is the power wars between ford,chevy, and dodge back on? i cant wait to see what ford answers back with. do i hear 360?

 

whats the torque? i could care less about hp. its down low torque that matters.

 

How aboout 320hp, 380ft/lbs and 3 more mpg.

 

i am hoping ford will get a small v-8 to make at least 400 ft pounds the 5.4 is only 330 cid so it is a tiny v-8.

 

Now as long as they're around after 2007 to handle warranty issues and such...

 

It's the horsepower race of the 60s all over again. Insurance rates killed the horsepower race back then but I suspect it will be fuel mileage regulations this time.

 

Emissions standards helped the demise of the muscle cars as well.

Personally I think the whole h.p. thing is getting out of hand. It is obviously a good marketing tool, but it just keeps driving prices up. On the other hand, if they can make these engines (Ford, GM) that can produce the power, be reasonably efficient, and have a long service life, why not?

Gregghealy: So the new 6.0 Vortex Max makes 3 mpg more than the old version? If so, it was desperately needed. The 6.0 is a real gas hog.

Saw an advert. last night for the 1/2 ton GMC showing a towing cap. of 10,300. Properly equipped of course. Auto locking diff, 9.5" rear, heavy duty transmission (wonder what that is?). Still way too much load for a 1/2 ton, regardless of the manufacturer.

<TABLE class=tborder cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=4 width="100%" align=center border=0><TBODY><TR title="Post 3126162" vAlign=top><TD class=alt1 align=middle width=125>ford390gashog</TD><TD class=alt2>whats the torque? i could care less about hp. its down low torque that matters.</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Really? You can ignore h.p. as long as you don't need power, say, for pulling a load at highway speeds. If all you're doing is crawling around off-road that's fine. How about a 2.3 with a gear reduction making 1000 ft./lbs.? And still only 90 h.p.

Sure will be interesting to see what Ford and Dodge counter with.

 

Ford, not GM started this nonsense of taking a "half ton" model and optioning it up to a traditional "three-quarter ton". That GMC 1500 with 9.5 rear, 10,000+ towing cap, etc. is an answer to the "payload package" F-150, that Ford refuses to call an F-250 (not SuperDuty).

BTW, I'll take the GM 4L80E Hydramatic any day over the Ford E4OD, or whatever they call it today.

I agree that fuel costs may kill today's horsepower wars. It was not just insurance rates, but early emissions controls and fuel shortages that killed horsepower in the 1970's.

Jim

 

the ad did'nt mention the torque or i over looked. i hope ford counters with a boss 5.4 lol but would'nt that be nice. ford got 40 hp with 1 valve. do i hear a 4 valve head?

 

is this a bad thing? i'm kinda liking ford being out front setting the pace instead of playing it safe and trying to keep up. i think its going to be cool watching where this goes.

 

That's right. That is where the F150 came from. It was to skirt emission standards imposed on the F100 and it allowed the use of leaded gas until the standards were tightened for the 1979 model year. Seems like Chevy quickly introduced the BIG 10 version of their C-10 to compete with the F150.

 

Show me a one valve four cycle engine. You cannot, because none exist.

 

He meant 1 more valve, i.e. stepping up to a 3 valve from a 2 valve.

 

Really?? They musta forgot to put in my 04... I sure can't feel 300 horses under the hood.

Seriously...I think it was a bit more than that. And even those changes were not that impressive. Especially the "throttle-by-wire" system.

Chevy's square architecture on its engines has the TRQ right about where the HP numbers are....just like Dodge's oversquare engines.

I think I saw the 345hp Silverado's torque numbers right around 350 in an ad.

 

Okay...an update.

Vortec Max 6000 V8

* Thundering 345 horsepower @ 5200 rpm
* HEMI-beating 380 lb.-ft. of torque @ 4000 rpm