Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Super Duty/Heavy Duty > Super Duty & Heavy Duty
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


Super Duty & Heavy Duty 1999 to current Ford F250, F350, F450 and F550 Super Duty with diesel V8 and gas V8 and V10 engines SPONSORED BY:

Reply
 
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 02-07-2010, 04:26 PM
Tom's Avatar
Tom Tom is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Union, CT
Posts: 15,271
Tom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputation
TomB985
New 6.2L V8 compared to 6.8L and 5.4L

I'm posting this thread as a bit of a continuation of the 6.2L Q&A thread found HERE

There emerged quite a debate on old vs. new and I figure we should bring it here rather than clutter up a good Q&A thread!



Quote:
Originally Posted by bpounds
Those who liked the 5.4 will probably love the 6.2. It is an entry level engine, nothing more, and we lost the mid-level engine. Whether it is a V-10, or something else, Ford needs a mid-level engine for those who need more power but don't want to go diesel.
Entry level, nothing more? Of course I've never driven one but I can say I've driven a 5.4, a 6.8, and the 6.4 that I have now. This "entry level" engine will pull harder than my PSD will if you let it rev. It'll also pull harder than a V10 will anywhere north of 4,000 RPMs. And it's attached to a 6-speed transmission that shouldn't have any trouble putting it there whenever it's needed. So you have an engine that will, hands down, outpull both my 6.4 and your 6.0...and you dismiss it as "entry level".

The only time either of our PSDs would stand a chance is above 4,000 feet. The "mighty" V10 wouldn't stand a chance anywhere on earth.

Entry level?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy Buenger View Post
Yes I've driven both and the Chevy 6.0 is hands down the better towing engine under all towing conditions. The 5.4 is a gutless turd when it comes to towing. Over the years Ford has made improvements to the 5.4 like improved heads (PI), 3 valves/cylinder, but it's like polishing a turd, you can polish it all day long, but guess what, at the end of the day your still left with a turd. The 5.4 had no business being in a SD truck period.

The power of the V10 (2valve) version wasn't impressive either. Don't have any experience with the 3valve version but if the improvements of this engine in the 3 valve version is like the 5.4 3 valve then I wouldn't even consider purchasing one. The triton line of engines are just not impressive when it comes to towing and it's very obvious why the vast majority of these trucks come with a diesel.


Troy, I see what you're saying but I still would prefer a 5.4. There's no doubt that once a 6.0 spins up it would easily pull harder than a 5.4 would. So in a pure test of acceleration or speed of course it would win. But from real world experience, a 5.4 would have to downshift much less and would have an easier time maintaining speed. The 6.0 would win the race, but the 5.4(or V10!) would be a much more pleasant motor to tow with, in my opinion!
__________________
Tom,

Currently truckless.
Most recently: 2013 F150 XLT 4x4 EcoBoost
Moderators, Guidelines, and How They are Enforced
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-07-2010, 04:39 PM
92f150I6's Avatar
92f150I6 92f150I6 is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 1,611
92f150I6 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Not trying to be an ***, but the reason you say the 6.2 will out pull the others, is the exact same reason he said why the 6.0 out pulls the 5.4.
__________________
2003 F250 SD 4X4 5.4L 4:10 Arizona Beige
1987 Mustang GT (sold)
09 Challenger RT
07 BMW 328Xi E92
A bunch of motorcycles and a Quad.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-07-2010, 04:43 PM
Tom's Avatar
Tom Tom is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Union, CT
Posts: 15,271
Tom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputation
TomB985
Good point!

The big reasons I'm such a strong proponent for the 6.2 is because we were informed earlier in the other thread that it would have more low end torque than the outgoing 5.4.

