Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Newer Light Duty Trucks > 2004 - 2008 F150
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


2004 - 2008 F150 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 Ford F150's with 5.4 V8, 4.6 V8 or 4.2 V6 engine
SPONSORED BY:
Click HereAdvertisement

Reply
 
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #16  
Old 04-23-2008, 03:07 AM
Tylus's Avatar
Tylus Tylus is offline
MMNC (SS)
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Pearl Harbor
Posts: 10,570
Tylus has a superb reputationTylus has a superb reputationTylus has a superb reputationTylus has a superb reputationTylus has a superb reputationTylus has a superb reputationTylus has a superb reputationTylus has a superb reputationTylus has a superb reputationTylus has a superb reputationTylus has a superb reputation
^^^ good call. I forgot that alot of the 5.4's have the 3.55 gearset. the 3.73 will give you a little extra out the gate as well

the 5.4 plug issue is over-rated. we all worry about stuff, but this current plug issue (04-08 years) is just as likely to happen as the 2 valve 4.6/5.4 issues in 97-04 years.
__________________
2002 Excursion XLT w/ V-10 <---Build thread
2012 Challenger R/T - It has mufflers that are loud!
2015 Chevrolet Tahoe - New Ford QUALITY is such that I bought a Chevy
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-23-2008, 10:47 AM
tjthegreat tjthegreat is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ft Wayne IN
Posts: 721
tjthegreat is starting off with a positive reputation.
i towed with my buddies 4.6 and i wasnt really impressed,granted i was coming from a 300I6 which makes its power at about half the rpm the 4.6 does.so id go with the 5.4 it has crappy gas mileage along with fords other engines but it is a decent engine
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-23-2008, 10:53 AM
DanielB DanielB is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 29
DanielB is starting off with a positive reputation.
It would be nice if we could get back to a good 5.0 5.8 setup. Those were so much easier to work on.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-23-2008, 04:21 PM
tjthegreat tjthegreat is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ft Wayne IN
Posts: 721
tjthegreat is starting off with a positive reputation.
ya that would be nice but i dont think well see those days again
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-23-2008, 04:26 PM
DanielB DanielB is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 29
DanielB is starting off with a positive reputation.
Not after the announcement yesterday with the new mileage requirements.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-23-2008, 06:30 PM
tjthegreat tjthegreat is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ft Wayne IN
Posts: 721
tjthegreat is starting off with a positive reputation.
really. tell me more
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-23-2008, 06:35 PM
DanielB DanielB is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 29
DanielB is starting off with a positive reputation.
I think by 2015 the gov is requiring even higher milege out of cars and truck than previously released.

Proposed fuel economy standards go to 35 mpg - USATODAY.com

this article lists the new standards.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-24-2008, 04:07 PM
bob schulz bob schulz is offline
Junior User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 71
bob schulz is starting off with a positive reputation.
The new mileage proposal not yet approved to my knowledge, would require light trucks to yield 28 MPG. This, as I understand it, is virtually impossible with the current configuration of light pickup trucks as we know them. Politicians have no idea with what they are tampering, our trucks, our way of life. This so caller fuel crisis is a construction of our government's tampering through environmentalist fiat with our own production of domestic oil. The reserves thereof exceed the amount needed to power 60 million vehicles over the next 60 years. We have enough natural gas to last for more than 160 years at current use levels. So, all we have to do is drill, drill, drill! Don't hold yer breath. It's not politically expedient. '04F150, 4.6L, 3.73LS, XL reg.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-24-2008, 06:11 PM
SteelHorse08's Avatar
SteelHorse08 SteelHorse08 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 194
SteelHorse08 is new and has a neutral reputation at this point.
5.4L should be your decision.

Just get the 5.4L you will thank yourself the next time you have to pass someone, But I have the 5.4L with 3.55 gears so are you all saying I have less power? If so DAMN, I told the lame salesman I want the best engine and the best gear ratio for 2WD. I'll be getting a utility trailer to haul 4 ATV's soon, and from Iam hearing that it wont pull worth a S**T with 3.55, and less low end with 3.55 then 3.73. I want the 3.73 how to go about this process? I saw that on the windows of the F-150's on dealers lot it's only $300 more, DAMN I for sure would have went that route but I wanted 2WD so maybe they dont come stock with 3.73 with 2WD? Dont know, wish I could make may purchase over again! 3.55 limited slip suck or what, please enlighten me on this gear ratio thing?
__________________
08' F-150 XLT 5.4L 2x4 Super Crew W/Tow Package

