Have you registered for your free membership? If not, click here now to register!
 

  
Join Our Site - Its free, quick and easy!
Click Here to join.   Click Here for more information
Users Chatting None

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Newer Light Duty Trucks > The 2009 F150
Register - Join us, its Free! FAQ Members List Timeslips Calendar Mark Forums Read

The 2009 F150 Discuss the new 2009 Ford F150





Is F-150 Still King?


 
View Poll Results: which engine will be in your next F150?
V6 6 0.93%
low/mid v8 - prolly a 4.6/5.4 mod motor 56 8.68%
6.2 boss - new gas v8 172 26.67%
4.4 diesel - let the halftons have torque! 411 63.72%
Voters: 645. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #61 (permalink)  
Old 07-30-2007, 06:57 AM
Senior User
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 150
gregghealy is starting off with a positive reputation.
A massaged 5.4 mated to a 6 speed auto would be plenty of power, the 5.4 is so choked now. The diesel should get close to 20mpg pulling a load (?), as apposed to the 8 or 10 I see with my 5.4 though.
Reply With Quote
  #62 (permalink)  
Old 08-16-2007, 02:54 PM
Elder User
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 833
Petrol is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinM
My only point was the 4.4 may not be an ample solution from a mpg over the 5.4 or offer anymore power maybe less power. Less power may require you to drive with more throttle. So this could be a costly propersition, especially since the requirement is not to tow etc.. Everyone is making an assumptuion that the 4.4 will have more power and torque over the 5.4. Bad assumption until the numbers are posted!
the 4.4L TurboDiesel already exists.... it's not a new design, the numbers won't change much
__________________
'99 Expy 5.4L, 2WD,4R100,
List Mod's in Gallery
Reply With Quote
  #63 (permalink)  
Old 08-16-2007, 04:33 PM
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: San Diego
Posts: 139
02Taco is starting off with a positive reputation.
It would depend on the specs. I am familiar with the 4.6, 5.4, & 6.2. But the 4.2 V6 ??? and i assume the 4.4 Turbo Diesel is an I6 with ??HP & ??TQ?? I think having a diesel option in a half ton would be awesome. It sucks that you have to get a 3/4 ton to get it as an option. It would give ford a nice edge over everybody else, maybe even offer it in some SUVs.
__________________
2001 Mazda B3000 Dual Sport - All Stock

2002 Tacoma TRD 4x4 - 2.0 SAW coilovers, Camburg UCAs, 5125s in the rear, TRD headers, TRD Exhaust, BFG ATs, Grey Wire Mod, 2 Low Mod, and more to come.

1988 Honda CRX - B18b swap, Intake, Intake Manifold, Headers, Exhaust, 8lb flywheel, and more to come.
Reply With Quote
  #64 (permalink)  
Old 08-16-2007, 06:45 PM
MBBFord's Avatar
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ville Platte, La.
Posts: 8,513
MBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to behold
Chevy caught wind of this diesel in the 1/2 ton, and they already said they're going to do it too.(which they already did this around 98, but it didn't turn out to well).
__________________
Matt
- Special Forces/Mud Division

79 Bronco 400 C6 NP205 D44 9" 4.56 gears Lockers 6" lift and 37" SS Iroks
77 F-100 302 C4 D44 31" M/Ts
04 F150 Lariat Screw 4x4 2"AS 32x11R17 Hankook M/Ts or 34x10.50-17 SS LTBs
Reply With Quote
  #65 (permalink)  
Old 08-16-2007, 07:05 PM
Junior User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wichita KS
Posts: 95
cc1999 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Fuel was not 3 bucks a gallon back in 98'. It seems if the resale numbers hold up as they have in reguards to the Superduty trucks with the diesel engines, then a 30% savings in fuel cost would make perfect since in todays market.

I read in truck trend that Dodge is now looking to MB to help them out with a diesel for there new redesigned 2009 half ton trucks.
Reply With Quote
  #66 (permalink)  
Old 08-17-2007, 09:42 AM
Elder User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Denver USA
Posts: 523
V8EXPLR is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I'll be curious to see how the F250 sales figures will be effected if/when the F150 receives a diesel. I know quite a few people that don't need the towing capacity of an F250, but purchased one simply for the diesel. I'm not sure the F150 diesel will effect F350+ sales, but I would venture to say you'll see many people opt for the F150 diesel rather than the F250.

