Truck Trend Reports New Horsepower Ratings

[Fosters]

Originally Posted by DOHCmarauder

You didn't let me finish.....






There's a reason I hooked up the near 6,000 pound boat to the Tundra and left the lighter load for the Ford...

Unless you had Oprah in that boat, it's notwhere near 6000lbs... I know a 20ft boat will be around 3000lbs with trailer, that doesn't even look to be 20ft, let alone 6000lbs...

My suggestion, put a 30ft travel camper behind each, see how they do... that'll be a load

[dascro]

Originally Posted by DOHCmarauder

This was never meant to be a Toy vs Ford discussion.....somehow, they always end up being that way.

My one and only point is I'm glad Ford is stepping up with a 6.2 to compete....but I've also always felt they had the parts bin to step up any time they wished to.


As a former Lightning owner, I think Ford could have even FACTORY appeased us with a blower....(then we'd get all the goof balls crying how Ford has to cheat to compete)

I came in to this discussion late and got into the ford vs. toy debate.

No doubt they have the parts bin. If they didn't they have as good minds and technology as anyone, they just have to use it.

[Fosters]

Originally Posted by DOHCmarauder

This was never meant to be a Toy vs Ford discussion.....somehow, they always end up being that way.

My one and only point is I'm glad Ford is stepping up with a 6.2 to compete....but I've also always felt they had the parts bin to step up any time they wished to.


As a former Lightning owner, I think Ford could have even FACTORY appeased us with a blower....(then we'd get all the goof balls crying how Ford has to cheat to compete)

dude, if I had a penny for every time I wished ford would pull something out of the parts bin and make it available for production at a decent cost... like that 4.6 stroke based v10 in the f150 (or dare i say even in the mustang like it was tested in)....

[DOHCmarauder]

Originally Posted by dascro

there are several RV forums on the net that constantly sing the praises of the 6.8. Many choosing to compare the truck to the diesel. These guys regularly tow very near or even over the capacity of the truck. 6k lbs is not a challenge for any 1/2 truck. It is under the rangers capacity. 2 jet skis are probably below the rating of the escape...

Dude, I'm not knocking the V10.....I have been here for years defending it (the 4R100 trans I'm not too pleased with.....even though it never fragged in the Lightning) I'm just telling you that I prefer towing MY loads with the Tundra......If i had a 10K trailer, maybe it would be different.

Still think the pre-'05 Super Duty brakes are junk.

[dascro]

Thats a different story then. You seemed like you were saying that the toy is superior to the V10 for towing. But since it is YOUR towing then that is a different story.

[DOHCmarauder]

Originally Posted by Fosters

Unless you had Oprah in that boat, it's notwhere near 6000lbs... I know a 20ft boat will be around 3000lbs with trailer, that doesn't even look to be 20ft, let alone 6000lbs...

My suggestion, put a 30ft travel camper behind each, see how they do... that'll be a load

23' tri-directional glass laid up custom by Howard boats.....502 BBC.

Boat is around 4,000 pounds empty, I always top it off with 100 gallons so as to not get cheap and expensive marina fuel and the trailer weighs aprox. 1500 pounds.


Look up Consumer reports truck test (yes, I HATE CR but I'll accept their timed testing)

Granted, they didn't pull up a grade, but the Tundra was quicker accelerating to speed than EVERY truck tested pulling 7,400 pounds INCLUDING all the diesels.

I've pulled 10K (7K excavator and tilt trailer) with my V10.....it did well.

But from seat of the pants, I still think the Toy will take it.

I'll honestly give the results if I hook up 10K to the Toy.

But I will also add that if I had to pull 10K regularly, the 1/2 ton Tundra would NOT have been bought.

[DOHCmarauder]

Originally Posted by dascro

Thats a different story then. You seemed like you were saying that the toy is superior to the V10 for towing. But since it is YOUR towing then that is a different story.

I think the Super Duty is a heavier duty truck......but like the diesel vs V10 argument:

Unless towing max loads a lot of the time, one can be over kill.

