MPG's vs HP/TRQ

[valdor]

Originally Posted by tjthegreat

ya thas about wat my 300 puts out but it can still pull some ***** i think 250 hp would be plenty of hp for any truck today

the reason your 300 pull so well is the way it delivers that 260 ft/lbs odd. agree 250 hp in a (diesel) "halfton" is plenty. Guess 420 trq should be good to.

[valdor]

Originally Posted by ford4.9

I’m going to get flamed on this, but I really feel this has to be one the lamest things that Ford have come up with in sometime. Why in the world would you choose a displacement 4.4L in a V8 format? What is the bore and stroke going to be, little and a little less? This is a recipe for a motor that has to be spun up to make any torque. Could they not go with V6 or dare I say an I6?

I will gladly fry with ya on that point, but for my money they should built something like 4.5 I6. Always felt V8's should be 5L or more, although i am not clever enough to give you a decent reason.

[valdor]

Originally Posted by cartmanea

Most likely they did this so they could engineer one engine in the 6.7L and then scale it down to the 4.4L. A V6 would have been a better design in my mind, but that involves a complete redesign of V angle and engine balancing. Also, probably not enough room in the engine compartment for an I6.

The Brazilian built (righthand drive) F250 has an 4.2 i6 Tdi. nothing high tech but it moves the truck. your propably rite on the 4.4 / 6.7 theory.

[valdor]

Originally Posted by RoyJ

Funny, the latest Defenders actually use a Ford diesel (from a Transit van, I believe).

You are absolutely right, it uses an 2.4l crd I4 making 121hp and 266ft/lbs. The Range Rover 3.8 V8 crd is to high tech for a truck engine for my likikng... Does the fact that Land Rover now belongs to the Indian Tata automaker affect Ford ror using that desighn you think?