OK, first I'll admit I'm new to the forum but I've read a high percentage of the recent posts. I've contemplated becoming a member for awhile now. . . , it's the whole Hemi comparison that finally pushed me over the edge.

I'm not sure why Ford decided to pick on the Hemi during it's recent barrage of F150 commercials, but I think it's going to backfire. Whenever Ford talks about superior low end torque it adds the disclaimer of 1,000 rpm in fine print as if that is the only engine speed it can "measure up". Problem is, how do you use that "superior" torque at 1000 rpm? If you go WOT with your automatic trannies from idle you can surpass 1000 rpm before you even move thanks to the stall speed of the convertor.

The whole 80% torque from 1000 up sounds good but apparently isn't unique to the Ford 5.4L. Local dyno put a manual trans heavy duty Ram on the rolls and found 80% or better torque from 1000 up as well (and that's 80% of a higher number if you believe the 365 & 375 ft lb ratings Ford & Dodge have published at the engine).

This board does give credit to the Hemi winning a race if both trucks are unloaded, I agree. But if weight is added to both the Ford somehow will win?, I don't agree (read on).

Acceleration is a function of vehicle mass and force at the tire patch. This force is a function of torque at the wheel and tire radius. The torque at the wheel is a function of engine torque and gear multiplication from the transmission and differential. If you don't follow this logic, just understand that if two trucks weigh the same, have the same gearing, same tire size, and same driveline efficiency, the truck that makes the most torque at the engine over the course of a race wins. More engine torque will mean not only faster acceleration but superior pulling capability.

I contend that the Hemi has more torque at all speeds (except perhaps 1000 rpm although I'd like to see comparative graphs) and will therfore out accelerate and outpull the 5.4L 3 valve in equally equipped trucks whether it be unloaded or equally loaded.

I recall one member putting up a $100 bet to Hemi owners. I'd like to take that bet, and you can decide how the race will be run (0-60, 1/4 mile, loaded or unloaded). Any takers in Michigan?, there aught to be a few in Dearborn. If there are no takers as I suspect, I'll even add a couple hundred pounds to give you a sporting chance. Yes, my truck will be stock (as must yours).

I know I'm going to get flamed, but these are the facts as I understand them. Please do not kick me out of this forum, I'd like to read and learn any and all counterpoints with the ability to respond.

 

Well honestly, you will get a lot of backfire from this, as I was the poster who was challenged to the race for $100. I don't own a truck now, or have I driven either of the new trucks out but I was trying to go by what the numbers were saying. I'm not really all that biased, I just like what performs and your dyno of the torque basically proves to me what I've been assuming all along. I also have stated before that I would like to see competitive dyno graphs. Good for you man, I've been wanting to know this info for awhile now. Welcome aboard.

 

I don't have graph data for the ne 3v 5.4L but I'll give you some numbers for the old 5.4L vs the 5.7L Hemi and you can make of them what you want:

@ 1000 rpm
5.4L is at 290lb-ft
5.7L is at 290lb-ft

@ 2000 rpm
5.4L is at 330lb-ft
5.7L is at 320lb-ft

@ 2500 rpm
5.4L is at 350lb-ft
5.7L is at 330lb-ft

@ 3000 rpm
5.4L is at 330lb-ft
5.7L is at 350lb-ft

Ford's old 2v 5.4L makes the same or higher torque at low rpms and although I don't have a graph for the 3v 5.4L I'm almost certain it shows even better performance in this regard than the old 2 valve design.

My personal opinion-I'd pick the time proven 8 year old 5.4L which tows at lower rpm (less engine wear) over the brand new Hemi 5.7L which tows at higher (more engine wear) engine speeds.

Basically, I think you have the wrong idea trying to prove which truck has the better towing engine by offering to race with a load on the beds or a trailer on the hitches.

Think about this: My V10 F250 is a damn good towing pickup. With a 7000 or 8000lb trailer on the hitch I can positively outrun up any interstate hill a commercial diesel tractor with any loaded trailer on his tail. But....does this make my V10 a better towing engine than a commercial tractor engine??

