aluminum FORD 640 CI Aluminum FORD is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,006
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.
Performance difference's between rear end ratios.

I've been keeping up with the latest in 2011 F-150 road tests and all that stuff. Here recently I've noticed something that I found a little intriguing. Recently there have been two fairly major road tests and comparison's that a 2011 F-150 was involved in. The particular truck I want to you take notice of in the first test ''which only includes F-150s'' is the one with the 5.0L V8. In the second test the only F-150 that was there to compete was one with the 5.0L.

The thing I find interesting is that the 2011 F-150 5.0L that was tested by Truck Trend ran a 0-60 of 6.9 seconds. Keep in mind that it was a 4X4 Crew Cab with a 3.73 rear end.

Now the one tested by Pickuptrucks.com was a regular cab 2WD 5.0L with 3.55 rear end...And it ran the same 6.9 second 0-60 as the much heavier Crew Cab 4WD F-150 with the 3.73 rear end.

Considering the weight difference I would have expected the 4X4 F-150 to noticeably slower perhaps 1/2 a second or so to 60? But instead it runs nose to nose with the lighter 2WD model...Does making the jump from 3.55 to 3.73 really yield that much extra performance?

I personally own a 2011 F-150 FX4 Supercab with the 5.0L and 3.73, and I even test drove an XLT 5.0L Supercab with 3.55's before I made my purchase. To me my 3.73 equipped truck maybe feels a little more punchy off the line...But really any real world difference seems negligible. Let me know what your thougts on the subject are.

#1
5.0-liter V-8 XLT SuperCrew 4x4 - 2011 Ford F-150 Comparison Test - Truck Trend

#2
http://special-reports.pickuptrucks.com/2011-30k-
shootout.html

Here's the spec's for the trucks tested in the order I've placed the tests above this.

#1
2011 Ford F-150 XLT SuperCrew 4X4
5.0L V8
3.73 Rear End
Curb Weight - 5640lbs
0-60 = 6.9 seconds
1/4 mile = 15.3 @ 93.30

#2
2011 Ford F-150 XLT Regular Cab 2WD
5.0L V8
3.55 Rear End
Curb Weight - 5,110lbs
0-60 = 6.9 seconds
1/4 mile = 15.4 @93.31mph

(530lbs difference in curb weight)

''Note''
For some reason Pickuptrucks.com neglected to include the spec's for the trucks used in their test. So I had to look up the curb weight online for a Regular Cab 2WD 5.0L F-150. The numbers may not be exact to the F-150 used in their test...However they are very close.

What do you think? Why did the almost 600lb heavier F-150 run the same 0-60mph time and almost identical 1/4 mile time and trap speed? Could this be due to gearing alone? Did the Crew Cab just have a hot engine or in vice versa the Regular Cab had an underachiver engine?

I've never personally run my 5.0 Supercab FX4 in a 0-60 or 1/4 mile so I can't speak for myself...But I did however watch a factory stock 5.0L regular cab 2WD F-150 run a 14.5 1/4 mile @ 95mph (Speed Limiter) and that particular truck had a 3.73 rear end.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-27-2011, 05:46 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins tseekins is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hampton, Virginia
Posts: 18,976
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
Different trucks, different locations and different drivers.

One only needs to look at the super duty line-up to see what a powerful engine and a six speed transmission do to truck capability and fuel economy.
__________________
Tim
SCPO United States Coast Guard Retired
2011 F-150 XLT 4x4 Ecoboost
2010 Ford Focus
2004 Expedition XLT 4x2

FTE Guidelines
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09-27-2011, 06:33 AM
todd230's Avatar
todd230 todd230 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Gilbert Arizona
Posts: 192
todd230 is starting off with a positive reputation.
I'd believe it - gearing is a huge part of straight line acceleration. Think of timing 0-20 MPH from a stop in 1st gear vs starting in 2nd gear. It's about getting to and keeping the motor in it's power band. I would think the 5.0 would be more gear sensitive than the EB simply because of the power band - 5.0 makes peak torque and HP higher in the RPM range so that first to second gear time would probably account for a good chunk of ET not running in the ideal power band - then at the end of the run where wind resistance plays a larger part the 3.73 is also helping.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 09-28-2011, 04:49 AM
FORD FRED FORD FRED is offline
Junior User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 65
FORD FRED is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
The super crew would have more weight on the back axle helping it to get traction and get out of the hole faster. Also if the 4x4 was engaged it would also help it to get out of the hole faster. Just my 2 cents worth.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 09-28-2011, 10:13 AM
cartmanea cartmanea is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Corvallis, OR
Posts: 6,733
cartmanea is a name known to allcartmanea is a name known to allcartmanea is a name known to allcartmanea is a name known to allcartmanea is a name known to allcartmanea is a name known to all
Gearing makes a huge difference in acceleration; I'm not sure why you're wanting to debate this so much...
__________________
2012 F-150 XLT Ecoboost SuperCrew 6.5' 4x4
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 09-28-2011, 10:55 AM
shortride's Avatar
shortride shortride is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: 46th State USA
Posts: 584
shortride is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
One consideration is that these late model engines have the ability to adjust the ignition, valve timing and fuel control under different conditions. This could explain some of the performance characteristic differences.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 09-28-2011, 11:03 AM
cartmanea cartmanea is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Corvallis, OR
Posts: 6,733
cartmanea is a name known to allcartmanea is a name known to allcartmanea is a name known to allcartmanea is a name known to allcartmanea is a name known to allcartmanea is a name known to all
Quote:
Originally Posted by shortride View Post
One consideration is that these late model engines have the ability to adjust the ignition and maybe valve timing and fuel control under different conditions. This could explain some of the performance characteristic differences.
The gearing explains it... Lower gears apply more torque at a lower speed to the rear wheels, which will provide more acceleration. Pair that with a heavier vehicle and the lower gears will attain similar acceleration to a lighter vehicle with taller gears, though at the cost of highway mileage and top speed.
__________________
2012 F-150 XLT Ecoboost SuperCrew 6.5' 4x4
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 09-28-2011, 11:39 AM
shortride's Avatar
shortride shortride is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: 46th State USA
Posts: 584
shortride is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cartmanea View Post
The gearing explains it... Lower gears apply more torque at a lower speed to the rear wheels, which will provide more acceleration. Pair that with a heavier vehicle and the lower gears will attain similar acceleration to a lighter vehicle with taller gears, though at the cost of highway mileage and top speed.
Absolutely!

This is the only reason for my post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 640 CI Aluminum FORD View Post
Now the one tested by Pickuptrucks.com was a regular cab 2WD 5.0L with 3.55 rear end...And it ran the same 6.9 second 0-60 as the much heavier Crew Cab 4WD F-150 with the 3.73 rear end.
Reply With Quote
Old 09-28-2011, 11:39 AM
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Newer Light Duty Trucks > 2009+ F150

Tags
060, 150, 2006, 2007, 4x4, axle, cab, differances, end, f150, ford, ratiodifferences, rear, roush, specs, supercrew, 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 On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:18 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.5.2 ©2010, Crawlability, Inc.
Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Statement - Jobs
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.

vbulletin Admin Backup