MPG's vs HP/TRQ

[Lead Head]

Originally Posted by tjthegreat exactly it not hp that moves the trailer its torque Yes, but horsepower lets you get that load moving at speed.

[fordtruckman]

I would want MPG definitely because if the truck isnt going to get decent mpg instead has a whole lotta HP that i dont need then i wouldnt buy it.

[capt caper]

Mostly I carry light bulky cargo. I don't need a 6.4. If they made a 150 with a decent diesel with mileage I'd buy it. Or a Super Duty with a smaller diesel. Although emissions would kill that one too I would think.

[mnmwhit]

I want the diesel in an EXPY

[eatfish]

I would like to see Ford partner up with VW and put their 133 hp tdi into a ranger. That would be all the truck I need for driving around. Should get around 30 mpg. The little 240 in my '68 has done the trick for many years. Now I would be getting 10 more mpgs.

[capt caper]

Originally Posted by eatfish

I would like to see Ford partner up with VW and put their 133 hp tdi into a ranger. That would be all the truck I need for driving around. Should get around 30 mpg. The little 240 in my '68 has done the trick for many years. Now I would be getting 10 more mpgs.

I could go for that too. I haven't been in a Ranger but I was in a Tacoma 4Dr. and the leg room was awesome for a big guy like me. My wifs Liberty is bad. I hate driveing it. No were to put my feet. They have to stay in front of the pedals so my knees are bent up bad.Not to mention the seats stink. Comfort would way in big time with me.

[eatfish]

Comfort means nothing to me. I would sit on a milk crate if I could get 30 mpg out of a small pick up. Want a vinyl interior, crank windows, and manual door locks. And most of all I want to be able to afford it. Now for my old lady... Thats another story.

[KelVarnson]

Originally Posted by tjthegreat

exactly it not hp that moves the trailer its torque

Originally Posted by Lead Head

Yes, but horsepower lets you get that load moving at speed.

Lead Head is right. If you're interested in doing actual work with the truck, like towing, horsepower is the determining factor. Diesels just have high torque numbers because they make their peak horsepower at lower RPMs.

[pugster]

I stood next to a diesel Ranger in Scotland last summer. What engine are they putting in those? I don't know why they couldn't do it here.

[hsfbfan]

Originally Posted by pugster

I stood next to a diesel Ranger in Scotland last summer. What engine are they putting in those? I don't know why they couldn't do it here.

The new 2010 emissions are the main reason they couldn't use that engine.

[tjthegreat]

i kno but you dont need 381 or even 315hp to move it around in a half ton

[eatfish]

See here:

Ford launches new diesel engine for the Ranger, in Europe - AutoblogGreen

Now we are getting closer. I Just want it to come in a regular cab and without all the trim on the outside.

[hairyboxnoogle]

there was supposed to be a 2.8L 4cyl turbo diesel with the powerstroke badge goin into 4dr rangers in S. America. Had and est. 28 mpg hwy. 133 hp and 285 ft. lbs of torque.

[mudmaker]

Have you guys heard about the possibility of the F100?? a little smaller than the F150. I am assuming it will offer a diesel, but dont know. They just said they were designing a smaller version of the f150 to get better mileage.

[884x4broncoII]

Originally Posted by KelVarnson

Lead Head is right. If you're interested in doing actual work with the truck, like towing, horsepower is the determining factor. Diesels just have high torque numbers because they make their peak horsepower at lower RPMs.

why do you need to accelerate fast pulling a trailer? i have pulled 14k with my 7.3 it would take a long time to get up to speed but once it got there it held it, thats alot more important that how fast i get to sped.