 

That's brand loyalty for you. The 5.4 is a long stroke engine. Torque is the only thing going for it. The hemi giving up 10 ft lbs here, 20 ft lbs there in the lower end is not bad. If time proves it to be a durable engine that doesn't spit out spark plugs, have piston slap, or head gasket leaks it gets a thumbs up from me. You guys can do the 5.4 vs Hemi battle. When I'm done with my mild 383W, it's hunting season for v-10's and 6.0's.

 

Thank you very much for a straight forward reply with excellent content.

First, I'd like to know where you found those numbers for the Hemi. I've never seen Chrysler post performance numbers in 500rpm increments like Ford. Could you tell me where those numbers were interpolated and extrapolated from? The 5.4L 2 valve numbers look inflated. They must be from the good old days when Ford was sued for publishing lofty numbers for some of their powertrains. By all means though, I'll gladly put the Hemi up against the 5.4L 2 valve variant. If the 2 valve numbers you quoted are accurate, I don't see why Ford spent all that money on a 3 valve engine that can't improve upon those low end numbers (3 valve doesn't make 350 ft lbs at 2500). I know the extra money wasn't spent to make good torque up high. The Hemi goes another 600 rpm beyond the 3 valve redline delivering better than 300 ft lbs all the way.

And how do you figure the Ford tows at a lower engine speed? Seems to me the Ram 1500 comes with a 5 speed automatic (vs 4 speed) and taller rearend. This equates to lower engine speeds at a given cruising speed.

If you work the truck hard enough to make it downshift (WOT accel for passing for instance) both engines will run up to or near redline before shifting. In the case of the Hemi, you will put substantially more torque to the wheels at these higher engine speeds if you desire. If you fear you are damaging your Hemi from high engine speed, don't go WOT (Wide Open Throttle). The engine will shift short of redline but you'll have to get used to the "5.4L level performance". OK, maybe I went a little overboard on the last comment, but you get the point.

Despite the 2 valve #s you've shared, I still believe the Hemi has the 3 valve beat in torque at all but possibly 1000 rpm (like the tiny print says in the Ford commercial). Ford is going to regret airing the commercial that shows it pulling on the Hemi. It's only a matter of time before the major magazines run the same tests with a much different outcome. If Dodge marketing is even half awake, they will not let Ford have the last laugh on this one.

 

Exactly why are you bragging about all this good torque up high? I own a Ranger 3.0 and you try using all that "high RPM torque" at the Pismo sand dunes, know were it'll get you... no were, you'll be stuck. Now I like the hemi's but I'd rather have better low end power any day, If not to get you started in the sand, but to make every day stop and go traffic easier on the engine by working at lower RPM. Second exactly how do you know the 3v doesn't make of 350ft-lbs, or even that the hemi has over 300ft-lbs all the way to red line...I thought Dodge didn't have readings at 500 Rmp intervals or that Ford had even posted the complete dyno readings for the 3v.

 

I'll start with the easier questions,

P (hp) = T (ft lb) x N (RPM) / 5252

If the Hemi is rated at 345 at 5400, then it is making 336 ft lbs at that speed. Torque decreases slightly by 5600rpm and nearly makes the same power from 5200 to 5600 (remember the dyno curve I mentioned earlier). The Hemi doesn't lose even close to 36 ft lbs in the last 200 rpm. So there you have it, over 300 ft lbs to redline.

I am not only "bragging" about the high end torque, but also the low and mid range torque. The high end torque is simply the region where the engines differ most. Am I to understand that you would oppose a 5.4L 3 valve upgrade that maintains it low and mid range torque but gives you more up top? If that high end torque scares you so much, you can get off the accelerator as the engine speed climbs. Note that it is possible, and even very likely, that I can haul a car (say 6000 lb car & trailer) from point A to B without going beyond peak torque speed of 4200 rpm. Just because the Hemi makes superior high end torque doesn't mean I have to use it every time I drive (just when I want to accelerate much harder than the competition).

I respect your comment that you'd rather more low end torque than high end power. I'm sure Dodge could have made this trade-off but they must have been happy with its low and mid range performance. If it matches or exceeds the 5.4L 3 valve at all but possibly 1000 rpm I'd say it makes enough down low to get the job done.

