Heat is proportional to HP per hour. I can easily tow your boat up a hill in low gear. No need to go 70 mph up hill with a load. You may notice that professional drivers with huge engines slow down on hills.

 

Not because they want to. I used to be one, from '07 to '10. My second-to-last truck was an '07 KW T600 with a 435 HP C15. Pulling up to the Eisenhower tunnel with a load of molybdenum the already-huge radiator and cooling fan couldn't keep up and she overheated. Pulled off at the rest area and let her cool down, and later I had a dealer check it out and they said everything was functioning as it should.

That big radiator couldn't keep 435 HP cool pulling a long hill at altitude, and that was pedal on the floor struggling to hold 25 MPH. If that truck had 1,000 HP it would have never made it because of inadequate cooling unless I slowed down to 25 MPH and only used 435 HP up the hill.

You could make a truck that only had a couple hundred horsepower and rate it to tow, but nobody would buy it. I would much rather be able to stay with traffic up and down hills with a trailer. Big trucks have no choice because you can't cool enough horsepower to make them climb hills at 65. That and the fact that nobody makes a 1,000 HP truck engine. But little trucks have that option, and modern ones make that happen. I liked my 365 HP F150, and I wouldn't want a truck with any less.

 

Ray, it seems like you've appointed yourself the only expert on a variety of subjects, from cooling capacity to pedestrian safety.

I tend to put more stock in independent crash tests, warranty backed engineering, and SAE certificed towing capcbility than "gut feel."

 

Pedestrian safety IS tested on new cars. My cousin who works at GM has talked about it before.

 

I agree with this to a point. Example Why do trucks have carpet in them? The first thing everyone does is add liners to the floors now. Why not just use a material that can be washed down? My dad had an older Ford(I think the first Double Cab ever made 92 or 93 I believe) and it had vinyl floor he used to spray it off with a water hose which made cleaning easier. Nowadays with all the different types of material available they should have something better. Something like SeaDek material that is soft, waterproof, and sound resistant would be perfect!

 

Thanks seventyseven250.
Nope I didn't get appointed to anything. Don't think I have demonstrated any expertise here. (I could, but I charge for that ). Not trying to prove anything except I am one Ford enthusiast that wants something more functional. I am benefiting from the experience of other users here. But I do challenge the status quo. We are somewhat being led down the wrong road based on shaky information from "experts". (SAE is not infallible) Also, it seems all the "expertise" here is not traceable (no names used here?). NIST is at least traceable to physical constants.
I like this quote the best:
Originally Posted by Jklnhyd
Holy hell, its not even 9am and you folks are gonna drive me to drink….
I take my hat off to that fellow, whoever he is. . . .

 

Brand-new trucks roll off the factory floor every single day with a vinyl floor. Those of us who like carpet can get that, and those of you who don't can have your vinyl. What needs to change here?

Seriously, I'd like to know what you're looking for. You say less bluff more guts, but you really mean less guts? Less power? What do you think the next generation F150 should be?

 

Well I for one would buy a NEW truck with a couple of hundred horsepower rated to tow, in fact I drive one that has 186 hp quite often at up to 35-40k GCW.

Of course my logic for less horsepower is greater fuel economy, and that is indisputable, it takes heat to make horsepower and to make more heat it takes more fuel. One cannot get around physics on this. Of course a more efficient from a thermal standpoint a engine is, the less fuel is used to make a certain amount of horsepower, therefore, a truck that needs a smaller radiator to keep cool is going to get better fuel efficiency simply by rejecting less heat into the cooling system, and then needing a larger radiator to dispel said heat. Or should we say wasted heat, as that dispelling of the heat does nothing to move the truck down the road, or to move the load up the hill, or to build USABLE horsepower, horsepower that can only be used for a short term rating, is really not useable as most hills do not come in 1/4 mile increments. So those high horsepower dyno pulls floating around to me are useless, unless they are pulling at full load for a few hours without overheating, then that is real and USABLE horsepower.

More horsepower, if you use it that is, will take more fuel. We are not talking steady state low horsepower requirement cruising here, but hard running, acceleration, and idling, yes idling, it takes more fuel to keep the proper stoichiometric ratio on a larger engine at a given rpm than a smaller engine.

We are talking gasoline engines here, as diesels have little different operating parameter.

But then, I have no problem with the higher hp engines being available for those so inclined, just make smaller, more fuel efficient engines available as well. After all, all the horsepower in the world, did someone say 1000 ? means nothing, the SAME 60 mph speed limit with ANY trailer (commercial OR private) on ANY road in WA state applies. Now if we could all travel like on the Autobahn, things would be different, but we can't. Hell, I can move at 60 mph with my little 186hp, but not uphill, so it is a truck, put the four ways on and stay in the right lane.... I still get the job done even at a slightly slower speed up the hills, and at the least amount of fuel required, which is my second highest cost item (the product moved is the first) in moving loads.

So the smaller engine available in the 2015 makes sense to me. What does not is the high bed sides and higher cab. Sure running boards cure the higher step up into the cab, but what about lifting things into the bed, or over the sides? That extra few inches makes a difference, and why is it there? There is no logical reason, at least on a working truck.

On my work truck 4wd F350 with a canopy, I had to get running boards to even comfortably be able to get up into the truck, but working thru the side doors on the canopy is a pain. It is just that much taller than my old 2wd F250 to make it so. Why does a full size 4wd have to be taller? No logical reason, it is NOT going to go serious off roading as it is just too big (wide) to fit on any trail and too long (4 door, long bed) to do whoops. Besides the required running boards bring the ground clearance down to standard levels anyway. It does not take a lot of ground clearance to use this truck where it is practical - IE at the beach, in snow etc!

So make my trucks lower Ford. Make them more usable in that regard! At least, make that "option" available!!!!