The 5.4 has WAY more low end torque than the Chevy 6.0. So while I admit the new 6.2 sacrifices a bit of low end torque over the outgoing 6.8, it should still be head and shoulders above the competition. This competition also includes the 5.7L Dodge motor.
__________________
Tom,

Currently truckless.
Most recently: 2013 F150 XLT 4x4 EcoBoost
Moderators, Guidelines, and How They are Enforced

Last edited by Tom; 02-07-2010 at 04:49 PM. Reason: engine confusion!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-07-2010, 05:36 PM
Troy Buenger's Avatar
Troy Buenger Troy Buenger is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Katy, TX
Posts: 2,234
Troy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to behold
Guys,
Now I'll continue this discussion in this thread so Mike can get back to selling the strengths of the new 6.2.

The 5.4 may have better grunt off the line, but most of my towing is at highway speeds. At highway speeds the 5.4 just would struggle to maintain speeds. Matter of fact when pulling the same loads I couldn't even run my truck in overdrive, in fact most time it would never even shift in overdrive even when it was selected, and as a result the 5.4 had worse fuel economy than the 6.0 which could tow the same load in overdrive. The fuel economy of these two trucks pulling the same load was the 5.4 ~ 9mpg and the 6.0 ~ 11mpg.

Also when towing this trailor with my truck was a pride swallowing experience as my dad would just laugh at the lack of power this truck had. With this harrasment it just made a long drive even longer.

Also btw even though both trucks felt like they had about the same grunt from a stop, it's the highway running where people want their truck to perform the best.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-07-2010, 06:12 PM
Tom's Avatar
Tom Tom is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Union, CT
Posts: 15,271
Tom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputation
TomB985
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy Buenger View Post
The 5.4 may have better grunt off the line, but most of my towing is at highway speeds. At highway speeds the 5.4 just would struggle to maintain speeds. Matter of fact when pulling the same loads I couldn't even run my truck in overdrive, in fact most time it would never even shift in overdrive even when it was selected, and as a result the 5.4 had worse fuel economy than the 6.0 which could tow the same load in overdrive. The fuel economy of these two trucks pulling the same load was the 5.4 ~ 9mpg and the 6.0 ~ 11mpg.
That's interesting, was the rear end gearing the same between the 6.0 and your 5.4?

Of course the new 6.2 will have more horsepower as well as torque than the Chevy 6.0, I'd be very curious to see how their torque curves compare. Maybe the LY6 engine does a bit better down low than I thought...
__________________
Tom,

Currently truckless.
Most recently: 2013 F150 XLT 4x4 EcoBoost
Moderators, Guidelines, and How They are Enforced
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-07-2010, 06:28 PM
Troy Buenger's Avatar
Troy Buenger Troy Buenger is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Katy, TX
Posts: 2,234
Troy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to behold
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy001 View Post
That's interesting, was the rear end gearing the same between the 6.0 and your 5.4?

Of course the new 6.2 will have more horsepower as well as torque than the Chevy 6.0, I'd be very curious to see how their torque curves compare. Maybe the LY6 engine does a bit better down low than I thought...
No... The Chevy had 4:10 and the Ford had 3:73. However when running unloaded in overdrive both vehicles ran ~1900 - 2000 rpms at 70 mph.

