Old Vs New
Post Fiend
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,473
Likes: 4
From: Lafayette, IN
With modern engines and transmissions, revving higher is not a big deal for a new gas truck. Not to mention that that 5.4 makes more torque *everywhere* than your truck.
Link if image does not work: http://jastrauss.fastmail.fm/1990_p16.jpg
Those were Ford at-the-crank numbers and graphs. Here's the as-measured wheel power for the new 5.0:
Link if image does not work: http://www.f150online.com/forums/mem...3-untitled.jpg
And the 2009 5.4L:
Link if pic does not work: http://www.f150online.com/forums/mem...perf-hp-tq.jpg
Add about 15% to those to get comparable at the crank numbers. Here's an at-the-crank graph for a late 5.4:
Link if pic does not work: http://www.gearvendors.com/images/f5.gif
To say nothing of what the Lightning (and the related early Raptor with the 5.4) got at the crank:
Link if pic does not work: https://www.ford-trucks.com/specs/lightning_torque.jpg
Link if image does not work: http://jastrauss.fastmail.fm/1990_p16.jpg
Those were Ford at-the-crank numbers and graphs. Here's the as-measured wheel power for the new 5.0:
Link if image does not work: http://www.f150online.com/forums/mem...3-untitled.jpg
And the 2009 5.4L:
Link if pic does not work: http://www.f150online.com/forums/mem...perf-hp-tq.jpg
Add about 15% to those to get comparable at the crank numbers. Here's an at-the-crank graph for a late 5.4:
Link if pic does not work: http://www.gearvendors.com/images/f5.gif
To say nothing of what the Lightning (and the related early Raptor with the 5.4) got at the crank:
Link if pic does not work: https://www.ford-trucks.com/specs/lightning_torque.jpg
Sorry, I'll go with the test-cell dynos over the butt dyno every time.
Jason
Elder User
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 656
Likes: 4
From: Geneva,Ohio
Its called competition chevy and fiat in the 90,s didnt tow or haul any more than the obs in like 08 to 11 we got are *** kicked by gm thats why we came out with this new **** to out do them therefore 11,300 lbs go hook that to your obs but with a 351 and stick 4.30 gears in it. It wont struggle if it does then go to 4.9
Laughing Gas
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,062
Likes: 6
From: Dallas, TX, USA
Its called competition chevy and fiat in the 90,s didnt tow or haul any more than the obs in like 08 to 11 we got are *** kicked by gm thats why we came out with this new **** to out do them therefore 11,300 lbs go hook that to your obs but with a 351 and stick 4.30 gears in it. It wont struggle if it does then go to 4.9
Now, you're claiming the 08-11 trucks were worse than the OBS, yes? Funny, since the 08-10 trucks were the same basic truck as the new one, just with the older engines. But let's take a look.
Source: http://ford.ca/pdf/brochures/10383_en.pdf
Least capable 2010 F-150 variant - 4x2 short cab short bed with the 4.6L V8 2-valve (no smaller engine available, next engine up was the 4.6L 3-valve), fuel economy gearing and NO heavy duty package: 4,780lbs
GVWR for the same truck: 6,450lbs
Payload capacity (stated by Ford): 1,670lbs
Maximum trailer weight: 5,500lbs
Again, on what planet is 1,670lbs less than 1,495lbs?
Post Fiend
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,473
Likes: 4
From: Lafayette, IN
Its called competition chevy and fiat in the 90,s didnt tow or haul any more than the obs in like 08 to 11 we got are *** kicked by gm thats why we came out with this new **** to out do them therefore 11,300 lbs go hook that to your obs but with a 351 and stick 4.30 gears in it. It wont struggle if it does then go to 4.9
Heck, my '03 E250 with a 4.2L V-6 would out-haul the 302 and 300. It's got more HP than either, and is probably in the ballpark with torque. And, with 155,000 miles on the clock, it still runs like a top with no leaks, something not often said about the other two engines. I think it's even rated to tow up to 5,000 lbs, something both the 302 and 300 would struggle to do. It's no picnic in a 351, either, compared to newer engines of a similar displacement.
Jason
Elder User
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 757
Likes: 0
From: 7th realm of hell, Va.
Having owned an 06 F250 4x4 5.4L3v CCSB and now the 92 F250 4x4 5.8L SCLB I can tell you they are not even in the same category. With the same load, my slide in truck camper the 06 aout accerated the 92 and out braked the 92. Yes the 92 will hadle the load, about 2000# wet and loaded plus 2 people in the cab, just the 06 out performes the 92.
The primary advantage of the 92 over the 06 is the fact I paid cash for the 92 so I have no truck payment now and $500 plus dollars a month in the bank is a big advantage, especially in todays economy
Matt
The primary advantage of the 92 over the 06 is the fact I paid cash for the 92 so I have no truck payment now and $500 plus dollars a month in the bank is a big advantage, especially in todays economy
Matt
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
smoulding
General Automotive Discussion
25
Feb 12, 2006 08:54 AM
powerstrokenut
6.0L Power Stroke Diesel
7
Mar 8, 2002 03:22 AM