As to styling, I could care less. All vehicles regardless of type are a tool to get a job done, even if that is basic transpiration. This whole car culture carefully crafted and kept alive by the car companies and others is meaniless, at least to me. I drive a Ford truck because it fits me best, and I know how to fix it, NOT because it is built better than others, because in many ways it is not, and yes, Ford has there issues as well. I don't drive large Ford cars though, GM large cars have always fit me much better.

So again, make my FULL size trucks lower Ford, make them more user and load friendly. Ford, you had a FULL size pickup that was rated at 29 mpg in 1978 - by now these trucks should be at the upper 30's, make MINE that way, then I will buy, but until you can at least MATCH the 1978 rating, I will NOT buy a new truck.

Further more - I have enough time spent crawling up into semi's, I don't need nor want that unless it is required to clear the tires, something that is not on any factory stock pickup.

David

 

I guess I am need a new truck and I don't like anything I see on the lots. I know FORD engineers can make almost anything that customers want. I came here to make some noise to that effect in hopes that FORD had someone scouting this site.
I have left my non-informed, best guess for the direction that I would want truck makers to go. Also got some ideas from others here. Hope FORD reads it.
I liked getting >260,000 miles on the inline six. The V6 is pretty reliable. (170,000 now). I never knew what a utility truck was until I saw a Korean 3-wheeled job. I don't know a thing about it except it could haul more than any 1 ton that detroit made, at least at 40 mph. I know it couldn't match the roadworthiness of a new F350, but it sure could out-haul it.
I like FORDs best, had better luck with them. I don't make noise on CHEVY blogs because I want FORD to lead the pack. I want buyers to kick the tires and check the quality of steel in the axels, rather than read the fancy brochures and drink the Kool-aide. I am betting that more than a few drivers are capable of that and more.
They are capable of digging in and finding out what they are getting for that much money, and they are capable of more than a little common sense. Like the fellow who addressed floor-mats here and the driver that verified from experience that you CAN climb a hill towing 10,000 pounds (though he may have been towing six or seven times that with his tractor). None of this has any real numbers attached to it, but I or any engineer could put approximate numbers and design limits on their experience.
Many of us can dig into the onboard electronics too. I like electronics on the engine but I don't like electronics to decide when to lock my doors, turn on lights, beep the horn, and make reminder noises. There aught to be a disable switch.

Does Ford have an e-mail so users can talk to engineering group leaders directly?
I probably missed it, it ain't obvious that they want to hear from users directly.

I am almost done here. Will be glad to hear some more input before moving on.

 

You can disable the door lock and horn beeps.

 

thanks dmanlyr
See! There ARE drivers that know from where they speak.

Ya know, it takes about 5 years to train an engineer to develop the common sense that dmanlyr knows about thermodynamics. A few of them can actually work out the partial differential equations but almost none can apply them unless they use design software.
But a whole team of engineers has no problem with it.

We just have to herd them in the right direction.

 

Ford does have eyes on this board and they serve in a customer service capacity for those who purchased a vehicle and need assistance.

I'm not convinced that these folks will be able to pass info back to Ford on customer wants and I'm not convinced that Ford is scanning these boards for t hat type of info.

A car maker is going to build what the majority of it's customer base wants or perceives that it wants. Those who want a beater with a heater are going to have to continue rebuilding existing trucks. The joy of wrench turning is way behind me now.

 

Good, is it in the user's manual?

 

Thanks Tim

Good stuff. You got me thinking when you said
"A car maker is going to build what the majority of it's customer base wants or perceives that it wants."

I immediately wondered how they determine what their customers want.
If they don't listen to user input from their service reps, who else don't they listen to?
I have never had a dealer offer to forward my design concerns to HQ. I get the feeling it's just not done.
And so I tried here.
I need a new truck and no one is listening.
Automakers marketing crews foster a feeling of dominating the highway rather than getting the job done. That sure ain't the direction I want to go. I see to much of the results of inconsiderate driving.

Maybe this comfortable pot has been stirred enough. Got to get to the next level.
Anyone got e-mails for Ford's truck design chief and Ford's truck marketing chief?

 

Ray,

Up have hit the nail on the head, unfortunately American motorists have been sold on the whole horsepower and styling sells, if not by their own choice, but also swayed by the multitude of car ads selling such performance, performance which can NEVER be used legally in America's driving experience.

There are many of us who want something more practical, a emphasis on tare weight verses GVWR, verses GCWR, ease of loading, driving, etc. Unfortunately for us, we are stuck with what the manufactures build, but are we really? Nope, not in the slightest, while I hate wrenching at my age, I will do so to get what I want, I am not locked into buying something new every few years. As well, my location in a relatively salt free area means that things like frames and brake lines can last almost indefinably. Not the case in heavy salt areas though.

Breaking the Kar Kulture is the first step. Practicality and safety over styling first and foremost, at least for daily drivers. Toys could still be fun, but I am talking day in day out working and transportation vehicles. Limiting manufactures ads to real world driving situations (not on a "closed course, do not attempt") would be the second. Thirdly, good state inspections to get the unsafe vehicles and illegally modified vehicles off the road, and fourth, consumer education as to what trucks are all about , at least in my opinion.

That said, I have memory, and while polluting less, being safer, new cars, and trucks DO NOT get better mileage. One look at the history of real world and the EPA rating reveals this clearly.

Of course we can drive up to 80 mph legally now, rather than the double nickel, but does this mean that we really need enough horsepower to go 150 mph? Not in my opinion n the least.

Besides that, you can't buy speed rated tires that are also load rated / carrying the last time I looked, so is patently unsafe to drive faster than 84 mph sustained. So why have that much horsepower in the first place. A few extra minets spent on a hill climb are really worth less mileage on the years of life on a truck?

Just what works for me, David