Running unloaded the Ford deffintely made better fuel mileage, but load them up with a trailer and it the fuel economy shifted to the Chevy.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-07-2010, 06:37 PM
SDTriton250 SDTriton250 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 425
SDTriton250 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.SDTriton250 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Wouldn't even tow in O/D? Why do people insist on towing in O/D? I use O/D for empty cruising mileage and let the transmission decide while towing. Direct drive is the preferred selection for towing heavy with the gas engine. We towed our 8500 lb mid profile 5th wheel 1250 miles four days after I bought it for our Christmas vacation. I set cruise on 60mph on the way out as it only had 240~ miles on it. On the flats, it's held O/D at 1900~rpm. In rolling hills, it shifted to direct to run 2700~rpm. On two longer steeper hills, it shifted to 3rd to run 3800rpm. 3800rpm is peak torque rpm, the bottom of it's power band. On the way back with closer to 1k miles on it, we ran 65mph on much of the trip with no trouble. 2000rpm in O/D, 2800rpm in direct up rolling hills or against headwinds and an occasional 4200rpm in 3rd with plenty of power. Why some consider the 5.4L running in it's normal operating rpm range and not even getting close it peak horsepower rpm a problem is beyond me. I ran my previous Hemi powered 2500HD the same way and at 120k it still ran like a new engine. I've never known it to be harmful to run an engine in it's normal operating rpm range and power band. I expect the 5.4L to last a long time with proper care and normal operation.
That is unless I trade it for the 6.2L...
Why don't diesels tow 1000rpm below their peak torque rpm? 2000rpm is but a blur. You can't pedal that fast or count that fast or even see that fast. It is NOT low rpm. But it is the normal operating rpm for the small pickup truck sized diesels with an occasional downshift to run 2800~rpm up the steep ones while towing heavy. Won't hurt it either. We did it many times with our Cummins Rams.
OTR trucks run 1100~rpm with an occasional 1800rpm climb. Pickup truck diesels run 2000~rpm with an occasional 2800~rpm for the climb and the gassers run 2000-3000rpm towing with an occasional 4000~rpm for the climb. It's all normal operation and not an indication by any means that any of them are struggling or "screaming".
I need to stay away from the Ford dealerships when the 6.2L starts showing up!
__________________
2010 F250 XLT CC SB 4X2 5.4L auto/3.73 Reese 15k
2007 KZ Jag 28JFSS 5th wheel. 8500# 1700# pin.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-07-2010, 07:05 PM
Troy Buenger's Avatar
Troy Buenger Troy Buenger is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Katy, TX
Posts: 2,234
Troy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to behold
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDTriton250 View Post
Wouldn't even tow in O/D? Why do people insist on towing in O/D? I use O/D for empty cruising mileage and let the transmission decide while towing. Direct drive is the preferred selection for towing heavy with the gas engine. We towed our 8500 lb mid profile 5th wheel 1250 miles four days after I bought it for our Christmas vacation. I set cruise on 60mph on the way out as it only had 240~ miles on it. On the flats, it's held O/D at 1900~rpm. In rolling hills, it shifted to direct to run 2700~rpm. On two longer steeper hills, it shifted to 3rd to run 3800rpm. 3800rpm is peak torque rpm, the bottom of it's power band. On the way back with closer to 1k miles on it, we ran 65mph on much of the trip with no trouble. 2000rpm in O/D, 2800rpm in direct up rolling hills or against headwinds and an occasional 4200rpm in 3rd with plenty of power. Why some consider the 5.4L running in it's normal operating rpm range and not even getting close it peak horsepower rpm a problem is beyond me. I ran my previous Hemi powered 2500HD the same way and at 120k it still ran like a new engine. I've never known it to be harmful to run an engine in it's normal operating rpm range and power band. I expect the 5.4L to last a long time with proper care and normal operation.
That is unless I trade it for the 6.2L...
Why don't diesels tow 1000rpm below their peak torque rpm? 2000rpm is but a blur. You can't pedal that fast or count that fast or even see that fast. It is NOT low rpm. But it is the normal operating rpm for the small pickup truck sized diesels with an occasional downshift to run 2800~rpm up the steep ones while towing heavy. Won't hurt it either. We did it many times with our Cummins Rams.
OTR trucks run 1100~rpm with an occasional 1800rpm climb. Pickup truck diesels run 2000~rpm with an occasional 2800~rpm for the climb and the gassers run 2000-3000rpm towing with an occasional 4000~rpm for the climb. It's all normal operation and not an indication by any means that any of them are struggling or "screaming".
I need to stay away from the Ford dealerships when the 6.2L starts showing up!
Why tow in overdrive? When towing with the Ford 5.4 in 3rd gear I could barely achieve 200 miles on a tank of gas. Either way it didn't matter since the Ford would'nt never shift into overdrive anyhow, and boy did it suck the gas! The Chevy 6.0 on the otherhand would run in overdrive for the most part and therefore it made ~ 2mpg better.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-07-2010, 07:25 PM
SDTriton250 SDTriton250 is offline
Senior User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 425
SDTriton250 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.SDTriton250 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I've only owned a couple of Chevy's and fuel mileage wasn't on the list of assets with mine. I get the same mileage towing with the 5.4L I got with my previous Hemi powered 2500HD. I don't know what you're towing but, over on the Open Roads forums, folks report about the same mileage with their 6.0L GM's. No one is reporting mileage comparable to diesel towing mileage with their gas engines. I averaged 10.5mpg towing with all four of my Cummins powered Rams. I stop about every 200 miles with my F250 towing but that's mostly due to it's small gas tank with the short bed. I'm already wishing I would have gone with another long bed. I made the same 200~ mile stops with all of them anyhow to stretch a leg, eat, leave a squirt and refuel. My favorite stops are already mapped out regardless of mileage. But a gutless turd? Mine is far from it.
__________________
2010 F250 XLT CC SB 4X2 5.4L auto/3.73 Reese 15k
2007 KZ Jag 28JFSS 5th wheel. 8500# 1700# pin.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-07-2010, 07:29 PM
Fordfanatic4life Fordfanatic4life is offline
Postmaster
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Richmond BC
Posts: 3,924
Fordfanatic4life has a very good reputation on FTE.Fordfanatic4life has a very good reputation on FTE.Fordfanatic4life has a very good reputation on FTE.Fordfanatic4life has a very good reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Troy Buenger View Post
No... The Chevy had 4:10 and the Ford had 3:73. However when running unloaded in overdrive both vehicles ran ~1900 - 2000 rpms at 70 mph.