Color is Dark Shadow Metallic Gray 2-Toned
Flowmaster Super 44 muffler w/4" SS Tip
Airaid M.I.T. (Intake air Tube)
AEM DryFlow Performance Panel Air Filter
Inyati Spray-in Bedliner
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-24-2008, 09:10 PM
dlgentry's Avatar
dlgentry dlgentry is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 129
dlgentry is starting off with a positive reputation.
Go big or go home!!
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-24-2008, 09:55 PM
tjthegreat tjthegreat is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ft Wayne IN
Posts: 721
tjthegreat is starting off with a positive reputation.
3.55 arent bad its pry the best overall gear for mpgs and towing
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-24-2008, 10:01 PM
bridge's Avatar
bridge bridge is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: League City, TX
Posts: 2,548
bridge has a great reputation on FTE.bridge has a great reputation on FTE.bridge has a great reputation on FTE.bridge has a great reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob schulz View Post
The reserves thereof exceed the amount needed to power 60 million vehicles over the next 60 years. We have enough natural gas to last for more than 160 years at current use levels.
Reference please!
__________________
Current Stable
2014 F-250 King Ranch Crew Cab 6.7L Diesel FX4 (Fifth Wheel Keystone Cougar 327RES)
2013 Expedition King Ranch

Put Out to Pasture
2011 F-250 King Ranch Crew Cab 6.7L Diesel FX4; 2006 F-150 Lariat SuperCrew 5.4L 3V 4x4; 2006 EB Expedition 5.4L 3V; 2002 Mustang Convertible GT 4.6L; 2001 Eddie Bauer Expedition 5.4L
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-24-2008, 10:06 PM
bridge's Avatar
bridge bridge is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: League City, TX
Posts: 2,548
bridge has a great reputation on FTE.bridge has a great reputation on FTE.bridge has a great reputation on FTE.bridge has a great reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielB View Post
I think by 2015 the gov is requiring even higher milege out of cars and truck than previously released.

Proposed fuel economy standards go to 35 mpg - USATODAY.com

this article lists the new standards.

Interesting. They've got their work cut out. Changing over to a fuel that yields less gas milage and having to increase overall MPG. Looks like the Transportation Dept is advocating Hybrid electrics because ETOH and current vehicle sizes ain't gonna do it.

This could also be a hastily devised chess move in response to OPEC. We announce our intentions to consume less and hope that this scares OPEC to raise production to curve prices and put the oil speculators in their place.
__________________
Current Stable
2014 F-250 King Ranch Crew Cab 6.7L Diesel FX4 (Fifth Wheel Keystone Cougar 327RES)
2013 Expedition King Ranch

Put Out to Pasture
2011 F-250 King Ranch Crew Cab 6.7L Diesel FX4; 2006 F-150 Lariat SuperCrew 5.4L 3V 4x4; 2006 EB Expedition 5.4L 3V; 2002 Mustang Convertible GT 4.6L; 2001 Eddie Bauer Expedition 5.4L
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-25-2008, 01:05 PM
bob schulz bob schulz is offline
Junior User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 71
bob schulz is starting off with a positive reputation.
To NASA bridge, if I remember correctly these statistics come from a new book reviewed on AM radio a couple days previous. The author, Robt. Price, the book, "Gusher of Lies".

I don't know about his research since I have not yet read it. I will get around to it soon. In my gut I believe this environmental hysteria is a colossal hoax the likes of which the world has never before seen.

Because of current governmental environmental regulations, an oil well will take ten years to bring on production line. Same for any new refinery. Thanks to the multiple levels the plantiff bar and the activists who employ them. We have been asleep, ladies and germs, for far too long. Wake up all. Our way of life has been under assault for the last four decades by radicals in our midst. It has been a Gramscian assault, quietly, it moved through our social infrastructure, our cultural institutions, schools, churches, our pickup trucks. And now our fuel mileage, of all things, is the recipient of this revolving of our society. We must be very careful every time we go to the ballot box.

This is not your grandfather's country. They're coming after his pickup through fuel mileage mandates. That's my reflection for the day.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-25-2008, 01:13 PM
bob schulz bob schulz is offline
Junior User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 71
bob schulz is starting off with a positive reputation.
Further, any reduction in our use of oil will quickly be absorbed by increased use in India and China. The only way to stem the rising market hysteria in the price of oil is the threat of producing our own. At the least, 20 percent of current market prices of oil are fueled by speculation. If we even threaten to open up ANWAR it will have a depressing effect on the speculation. If we actually begin drilling, off our coast and in ANWAR, it will have a net positive effect on our own energy problem in the US.

And we then, having 60 or so years, can move on the development of a totally new model away from oil. We can do it, we need only the sense and the will.
Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2008, 01:13 PM
 
 
 
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thinking about a 5 star tune for my 2011 FX4 5.0L 640 CI Aluminum FORD 2009 - 2014 F150 11 08-11-2013 08:48 AM
Proud Owner of a 89 F150 jgeronimo New Member Introductions 2 07-08-2013 04:43 PM
Lubbock meetup ccllud Texas Chapter 0 01-28-2013 04:00 PM
Man, there are a lot of 6.7's in Texas rickatic 6.7L Power Stroke Diesel 16 04-21-2011 10:31 PM
MotorVac in TX? tmcalavy 1980 - 1986 Bullnose F100, F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 7 12-18-2000 11:29 AM


Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Newer Light Duty Trucks > 2004 - 2008 F150

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

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

Forum Jump


Participate In The Forums

Create new posts and participate in discussions. It's free!

Sign Up »





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 AC1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Statement - Jobs
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. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.

vbulletin Admin Backup