[rickey498]

My dad pulled my 32' ft travel trailer with a two slide outs(one being a super) with his 98 expedition just fine. I'm not talk hwy either. i am talking about back roads with lots of hills. He also has a chevy z71 he could have pulled it with, but he choose the expy. Toyota has been copying ford since day one. If you want to support the japanese economy by buying a toyo thats fine. But, just to let you know this is a ford truck site not a toyota truck site. The tundra is the ugliest truck i have ever seen, and the interior is even worse. Have you tried to load a 4wheeler in the back yet. nuff said. Have fun pulling your boat

[DOHCmarauder]

Originally Posted by rickey498

My dad pulled my 32' ft travel trailer with a two slide outs(one being a super) with his 98 expedition just fine. I'm not talk hwy either. i am talking about back roads with lots of hills. He also has a chevy z71 he could have pulled it with, but he choose the expy. Toyota has been copying ford since day one. If you want to support the japanese economy by buying a toyo thats fine. But, just to let you know this is a ford truck site not a toyota truck site. The tundra is the ugliest truck i have ever seen, and the interior is even worse. Have you tried to load a 4wheeler in the back yet. nuff said. Have fun pulling your boat

Here we go again.....

Tundra is built in the U.S. with 75% American content.

My Super Duty was built in Mexico.

My 'o7 Lincoln was also built in Mexico using 50% American content.

My '06 Mustang gt uses 65% American content.

As far as loading my 4 wheeler........nah, I'll put the 2 quads and 2 motorcycles (or more, depending who's going) on a trailer.

But I have blown 2 transmissions on my 70K mile Ford.....nuff said.

[Big Bad]

Originally Posted by Fosters

really? please educate me on why is it that after 6100 rpm the stock 4v motors in machs fall flat on their face then? and I've seen lots of people shift these cars at 7k rpm, they're the ones that run 14s stock and don't understand why.

It's not because of the intake runner length. I can show you any number of dyno graphs with stock runner length intake 4Vs making peak power at 6,200 - 6,300 rpm and peak torque at 5,000 rpm. Regardless, a 6,100 rpm HP PEAK is going to require an upshift at at least 6,700. It's called AVERAGE HORSEPOWER. Only idiots upshift at the HP peak.

also, peak torque occurs at 3300 rpm, not 5000.

Wanna bet? You haven't been around many stock intake Cobra/Mach dyno graphs if you believe that. LMAO

You don't need midrange torque in a car designed to rev to 7200 rpm; not if your power band is going to be 4500-6000 rpm. I don't know of any times that I've been at 3300 rpm while going down the strip...

Mid-range generally indicates the 3000 - 5000 rpm region. Not sure what you would call mid-range.

If your theory was true about the 13" runners, why is it the FR500 intake with it's 7" short runners allows power to run way up to 7000 rpm, and makes you able to shift at 7k without having the car fall flat on it's face?

I'm not giving you a theory, I'm giving you facts. With the proper supporting mods and cams the FR500 intake will provide a HP PEAK at roughly 7,200 rpm, or roughly 1,000 rpm higher than the stock intake. Look at ANY FR500 dyno graph and the curve is still climbing at 7,000 UNLESS it is undercammed, that is not how you maximize average horsepower.

And if your theory about the 4v heads flowing so well at low lift numbers was right, why is it the FR500 cams are 472 lift and why is it the cobra R cams are 510 lift? I thought the 4v heads didn't need much lift...

Did you need read what I said? Stock 4V heads, rather, stock 03 Cobra heads, begin to stall out around .425"-.450" lift, between .450" - .550" lift they only gain around 5-10 cfm. Cobra R heads are a difference animal, larger intake port volume, better short side, and they pick up a bit more from .450"+, but still not a whole lot. By low lift I was referring to .200" lift and below, in that range 4V heads KILL 2V and 3V heads even more than they do at peak. Have you ever even seen a 4V flow chart? From the stuff you've been typing I seriously doubt it.

Seems to me we're back to my point of - ford choked the spots cars with small cams and long intake runners - stuff that would be suited more for trucks than cars trying to go fast.

A 99+ Cobra/Mach manifold is in no way suited to a truck application. The truck manifolds run ~18" long runners with a smaller cross section. Once again, I'm not sure why you think an intake that will provide a 5,000 rpm torque peak and a 6200-6400 rpm HP peak is in any way suited a truck.

last but not least, the navigator cams are identical to the 03/04 cobra/mach/marauder/aviator cams, which are very very close to the 99 cobra cams. so your point about them using less aggressive cams to retain the low end torque is moot, because they did use em.