Lastly, the old 5.4L 2 valve made it's peak torque at 2500 rpm (supposedly 350 ft lbs per above). The new 3 valve makes it's rated 365 ft lbs at something like 3800 rpm. 80% of 365 is 292 ft lbs which I assume is very close to what it makes at 1000 rpm. Reportedly, the 3 valve builds torque in a linear to slightly concave manner. This would favor my statement that it doesn't match the 2 valves performance at 2500 rpm. Can anyone share a dyno curve so we can see the characteristic shape at the speeds we are discussing? I could be wrong here, but I'd be very surprised to see 350 ft lbs at 2500. The fact that all your 3 valve engines are mated to automatic transmissions makes this task (finding a torque curve that accurately portrays the engines low speed characteristics) very difficult.

I've got to go, my offer still stands.

 

i wish i could post attachments. i can't yet, (too new of a user i guess) but i did a comparison myself using my excel.....

here is what i found. from what has been said on this thread, the ford produces 80% of torque at 1000 rpm. = 292 ft lbs

dodge produces 290 at 1000 rpm.

ok well from dodge website,

hemi produces peak torque at 4250 of 375 ft lbs.

ford produces peak torque at 3750 of 365 ft lbs

so from doing a simple graph with a linear fit(the best we can do till we find true graphs), it shows that the fords torque is stronger all the way through the rpm band than the dodge....until we can get true curves from both ford and dodge, this will explain why the ford outpulls the hemi from a standstill.

sorry dodge fans, do the calculations yourself...

sorry i couldn't post the attachment.

also, if ford will make that bold of statement, i believe they would have at least tried that test before they aired that commercial. that is pretty ballsy if they didn't...

dont let the peak numbers fool you....and dont forget about the rest of the drive train either. early reports of the ford tranny say that it is strong and firm...maybe the soft shifts are gone...

bottom line though, low end grunt is what it is all about...

 

If you guys want to argue over a few horses thats fine. I just wnat to let you guys know that I think you should enjoy the truck you have and not worry about who truck will get .000000001 seconds faster to the finnish line.

 

It takes a lot more than three points to define a torque curve. You may be right about the 2 ft lb advantage Ford has at 1000 rpm, the small print in their adds claim they make more at that (and only that) engine speed. I suspect the Hemi makes more at all other engine speeds. Time will tell, tests will be run and rebutals heard.

One thing is clear, this performance shortfall isn't going to sit well with Ford, it's become known as "Ford's Hemiroid", because it's a pain in their a$$.

. . . a little something I heard, I can't take credit for it.

 

if you call this engine a performance shortage, and ford's hemiroid, then what would you call the last 5.4 which was named the worlds best engine for several years running???

just because all the dodge guys are passionatly in love with their precious hemi, which in theory should easily out power the ford for sake of displacement, 2 plugs per cylinder, and the hemishperical chamber, doesnt mean that ford has to match all thier numbers. ford has been building the best truck the longest out of all the three. what they have been building has obviously been getting the work done..... maybe in a couple years, ford will build a high performance motor that belongs in a car, and put it in a truck so you dodge guys will be happy... but for now, ford is making an awesome product!!!

that is my .02

 

Where did you hear that the 5.4 is the worlds best engine? Please post a web address or article, because I don't think that engine really holds a candle to more sophisticated engines like the S2000 or the new M3 engine.

As for the reliability thing, all 3 manufacturers make equally reliable trucks, there is no way to prove different, tell your stories and whatever but that is not a good way to tell.

Lastly, Ford has not been doing well lately, neither has chrysler, and Mr.Ford Jr. has a lot of cleaning up to do from the last CE and doesn't have much to work with on new vehicles. Ford is betting a lot on this new truck and it did fall short in term of numbers. Why was the 4.6 left completely unchanged minus throttle by wire? You'd think that a completely redesigned truck, the one that is the BEST selling vehicle in general, would come out on top in every category.

Torque, you present a strong case and it sounds like you have some insider knowledge, everyone will continue talking about the 5.4 but there is NO dyno whatsoever to prove what they are saying, everyone is going by what Ford has been telling them. I'm very interested in seeing the outcome in this.

Also, if you check the Ford website it says the "1000 RPM" thing but has an asterick that reads "When equiped with 4.11 gearing", don't understand why its just with those gears.

 

I don't have to worry about the 5.4 vs the 5.7 when my 6.4 makes 427 ft lbs @ 2,200 rpm. I out pull them both.

 

hahaha niiiice!

 

fords building a 4.6 3 valve engine thats why the current isnt changed