I've jumped from the pack...after test driving all of the available 4x4 crew cab '1/2 ton' pickups (Chevy Silverado, Ford F150, Nissan Titan, Toyota Tundra, Dodge 1500), I have to say that I was very disappointed with the Ford powertrain. My 01 Expedition had the 4R100 and 5.4L v-8 (the predecessor to the 300hp 5.4L), which wasn't exactly class leading power at the time. As I evaluated my options, there were many things about the F150 I liked, but of the group described above, it was the doggiest to drive. The 5.3L Chevy was easily more powerful in normal driving (and in fact almost felt peppier than the 6.0L chevy). The current 5.4L was comparable in feel to the 4.7L 'small' Toyota V-8.

I'm just curious why Ford cannot come out with a smallblock that is comparable to the other companies. I've been hearing about the Hurricane and other 'projects' for years now, but nothing happens.

As a sidenote, even as a loyal Ford devotee, I ended up with a Dodge 1500. The 5 speed transmission, the Hemi, and the incredible rebates made it too hard of a deal to pass up.

 

Sorry we lost you! Just keep that Dodge in decent shape so you could it in for the next generation of Ford 1/2 tons. They are going to kick some serious ****!!

 

Yeah...I liked the seats in the F150...especially in the rear. There were other reasons I chose the Dodge, but the most disappointing aspect of the F150 was the engine/tranny combo. I'm also pretty miffed that there is no MDS or cylinder deactivation on the 5.4L.

Is there any 'solid' news (i.e. not rampant speculation) about what the next Ford small block v-8 will be?

 

I have not heard of anything other that what is talked about here in FTE. I am pretty interested in finding out what the deal is also. I can not wait to see preproduction pictures of this new 6.2 Liter engine! I only hope they get it out before we lose to many "Blue Oval" buyers to the ohter makers.

 

It will be there loss for changing brands.

 

What we really need is a small diesel. Even "small blocks" burn too much gas in trucks. That would also give us the biodiesel option. Flex fuel does nothing for me because there is no E85 sold outside the "corn belt" states. Used cooking oil is everywhere.

Jim

 

How much lower is the 5.4's mpg rating than the MDS equipped engines? I thought they were still pretty close.

 

Brother in laws 06 1500 Ram with MDS gets 25 mpg @ 70 mph. Co-worker gets the same milege in his Durango at virtually the same speed.

My Expy and F-150 with the 5.4L ( 2000 & 1999 ) anywhere from 14 - 18 mpg at 70 mph.

 

You sure? That's awful fishy. Even with cylinder de-activation, no road test done by any magazine got that kind of mileage. Someone is pulling your leg.

 

Pretty sure. I was riding in the the Ram for an extended highway trip that I have taken in both, the gas tank size is comparable in size to my F150 and Expy and there is no way no how I could get that kind of mileage in either at 70 mph. His digital mpg readout was reading 24 mpg all trip and when he ( my brother in law ) checked the mileage manually it worked out the 25 mpg.

The Durango, just word but I could ask for proof. Knowing the charactor of the owner of the Durango, he isn't one to lie to make a Dodge look better.

Plus it probably helps that we live in prairie country and there aren't many "nice" hills. ( hopefully you remember where the nice hills analogy came from )

 

Something else to consider...the EPA has used the same testing procedure since 1984. To figure hwy mileage, they run a specially prepared vehicle on a dyno at exactly 48.7 MPH. Who drives like that? No one.

All that changes when the 2008 models are introduced. The US Congress ordered the EPA to change their testing procedures. Last month Car and Drivers editor, Csaba Csere wrote a column on what to expect. Hybrids city mileage will drop at least 50%. Most other mileage figures now listed will drop 10-25%.


EDIT: Digital readout? LOL..those things are usually off by 10-20%. They are also programmed by the manufacturer.

 

Great, just when I thought getting 18 mpg in my Expy was pretty good!

At 48.7 mph, you would probably be more of a road hazzard here more than anything. H**l, 18 wheelers are now going 70 plus.

I've had mine checked manually by my wife and father. ( I'm not a math wizard plus I was driving at the time of calculation ) and my readout in my Expy was pretty close. ( within 1 mpg ). Other Expy owners that I've talked to or read on this site say basically the same.

 

I've only got 1700 miles on my new ram...FWIW, it is a quad cab, 4x4, Laramie, with a Hemi and 5 speed auto, 3.55:1 rear end gearing, and stock 265/70R17 GY tires inflated to 38psi. Cruising at 55, it is a cinch to get 23mpg. Crusing at 65, I'm getting closer to 20. For whatever reason, however, crusing at 70, I get better mileage than 65...right around 21.3, on flat ground, without wind interference. That data is coming from the computer, as I haven't had the opportunity to run a whole tank of fuel at any of those speeds. However, my initial checks have shown that the computer's mileage is within .3mpg of my hand calculated figures thus far.

I can't vouch for 25mpg at 70...but I can say that over 20 is not a problem, under ideal conditions, with no load. My 2001 Expedition, with 5.4L and 4speed auto, under identical conditions, wouldn't hardly muster 15.

You can definitely tell when the MDS is active...and if you drive by foot (rather than by cruise), you can maximize its usefulness...kind of a game, actually!

 

I guess I can also assume that maybe we had somewhat of a wind pushing us at the time. I didn't recall at the time.

I know when I get a breeze behind the brick...I mean Expy, I tend to pick up a mpg or two.

FarmLaw,

my bro in law's mileage got better once the truck had about 5 - 6K on it.

 

70+? In the US right? In kilometers, that's only 42 MPH...semis haven't driven that slow since Truman was prez.

Actually semis out in the boonies (for example, Arizona to Oklahoma on I-40) run closer to 80-90.

Edit: EPA testing @ 48.7 is figured by running the vehicles on a dyno.