Navigator INTAKE cams are identical to 03+ cams, not the exhaust cams. And 99/01 Cobra INTAKE cams have 10-12 degrees more duration than 03+ Cobra cams. The 01- cams show a minor torque loss below 3000 rpm and a HP increase above 5000 rpm on a 4.6. Those cams would be much better suited to a 5.4 truck app, since the extra displacement will make the cam act less aggressive.

[Ford-150]

truck trend's info is bs....

also towing isn't a 0-60 sport, just sayin.....

its more about how well it maintains a load at speed and handling

[Fosters]

Originally Posted by Big Bad

It's not because of the intake runner length. I can show you any number of dyno graphs with stock runner length intake 4V making peak power at 6,200 - 6,300 rpm. Regardless, a 6,100 rpm HP PEAK is going to require an upshift at at least 6,700. It's called AVERAGE HORSEPOWER. Only idiots upshift at the HP peak.

really? have you ever taken one of these cars down the drag strip? we could each post the collection of timeslips if you want...

Originally Posted by Big Bad

Wanna bet? You haven't been around many stock intake Cobra Mach dyno sessions if you believe that. lol

nope, not really... only about 80 dyno pulls of my own, plus quite a few dyno days attended... how many have you actually been there for and done?

Originally Posted by Big Bad

Mid-range generally indicates the 3000 - 5000 rpm region. Not sue what you would call mid-range.

mid range is 3000-4000 or 2500-4500, since rev range is 1000-6000, take the middle 1000-2000 rpm. Again, the car makes no useable power after 6200 rpm

Here's one of my earlier dynos, stock intake'd mach:

Originally Posted by Big Bad

I'm not giving you a theory, I'm giving you facts. With the proper supporting mods and cams the FR500 intake will provide a HP PEAK at 7,200 - 7,300 rpm, or roughly 1,000 rpm higher than the stock intake. Look at ANY FR500 dyno graph and the curve is still climbing at 7,000, that is not how you maximize average horsepower.

again, please prove those facts with your own dyno sheets and timeslips.

here are my slips from 2 seasons ago:

I don't have notes written on all of em about shift points, but I can guarantee you that if I took my car out and shifted where you think it shifts best, i probably wouldn't even hit 12s. I've tried pretty much every shifting point there is out there... 6700 ain't it, trust me.

Originally Posted by Big Bad

Did you need read what I said? Stock 4V heads, rather, stock 03 Cobra heads, begin to stall out around .425"-.450" lift, between .450" - .550" lift they only gain around 5 cfm. Cobra R heads are a difference animal, larger intake port volume, better short side, and they pick up a bit more from .450"+, but still not alot. By low lift I was referring to .200" lift and below, in that range 4V heads KILL 2V and 3V heads even more than they do at peak. Have you ever even seen a 4V flowbench? From the stuff you've been typing I doubt it.

I thought you said the navigator heads are some of the worst? at low lift they flow the most of any head, save for FR500 heads; at higher lift they don't, true, but a truck head doesn't need that anyway. sounds to me like what they were meant for, trucks, they do a good job.

and I know what a flow sheet looks like, have you actually read one?

here's an example:

Originally Posted by Big Bad

A 99+ Cobra/Mach manifold is in no way suited to a truck application. The truck manifolds run nearly 18" long runners with a smaller cross section.

Funny, why is the long runner in the aviator intake just 13" long then?

Originally Posted by Big Bad

Navigator intake cams are identical to 03+ cams, not the exhaust cams. And 99/01 Cobra cams have 10 degrees more duration on the intake. Cobra cams show a minor torque loss below 3000 rpm and a HP increase above 5000 rpm on a 4.6. Those cams would be much better suited to a 5.4 truck app.

yep, just what trucks need, less torque below 3000rpm and hp increase over 5000 rpm. you sir win the Darwin award.

