You are currently viewing our forums as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Ford-Trucks Forums community today!
I have searched and searched. I probably used the wrong search terms or something, but I have come up empty handed.
I'd like to see full dyno charts for current model 4.2, 4.6 and 5.4 engines.
I'm interested in the "official" charts (crank) and the real world charts (rear wheel).
None of my brochures have this info. They just list peak numbers which are worthless to me.
I'm looking for stock charts, nothing fancy.
Back in the day, when I was into motorcycles, a dyno chart was included in every magazine test. I'm new to trucks so I don't know what publications have these charts. You'd think Ford would publish them.
A Tundra catalog I got the other day (I have no idea how they got me on their mailing list, although I did have a Tercel like a billion years ago) has watered down (and suspiciously optimistic) dyno charts but at least they are somewhat useful.
Unrelated but worth asking: I've also been searching to see if the current 4.6 engines suffer from plug blow-out, plug seize-in or anything else out of the ordinary. I'm guessing (from looking at the spark plug part numbers) that the 4.6 does not use the same plugs as the 5.4 so that might eliminate the seize-in issues. I'm assuming, and hoping, the heads have more than a few spark plug threads, too.
Finally, the newest 4.6 (248@4750/294@4000) has almost the same power today as the 5.4 (260@4500/350@2500) did when it was first introduced. Obviously, the torque figures are not close and the 4.6 has to rev higher to make the power. Does a newer 4.6 feel anywhere close to a first generation 5.4 or does the extra ~50 cubes trump all no matter what? I'm guessing them 50 cubes matter a lot. 60ft-lb at 1500RPM lower has to be a big difference.
Okay, one last thing. The 4.6 (and 5.4, although not lately) seems to be on this list a lot:
Gear ratios, tire size, tire inflation, wheel size, 2x4 or 4x4 and bed length (which changes drive shaft length) all have an impact on dyno charts. Dyno charts are good for showing relative gain on one setup, but not for comparing absolutes for all setups.
Also, too many folks look mainly at the HP numbers... great if you like spinning your engine fast. What counts with these trucks is torque, especially on the low end.
FTE Founder. Enjoying life, hitting the throttle and hearing my Ford squeal 'em....
Elevation also plays an important role as well as the ambient temperature.
As for the list I have seen it and think it is pointless, there is no reason the 4.6L should be on it and not the 5.4L or visa versa, when the 5.4L is just a stroked version of the 4.6L for all intents and purposes. I equate it to Consumer Reports giving a Mazda truck a much higher ranking than a Ranger when they are the exact same thing just with a little different front body panels. When I see things like that there is an obvious bias or just plain lack of intelligence.
Elevation, air temp and humidity all play a role. Dynos generally have sensors for these which is why we have graphs, and corrected graphs produced by the dyno.
Engine oil temp, engine temp, coolant temp, fuel temp and air intake track temp also are factors. One of the reasons people use fans on dynos to minimize heat soak.
air temp makes a big noticable difference for my 97 4.6 and my 04 5.4 they seem to make more torqe and more horsepower when it is cooler weather Ive noticed this driving them both to work the 5.4 is in a 04 f150 4x4 and i love my truck. the 4.6 is in a 97 mercury couger xr-7 30th anniversary that actually belongs to my wife but i drave it to work daily with a 35 mile one way drive this one is a little sluggish getting started but it get 24-25 mpg so im thinking that it is geared for highway driving and i would be a fool to change them since i have to drive that distance.
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. FordŽ is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.