Just my thoughts, could be totally off base with this one.
__________________
Justin


2006 Ford F-150 SuperCrew XLT Chrome Edition
5.4L Flex-Fuel, 3.73LS, 18" Stock Rims, 18" BFG Rugged Trail T/A's, Trailer Tow Pkg
Sun/Moonroof, Fog Lamps, Ford Bedliner
Lund Headlight & Taillight Covers, Lund VentVisors
Reply With Quote
  #67 (permalink)  
Old 08-17-2007, 11:31 AM
fordmtnman's Avatar
Senior User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Green Valley, AZ
Posts: 138
fordmtnman is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MBBFord
Chevy caught wind of this diesel in the 1/2 ton, and they already said they're going to do it too.(which they already did this around 98, but it didn't turn out to well).
No, chevy did this in like '82 in all of their CK truck and blazers and suburbans. They finally stopped using a variation of this engine in 98 and when they soon thereafter came out with the duramax, they only put it in their heavy duty trucks. They started with the 6.2L diesel, which had bad heads until 85 or so if I recall, then in the early 90's they turbocharged it and punched it out to 6.5L. These weren't bad engines per se; they were just bad for being diesels. They weren't that powerful, around 150 hp, and they were slow to accelerate. You could tow more with a 454.

These engines had a bad rep for several reasons:

1. Everyone confuses them to this day with the 5.7L oldsmobile v8 that was a converted gas engine. (not the same engine) This engine was wholly unreliable.

2. Early models had bad heads (legitamate)

3. Injector pumps on all of them needed replacing every 80k miles or so. I never really thought this was that bad of thing. Preventative maintenance?

4. They were low on pickup. most of them weren't turbocharged, the ones that were still weren't that quick to accelerate, especially when loaded to gvwr. Not that the engine wouldn't pull a load - it would. It just wouldn't do it quickly. After the cummins came out, and ford upgraded from their 6.9 to the 7.3 idi and then the powerstroke, chevy's diesels looked silly in the power department. They were still kings in the mileage dept, though.

In a half ton or a blazer, the 6.2 would get you well upwards of 20mpg highway, something that I've still yet to see with modern diesels. Even in heavier rigs, suburbans and such, they got good mileage. At a time when suburbans were returning 8 to 10 mpg highway, the 6.2 was fetching 18-22.

If Ford, Chevy, Dodge, Toyota, or Nissan put half the engineering into a fuel economy diesel as they do gas engines or "power" diesels, there is no reason we shouldn't be seeing 30 mpg+ out of our 4wd half tons.
__________________
2007 Ford F150 XL 2WD
4.2L V6, 5spd, 3.55:1
Average MPG: 20.6
aiming for 25 mpg
Reply With Quote
  #68 (permalink)  
Old 08-17-2007, 02:31 PM
Junior User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wichita KS
Posts: 95
cc1999 is starting off with a positive reputation.
I hope they do come out with a Diesel 1/2 ton suburban again and not that deal they were doing at the last back in around 95-96 you could get a 6.5 turbo and they called it a 1/2 ton but it was really pretty much the 3/4 ton with 1/2 ton stickers on it. The odd thing I reacall about that was that you could get a 6.5 turbo in a blazer/tahoe that was a real half ton chassis. That never made since to me.

I remember the 5.7s and the 6.2s they were very very slow. The 6.2 was much better than the 5.7 but both were slugs. The 6.5s were not to bad as I recall they did not feel much different than the 350 gassers back in the mid 90s. I think the 6.5 was quicker than the pre vortech 350 gass trucks. Fordmtnman, that was a very good summary of GM diesel history at least this past 30 some odd years anyway.
Reply With Quote
  #69 (permalink)  
Old 08-17-2007, 06:21 PM
Elder User
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 833
Petrol is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by V8EXPLR
I'll be curious to see how the F250 sales figures will be effected if/when the F150 receives a diesel. I know quite a few people that don't need the towing capacity of an F250, but purchased one simply for the diesel. I'm not sure the F150 diesel will effect F350+ sales, but I would venture to say you'll see many people opt for the F150 diesel rather than the F250.

Just my thoughts, could be totally off base with this one.
I am currently chomping at the bit to get a New truck... I have compared the '07 F150 to the superduty and even though I can get a REALLY good deal on the superduty, the extra 3,000 lbs is not helping it gain my favor....
__________________
'99 Expy 5.4L, 2WD,4R100,
List Mod's in Gallery
Reply With Quote
  #70 (permalink)  
Old 08-18-2007, 12:14 PM
MBBFord's Avatar
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ville Platte, La.
Posts: 8,513
MBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to behold
Quote:
Originally Posted by fordmtnman
No, chevy did this in like '82 in all of their CK truck and blazers and suburbans.
No, chevy did it for a very limited time right around 97-98 in their half ton trucks.
But you are right about the rest, but again it was done around that time also.
__________________
Matt
- Special Forces/Mud Division

79 Bronco 400 C6 NP205 D44 9" 4.56 gears Lockers 6" lift and 37" SS Iroks
77 F-100 302 C4 D44 31" M/Ts
04 F150 Lariat Screw 4x4 2"AS 32x11R17 Hankook M/Ts or 34x10.50-17 SS LTBs
Reply With Quote
  #71 (permalink)  
Old 08-18-2007, 12:35 PM
Junior User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wichita KS
Posts: 95
cc1999 is starting off with a positive reputation.
Fordmtnman is right, GM had 5.7L diesel conversion engines in 1/2 ton trucks in 1979 - 1980 and skipped a year and came out with the Detroit 6.2L in 1/2 ton trucks that lasted from 82-87. I think the 6.5 turbo detroit was 1st put in the 1/2 tons in 93 or 94.