Running unloaded the Ford deffintely made better fuel mileage, but load them up with a trailer and it the fuel economy shifted to the Chevy.
aleady your not comparing similar trucks.. the gearing makes a huge diference...

also did the chevy have the same number of gears in its autobox ?

keep in mind the SD trucks weigh more, which makes them slower but much more stable tow rigs...

but i do agree the 5.4 isnt enuf motor for the SD trucks.
__________________
2003 F250 4x4 CC V10 4" Procomp, all white beauty

"list of previous owned Fords much to long to list here.."
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-07-2010, 07:53 PM
suzuki0702's Avatar
suzuki0702 suzuki0702 is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 726
suzuki0702 is starting off with a positive reputation.
my 5.4 gets urr done everytime!
__________________
2013 F250 xlt 6.7 CCSB


2004 F250 CrewCab, FX4 Off-road, 5.4, K&N FIPK, Whelen Hideaway strobes, twin 1000cca batteries, 8' 6" western proplus
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-07-2010, 08:00 PM
bucci's Avatar
bucci bucci is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Jessup, PA
Posts: 842
bucci is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.bucci is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
One thing that really caught my attention was when Mike, the 6.2l engineer, described the 6.2l as making decent power. This is the quote I'm referring to:

"The new 6.2L is all new. It shares nothing with any of the other V8 or V6 engines in the Ford Powertrain line up. The bore centers are 115mm, compared with the Modular 100mm bore centers. This allows us to have a relatively large 102mm bore, and make decent power from a 2 valve per cylinder engine."

I'm a little surprised that he chose to use the word "decent" to describe the power out put of the new engine. Why would the effort be made to design and release an all new engine to only be described as making "decent power"?
__________________
2009 F350 Chassis Cab 4x4 DRW
V10 6spd Manual
4.30 LS
XL Trim with Power Equip. Group, XL Decor & XL Plus
9x7 Reading Dump Body with Scissor Lift & Chelsea PTO
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-07-2010, 08:07 PM
Tom's Avatar
Tom Tom is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Union, CT
Posts: 15,271
Tom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputation
TomB985
Right, but define "decent!" 265 HP out of a 2V 6.8L V10 certainly wouldn't qualify as decent in my book! But back before PI heads, that was competitive.

