Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > General > Ford vs The Competition
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


Ford vs The Competition Technical discussion and comparison ONLY. Trolls will not be tolerated.




 
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2004, 10:26 AM
ChevmaninaFord ChevmaninaFord is offline
Senior User
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Gray's Creek, NC
Posts: 232
ChevmaninaFord is starting off with a positive reputation.
GM Woke Up

GM for 2006, as far as Z71 vehicles go will be giving their trucks and SUVs a high, LEVEL stance(Thank God). The fullsize truck will be geared towards outdoorsmen. Some Z71s sit level from the factory now, but a majority don't, I guess so many people complained they changed. Otherwise you had tighten the torsion bars, or use some kind of Ford Key in the torsion bars to make them sit level.
__________________
Silver 1999 Reg. Cab F150, 4.6L V8, Off-Road and Towing pckgs.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2004, 01:58 PM
grey77 grey77 is offline
Senior User
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: So. La.
Posts: 351
grey77 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Any word on beefing up their engine? I had heard rummor that GM would start offering their 350 as an option &/or possibly returning to that engine.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2004, 08:20 PM
ChevmaninaFord ChevmaninaFord is offline
Senior User
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Gray's Creek, NC
Posts: 232
ChevmaninaFord is starting off with a positive reputation.
No idea on the engines, wish they would bring the 5.7 350 back.
__________________
Silver 1999 Reg. Cab F150, 4.6L V8, Off-Road and Towing pckgs.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 02-12-2004, 09:27 PM
otto otto is offline
Posting Guru
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Racine WI
Posts: 1,686
otto is starting off with a positive reputation.
The only 350 thats in production is an alum block and that motors doesnt belong in a truck, the 5.3 and 6.0 are plenty, no reason to bring the 350 back, the block is the same as a 350 with a different bore and stroke.........we are pulling 16-18 mpg with 4 speed autos 300 hp 6.0's at the shop thats and 250hp 350 gas mileage all day, and mayhaps many a 180hp 302 owner on this board would like to get 16-18 with their rides

The General isnt sleeping their trucks sell well
__________________
Ford Truck Listing Only Here
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2004, 06:36 AM
Fordsflylow's Avatar
Fordsflylow Fordsflylow is offline
Postmaster
1999 Ford F-Super Duty
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: IL
Posts: 2,551
Fordsflylow has a great reputation on FTE.Fordsflylow has a great reputation on FTE.Fordsflylow has a great reputation on FTE.Fordsflylow has a great reputation on FTE.Fordsflylow has a great reputation on FTE.Fordsflylow has a great reputation on FTE.
Anyone heard or read about a class action lawsuit against chevy/gmc regarding excessive noise rattle and lack of power in their vortec v-8's?
__________________
99 F250 SD/SC XLT 6.8L/415ci, 4" lift, 189,000mi
94 Ranger SC XLT, 4.0L/244ci, stock, 215,000mi
Blue blood here!

"A 3% tax increase on the wealthiest Americans is socialism, but a 14% pay cut on the lower middle class is doing your part?" BS
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2004, 06:47 AM
mikelehmann mikelehmann is offline
Junior User
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: virginia
Posts: 87
mikelehmann is starting off with a positive reputation.
I have a hole stable of fords i like the body's. but there will never be a better motor than a SB chevy. say different and your only lying to yourself
__________________
2002 E-350 superduty extended 5.4
2004 F-350 Crew 4X4 5.4
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2004, 06:54 AM
Fordsflylow's Avatar
Fordsflylow Fordsflylow is offline
Postmaster
1999 Ford F-Super Duty
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: IL
Posts: 2,551
Fordsflylow has a great reputation on FTE.Fordsflylow has a great reputation on FTE.Fordsflylow has a great reputation on FTE.Fordsflylow has a great reputation on FTE.Fordsflylow has a great reputation on FTE.Fordsflylow has a great reputation on FTE.
I know I read about it somewhere, just can't remember where it was. It involves a series of years and I don't recall which.
__________________
99 F250 SD/SC XLT 6.8L/415ci, 4" lift, 189,000mi
94 Ranger SC XLT, 4.0L/244ci, stock, 215,000mi
Blue blood here!

"A 3% tax increase on the wealthiest Americans is socialism, but a 14% pay cut on the lower middle class is doing your part?" BS
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 02-21-2004, 07:14 AM
sinister73 sinister73 is offline
Elder User
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 761
sinister73 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I agree with otto, I see no reason to bring back the 350 in GM pickups. It was a very versatile engine which was adaptable to many applications - but the current 6.0L will do everything (in a truck) that any 350 would do and then some fella's.