My grand dad had a 1979 5.7 diesel Cadilac and a 1980 diesel 5.7 1/2 ton truck , then traded the 80 for a 82 6.2L . Oddly enough the 5.7s in the caddi and the p/u never gave him any trouble, but the 6.2 had a the verey head problems that fordmtnman was talking about. I remember driving those 5.7s and 6.2s when I was a teenager and man, slow is an understatement.

I later had a used 82 GMC 1/2 ton pickup that had the 6.2L and had to rebuild the fuel pump just like fordmtnman mentioned.

My dad had a 94 6.5 turbo 1/2 ton pickup and a 95 suburban with the 6.5 turbo. The truck was a real 1/2 ton the Suburban just said 1500 in the side it was really a 3/4 ton with 1/ 2 ton decals.

Last edited by cc1999 : 08-18-2007 at 12:40 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #72 (permalink)  
Old 08-18-2007, 01:26 PM
fordmtnman's Avatar
Senior User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Green Valley, AZ
Posts: 138
fordmtnman is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MBBFord
No, chevy did it for a very limited time right around 97-98 in their half ton trucks.
But you are right about the rest, but again it was done around that time also.
I did not make this up. My dad had a contracting business from 85-95, and we literally had a fleet of diesel chevy pickups, from 1/2 ton to 1 ton, and a suburban. My cousin still has an 84 K5 blazer with a 6.2 and 4 spd manual. He averages 25 mpg highway, and he has a lead foot.
__________________
2007 Ford F150 XL 2WD
4.2L V6, 5spd, 3.55:1
Average MPG: 20.6
aiming for 25 mpg
Reply With Quote
  #73 (permalink)  
Old 08-18-2007, 07:36 PM
MBBFord's Avatar
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ville Platte, La.
Posts: 8,513
MBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to behold
I hate typeing things.
I tried to say, you are right about the diesel engines in hose years, but you said they weren't in the 97-98 year I said. They put a diesel in that year truck for 1/2 tons(option of coarse), but it didn't last.
__________________
Matt
- Special Forces/Mud Division

79 Bronco 400 C6 NP205 D44 9" 4.56 gears Lockers 6" lift and 37" SS Iroks
77 F-100 302 C4 D44 31" M/Ts
04 F150 Lariat Screw 4x4 2"AS 32x11R17 Hankook M/Ts or 34x10.50-17 SS LTBs
Reply With Quote
  #74 (permalink)  
Old 08-18-2007, 08:19 PM
fordmtnman's Avatar
Senior User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Green Valley, AZ
Posts: 138
fordmtnman is starting off with a positive reputation.
I see. I must have misunderstood you then, although I fail to see where I said that 97s and 98s dont have 1/2 ton diesels... I'll make it clear.

I don't count the 5.7... it was a converted gas engine.

The 6.2 came out in 82 or 83 in every truck based product except s10s and el caminos. 1/2 tons too. They later made this into the turbocharged 6.5., with the same applictions. They quit putting diesels in half tons when they quit producing the old style 6.2/6.5 and came out with the duramaxes. My position is that they didn't put duramaxes in half tons, but the put the 6.2/6.5 in half tons for like 15 years there.
__________________
2007 Ford F150 XL 2WD
4.2L V6, 5spd, 3.55:1
Average MPG: 20.6
aiming for 25 mpg
Reply With Quote
  #75 (permalink)  
Old 08-18-2007, 08:42 PM
MBBFord's Avatar
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Ville Platte, La.
Posts: 8,513
MBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to beholdMBBFord is a splendid one to behold
Ok, then we both misunderstood each other.
__________________
Matt
- Special Forces/Mud Division

79 Bronco 400 C6 NP205 D44 9" 4.56 gears Lockers 6" lift and 37" SS Iroks
77 F-100 302 C4 D44 31" M/Ts
04 F150 Lariat Screw 4x4 2"AS 32x11R17 Hankook M/Ts or 34x10.50-17 SS LTBs
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:55 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin | Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC7 ©2008, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright © 1997-2008 Internet Brands, Inc.
Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - JOBS

Ford-Trucks.com and Internet Brands, Inc. is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company.
© 1997-2007 Internet Brands, Inc., Please see our Terms of Use / Privacy Policy