I think he was trying to refer to the competition. A ~400 HP engine wouldn't obliterate the competition, but it would be a significant advancement. But then again, they would be achieving this with larger displacement.

He also admitted that we'd be seeing over 60 HP per liter, which at the very least would put it ahead of ANYBODY's diesel engines!
__________________
Tom,

Currently truckless.
Most recently: 2013 F150 XLT 4x4 EcoBoost
Moderators, Guidelines, and How They are Enforced
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-07-2010, 08:17 PM
bucci's Avatar
bucci bucci is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Jessup, PA
Posts: 842
bucci is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.bucci is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
I don't know what he means by decent. You can't describe decent because no numbers are available. 60 hp per liter is 372 hp, but he did say over 60 hp so we're talking probably around 400 hp. Current 5.7l Hemis produce 390hp and 383 hp in HD, plus they are on their way out to make roon for the 6.4l hemi. Maybe they will answer to the 450 hp 6.4l hemi with a 3v 6.2l.

This is also one of the reasons that I don't feel it is real benefical for Ford representatives to come on here when there are no hp, torque, or towing numbers, or power output graphs to discuss. Alot of this back and forth would be eliminated with those numbers.
__________________
2009 F350 Chassis Cab 4x4 DRW
V10 6spd Manual
4.30 LS
XL Trim with Power Equip. Group, XL Decor & XL Plus
9x7 Reading Dump Body with Scissor Lift & Chelsea PTO
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-07-2010, 08:23 PM
Troy Buenger's Avatar
Troy Buenger Troy Buenger is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Katy, TX
Posts: 2,234
Troy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to beholdTroy Buenger is a splendid one to behold
Bottom line guys, I'm not here to put down the 5.4L engine. If it does the job for you and your'e satisfied with it, then that's great. But if given the choice for my next super duty, the 5.4 wouldn't make the list for me. But that's me!

Also with my experience with the Chevy 6.0 vs the Ford 5.4, again my experience is the 6.0 is the better towing engine. Does it tow a load like its not behind the truck, no, not even close. But it did tow with much more confidence than the 5.4, and they were both 4 speed autos.

If the Ford 5.4 was the best of all worlds type of engine, Ford wouldnt' be eliminating it from the lineup and the 6.2 wouldv'e never been developed. I for one am very excited to see Ford produce the 6.2 because from my point of view, there will be fewer disapointed people who buy this truck/engine combination, and hook up a trailer to only be disapointed with their purchase.

Also fyi - I own a 6.0 psd that has its share of problems like oil leaks, lazy injectors at 100k miles, so it's not like this engine is superior either. I'm thinking Ford maybe back in the game in the gasoline & diesel lineup for '11 since its' been behind the competition too long. I won't go into the nausiating story about my Ford 6.0 and my Dad's current Duramax.
Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2010, 08:23 PM
 
 
 
Reply

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ninth Generation Body Style (1992-96/97) Turns 20 Years Old in 2012! FORDF250HDXLT 1987 - 1996 F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 12 01-02-2012 02:20 PM
2 Valve versus 3 Valve beeser Super Duty & Heavy Duty 7 12-14-2009 04:52 PM
More on towing a travel trailer beeser Super Duty & Heavy Duty 38 01-27-2009 05:02 PM
Will the improvements in the 5.4L make their way to the V-10? BadHabitinVA Modular V10 (6.8l) 3 02-17-2008 10:33 AM
6.2L Hurricane & V-6 Diesel RX 1 Liter General Automotive Discussion 11 04-10-2005 12:08 AM


Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Super Duty/Heavy Duty > Super Duty & Heavy Duty

Tags
2011, 54, 60, 62, 62l, 68, buy, chevy, duty, engine, ford, ly6, super, v10, v8

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 03:32 PM.


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