The 6.0L is one of my favorite modern day engines - it's in a class by itself really. It will have equal performance with a Triton V10 towing up to 8000lbs, afterwhich the V10 should have progressively better performance as the weight adds up. It will stay with a V10 with loads on and will leave it empty. A 2500HD with 6.0 is rated at 10,600Lbs towing, and though I would opt for a V10 SD-350 if I were pulling 5 tons around all the time, I would have fewer reservations about pushing a 6.0L 2500hd to it's 10,600lb limit , than I would pushing an 04' F150 to it's very inflated 9,900lb limit for sure.

No 350 could match the V10 in any kind of performance except empty acceleration.

In honesty the 6.0 can't be compared to a V10 for downright pulling power, and it can't be compared to a 5.4L either - it's right in between both. I tend to compare it with the 5.4L myself since both the 5.4L and 6.0 are the base engines used in GM and Ford heavy duty trucks, and unlike the less powerful 5.4L which powers a truck about 400lbs heavier, the 6.0L is an actually useable base powerplant to work with without having to ante up for a larger engine just to have some get up and go.

The only mark the 6.0 had going against it was CSK (which the GM 5.7L also had ), but this has (finally) been eliminated and is no longer an issue.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 02-22-2004, 01:55 AM
MEPR MEPR is offline
Elder User
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: McChord AFB
Posts: 738
MEPR is starting off with a positive reputation.
i think the 350 could have been used but what replaced it is much better. As far as the stance of GM trucks. I like the raked look. Its a little practical too, whith the rear riding higher you can load em down and they sag as much. I get realy mad at my ford for that.
__________________
my truck is twice as old as me!
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 02-22-2004, 07:50 AM
MJD MJD is offline
Elder User
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 718
MJD is starting off with a positive reputation.
I have heard that the real reason that the 350 Chevy was discontinued was because it was too easy to find parts for them in junk yards and such, and GM wanted more money selling parts. I can find no reason not to believe this, because the 350 could have easily been built to do what the 366 does now. I am not sure if the same block design was used for the 366 or not. I do know that a 496 BB is just a stroked out 454.
__________________
1993 F-150 Ex. Cab SB 4X4, 302 auto-finally traded off

1986 F-250 ex cab 4X4. 460 4-speed manual

2004 Dodge Cummins
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 02-24-2004, 04:50 PM
vman vman is offline
Elder User
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: brimfield township,OH
Posts: 656
vman is starting off with a positive reputation.
No. The old 350 doesn't have one part in common with the new 5.3 or 6.0.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 02-24-2004, 05:36 PM
mikelehmann mikelehmann is offline
Junior User
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: virginia
Posts: 87
mikelehmann is starting off with a positive reputation.
the SB chevy first year was 1955 i think which i believe was 283
they also make 265, 302. 305, 307, 327, 350, 400 after market blocks goo too 455 ci 40 years give or take
__________________
2002 E-350 superduty extended 5.4
2004 F-350 Crew 4X4 5.4
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 02-25-2004, 02:23 PM
*Big_Swede* *Big_Swede* is offline
New User
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Sweden, Stockholm, Hägersten
Posts: 8
*Big_Swede* is starting off with a positive reputation.
I think the 265 was before the 283....
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 02-26-2004, 03:54 AM
FordLariat FordLariat is offline
Posting Guru
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: pound
Posts: 1,396
FordLariat is starting off with a positive reputation.
I've seen SBC engines all my life, and I have never seen one do anything that a 351w can't do. If judge how good an engine is by how easy it is to get parts for it and fix it, then you can tell that you are a fan of Chevy engines. I can see where having a million in each junkyard is good for Chevy fans, because they're always needing something replaced.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 02-26-2004, 12:04 PM
V10KLZZ71S's Avatar
V10KLZZ71S V10KLZZ71S is offline
Posting Guru
Garage is empty, add now
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Gretna ,LA.
Posts: 1,762
V10KLZZ71S is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally posted by FordLariat
I've seen SBC engines all my life, and I have never seen one do anything that a 351w can't do. If judge how good an engine is by how easy it is to get parts for it and fix it, then you can tell that you are a fan of Chevy engines. I can see where having a million in each junkyard is good for Chevy fans, because they're always needing something replaced.
10-4, Start looking at how many older chevys smoke compared to older fords that smoke, its not even close.I believe the only advantage the chevys had over fords thru the yrs was better flowing heads.My wife has a 2000 tahoe 5.3,crappy shifting, whining fuel pump[loud] dealer says its normal,so its normal for them to be heard 30 ft away.Gm products will always nickel and dime you to death,sure some get excellent peformance, but for the most part they are too unreliable for me.For yrs in consumer reports the most unreliable pickup was chevys and gmc,it still might be that way, havent checked lately, dont really care,until Ford becomes unreliable i will always buy Ford.
ps: my wife had the tahoe before we got married.
__________________
FORD MAN ALL MY LIFE!
Headers, BBK twin 65mm, Superchip Tuner,True dual exhaust, H-pipe w/Magnaflows, Homemade ram air
Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2004, 12:04 PM
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > General > Ford vs The Competition

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 09:29 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. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.



 
vbulletin Admin Backup