[chaparro]

I'm real mad at these figures (truck trend)

unloaded 0/60 loaded 0/60
silverado 2500 SRW diesel 7.7 sec 18.2sec 7500lbs silverado 3500 DRW diesel 8.5 sec 20.2sec 10000lbs
F-250 FX4 SRW V10G 8.3 sec 19.5sec 7500lbs
F-450 K.R DRW diesel 10.5sec 21.1sec 10000lb
sierra 2500 SRW diesel 8.3 sec n/a
sierra 3500 DRW diesel 8.4 sec 19.3sec 10000lbs
Toyo tundra SRW 4.7!G 7.7 sec 20.9sec 7500lbs
Toyo tundra SRW 5.7!G 6.7 sec 15.2sec 7500lbs

Comparing toyos 1/2 tons vs 3/4 and 1 ton domestics. OMG toyo doing better than our gas and diesels. We have to admited DOHC marauder is right. When toyo comes with their heavy duty diesel, everybody hide because nothing will be left of our domestics. On october I was on my way home pulling my 35 ft 5th trailer. Next to me there was a tundra pulling a real big TT. We were doing around 70 mph and seems the tundra to be powerful. I couldn't left her behind. To be a 1/2 ton and a gas engine I was was amaized how she keep the speed flat land and some hills. I think our domestics 1/2 tons will never compete in power with these dawm trucks.

[Ford-150]

Originally Posted by chaparro

I'm real mad at these figures (truck trend)

unloaded 0/60 loaded 0/60
silverado 2500 SRW diesel 7.7 sec 18.2sec 7500lbs silverado 3500 DRW diesel 8.5 sec 20.2sec 10000lbs
F-250 FX4 SRW V10G 8.3 sec 19.5sec 7500lbs
F-450 K.R DRW diesel 10.5sec 21.1sec 10000lb
sierra 2500 SRW diesel 8.3 sec n/a
sierra 3500 DRW diesel 8.4 sec 19.3sec 10000lbs
Toyo tundra SRW 4.7!G 7.7 sec 20.9sec 7500lbs
Toyo tundra SRW 5.7!G 6.7 sec 15.2sec 7500lbs

Comparing toyos 1/2 tons vs 3/4 and 1 ton domestics. OMG toyo doing better than our gas and diesels. We have to admited DOHC marauder is right. When toyo comes with their heavy duty diesel, everybody hide because nothing will be left of our domestics. On october I was on my way home pulling my 35 ft 5th trailer. Next to me there was a tundra pulling a real big TT. We were doing around 70 mph and seems the tundra to be powerful. I couldn't left her behind. To be a 1/2 ton and a gas engine I was was amaized how she keep the speed flat land and some hills. I think our domestics 1/2 tons will never compete in power with these dawm trucks.

you obviously have not heard of the upcoming Boss 6.2L.....

and where is this HD Tundra?

they only released a hideous concept

[LxMan1]

Originally Posted by Fosters

really? have you ever taken one of these cars down the drag strip? we could each post the collection of timeslips if you want...



nope, not really... only about 80 dyno pulls of my own, plus quite a few dyno days attended... how many have you actually been there for and done?



mid range is 3000-4000 or 2500-4500, since rev range is 1000-6000, take the middle 1000-2000 rpm. Again, the car makes no useable power after 6200 rpm

Here's one of my earlier dynos, stock intake'd mach:





again, please prove those facts with your own dyno sheets and timeslips.

here are my slips from 2 seasons ago:

I don't have notes written on all of em about shift points, but I can guarantee you that if I took my car out and shifted where you think it shifts best, i probably wouldn't even hit 12s. I've tried pretty much every shifting point there is out there... 6700 ain't it, trust me.



I thought you said the navigator heads are some of the worst? at low lift they flow the most of any head, save for FR500 heads; at higher lift they don't, true, but a truck head doesn't need that anyway. sounds to me like what they were meant for, trucks, they do a good job.

and I know what a flow sheet looks like, have you actually read one?

here's an example:





Funny, why is the long runner in the aviator intake just 13" long then?



yep, just what trucks need, less torque below 3000rpm and hp increase over 5000 rpm. you sir win the Darwin award.

Kinda odd how the larger intake port of the 2V PI head falls off at 5000rpm while the non-pi head keeps climbing.