I'm looking to replace my 1996 12 passenger. It needs a lot of work to pass inspection (pretty much the whole front suspension, tires, and an airbag 51 code). Also, I'm not sure about the engine (272k miles), and I'm thinking I'd just as soon put that money into a newer vehicle.

Yesterday I test drove a 2007 15 passenger. It has the 5.4. Based on what I've read here, I had expected it to be comparable in power to the 351 in my 96. I know it's a bit heavier vehicle, of course.

I was unpleasantly surprised. It was GUTLESS. I'm not sure I'd want my wife driving that thing.

There were other things wrong with that van, so I passed on it, but now I'm wondering if the 5.4 is an acceptable engine for the 15 passenger, or if that particular van's lack of power was an indication of a worn out engine or other problems. (I'm pretty sure the 'new' transmission had problems. It had a sound I didn't like.)

Your comments?

 

I 've got a 2000 with the 5.4L and I don't know I'f there is any difference between a 00 and 07, but mine does just fine. I don't feel it is gutless and it is packed full of tools and equipment. The 5.4L needs to rev, you can't be afraid to mash the pedal. It won't have the initial low rpm low end torque like the 351. According to Ford's specs, the 5.4L has more horsepower and torque than the 5.8L. There could also have been a problem with the van you were driving. Not to mention what gear ratio you have in your van vs the 07 could be different and have a different feel.

 

I've had a couple of pickups with the 351W (carbed in an '85 F-250 and fuel injected in a '95 F-150) and one with a 5.4L ('08 F-250). And now I have a 6.8L V-10 in my E-450-based motorhome (the 6.8L is pretty much a 5.4L with 2 more cylinders)

I don't know the numbers, but the 5.4L is rated for a lot more horsepower than the 351W. However, as EagleFreak said, that power comes at a much higher rpm. My '08 had a manual trans and when I tried to keep it at what I considered reasonable engine speeds it was a complete turd. Couldn't maintain 70 mph with a slight headwind in overdrive (~1900 rpm).

I didn't keep that truck long enough to figure out if the engine could be acceptable if I let it rev, but now with my motorhome I have a similar power/speed situation to the 5.4L. Below 3000 rpm it's got nothing. But if I keep my foot in it the auto trans will bring it up over 5000 rpm and it does really quite well.

With the right gearing the Triton engines are certainly not gutless. But they do need the right gearing. And also the willingness of the driver to "let her eat!" You NEED to let it downshift a gear or two or three to get out of it's own way. But if you do (and if the trans will do it, the one in my motorhome sure will), there's no lack of power.

 

Okay, that's helpful, folks. I didn't have a chance to let it wind up, so that might be the whole story. A high winding engine isn't my idea of a good choice for a vehicle that size, though.

Anyway, I passed on that one. Still looking though, so the input is much appreciated.

 

Just my opinion, no real experience with any 90's era Ford vehicles, especially trucks or vans...........

The vans beginning in '97 with the Modular Motors and 4R70W transmissions most likely have vastly different PCM strategies that undoubtedly affect what we'd call performance. Also guessing the vans were built more as haulers more so than impressive acceleration from a dead stop. Once the engines rev up to about 2K RPM's they're responsive enough, you can drive them with the gas pedal controlling when/if the transmission down shifts if quick acceleration is needed or wanted.

Up until 2005 the throttles were the cable-pulled type---in '05 they became fully electronic which does seem to reduce their off-idle acceleration just a little bit but not so much we'd say they're gutless.

If MPG's aren't a concern the V10s are pretty impressive if quick acceleration is the goal. Sadly those are tough to find, most common in the 15 passenger people movers. Claims of 10 MPG being a good number might make the budget conscious squeamish though.

Keep looking and driving a few different vans---make a mental note how loaded or unloaded it is during the test drive and compare that with your own anticipated normal or usual load.

Good luck with the hunt!

 

I tend to agree with you, but I do that knowing that we're wrong. The 5.4L in my '08 F-250 delivered 15 - 18 mpg in a vehicle that was probably pushing 7000 lbs empty. Hauling my slide-in camper and towing my Bronco it still turned in double digits. As I said, I didn't own that truck long enough to be sure that the power would've been acceptable if I let it rev, but based on the 6.8L in my motorhome I'm pretty sure it would've been. More power and better mileage can't really be wrong.

But saying that, I really didn't like that engine (or the 6.8L for that matter). Although I don't like the mileage at all, I MUCH prefer driving my 460-powered '97. And I can't see myself ever buying another daily driver with a mod motor. But that clearly indicates that I have a character flaw, because by the numbers the 5.4L is obviously a better choice

 

Add me to the list of doubters of the Modular Motor design---being very old school it goes against everything I've come to know or "think" relating to engines. Obviously they were designed for and by another generation of engineers who may have truly had a better idea.

Apart from some of the quirks discovered over their years in operation at the heart of it all I'm VERY impressed with the "performance" as installed in my E-Series work vans, equally impressed by their longevity. I strive to maintain mine probably a bit better than the average driver which may be part of their long-life. Then again even constant relentless upkeep can't and doesn't overcome poor design and/or build quality.,

And all this comes from a long, long time being a GM fan.

 

I have no experience with 90’s vans but lots of experience with ‘05-10 models.
* 4.2 v6 is pitiful. Nearly useless. But hey it works. Keep average speeds under 60 and you can get 18mpg. Above 60mph and you might as well have the v8 or v10.

* 4.6 is decent. I have one in my fleet with 4.10 gears and it is fully capable of doing its day to day job. Gas mileage about 14.

* 5.4 liter v8: I drove one of these on a test drive. I was impressed with its low rpm low throttle torque. I didn’t hot rod it, but I was impressed how close it was to my v10. Close- but not WITH the v10.

* 6.8 v10= that’s my favorite. I’ve put 220,000 miles on mine in recent years. It’s a torque monster. No hill, no wind, no cargo load makes it even hiccup. I suppose a five digit payload would make it feel like a dog, but man just buy a diesel to drag around that much weight. My v10 averages 12-13.5mpg, with a decent amount of highway miles at 65mph.


In conclusion, I think the one you drove was underperforming based on your description.

 

Heh. That's what I get with my 351.



Sounds like it, from all the feedback. It would not surprise me if it were a trans problem, or the cat was plugged. It had clearly NOT been well taken care of. Mismatched tires, filthy interior, only ONE of the rear seat belts was functional. Some had been cut off, some had jammed buckles.

The exterior looked good!