Bought an 09 f250 superduty with 5.4 last spring. Just a few days ago while driving down the freeway out suddenly started making a loud ticking noise. By the time I got pulled over it was really bad. Long story short, a rocker roller had seized up, caught the valve spring, lost the keepers and spring allowing the valve to slide down into the cylinder. This all happened in an instant worth no warning. After some research I guess this is common in these motors.

Time for a new motor but after learning about all the flaws in this engine I'm hesitant to put the money out for a new one. Are there any other motors that swap in with minimal grief?

 

The 3v 6.8 v10 should swap with not much modification. It just needs new engine harness/pcm the v10 radiator and if it’s an auto trans, I believe the torque converter is heavy for a v10. Good luck

 

it's a 6spd manual

 

The 5.4 was pretty bad. No doubt. But that said they rarely fail with low miles. I hate the 5.4 but if I had one and it died I'd put another in. Get a crate motor with a warranty and not worry about it.

 

ok so you just need to buy a new v10 clutch then for it to work with your current 6 speed. Yeah engine mounts the same, just need the v10 radiator, clutch and a 6.8 v10 engine wiring harness and pcm/ecm for a manual truck. The v10 crate engine isn’t that more expensive than a 5.4 and makes more power!! The 6 speed v10 super duty is one of the best powertrains in these trucks in my opinion. Dad has a 2004 f250 v10 6 speed 260,000 original engine and transmission!!
message me if your interested in selling your truck would take another 6speed gas super duty any day of week!

 

As an owner of a 2002 F-250 with the 6.8 V-10, I personally am a huge fan of the V-10 engines and can't wait to rebuild the one in my 07 with the 3-valve. However, I would be concerned that if this person does the swap to a V-10 and isn't "light" on the foot feed like they should be, they may not be happy with the fuel mileage like many owners. Personally, since my experience has been good and the fuel mileage for my pickup is actually pretty good (in my opinion), I think the problem is that too many owners just like to peg the peddle or start too fast from a stop and let the engine "gulp" the fuel down and get pissed that it gets poor fuel economy.

But, with so many owners being unhappy about the mileage, "maybe" there is a little more to the fuel mileage claims being poor than I'm giving credit even if I disagree. I'll still think it has more to do with people's poor driving habits and the reality is, V-10 owners/drivers just like the snappy response and power so they like to "get on it" too often when driving. Or, again, they can't stand to just take things nice and slow from a stop or set the cruise when towing which ALSO kills the fuel mileage in my opinion.

I've said in other posts that if people can stand to handle the foot pedal and not let cruise be used when towing or at the very least towing something over 5k with trailer and cargo combined, then you can gain another 1 to 2 mpgs which is significant. But, the reality is, people don't want to do that because it's just easier to "set it and forget it". I understand that being able to just set the cruise is nice and the reality is, on long trips especially, if you're having to use your foot the whole time, it can definitely get "old" and be fatiguing. (God forbid what did people do BEFORE the invention of cruise control right?) But, it helps you keep the transmission in the sweet spot a lot better and not let it downshift out of 4th (0/D) when you're just climbing a really slight grade and it could stay in 4th otherwise if you were controlling it.

In this case, I understand that with having the 6-speed transmission that maybe it wouldn't matter as much. I don't know. I advocate for the V-10 as well but just hope that the person wouldn't be disappointed with the fuel mileage if they did swap it to the V-10.

 

As an owner of a 2002 F-250 with the 6.8 V-10, I personally am a huge fan of the V-10 engines and can't wait to rebuild the one in my 07 with the 3-valve. However, I would be concerned that if this person does the swap to a V-10 and isn't "light" on the foot feed like they should be, they may not be happy with the fuel mileage like many owners. Personally, since my experience has been good and the fuel mileage for my pickup is actually pretty good (in my opinion), I think the problem is that too many owners just like to peg the peddle or start too fast from a stop and let the engine "gulp" the fuel down and get pissed that it gets poor fuel economy.

But, with so many owners being unhappy about the mileage, "maybe" there is a little more to the fuel mileage claims being poor than I'm giving credit even if I disagree. I'll still think it has more to do with people's poor driving habits and the reality is, V-10 owners/drivers just like the snappy response and power so they like to "get on it" too often when driving. Or, again, they can't stand to just take things nice and slow from a stop or set the cruise when towing which ALSO kills the fuel mileage in my opinion.

I've said in other posts that if people can stand to handle the foot pedal and not let cruise be used when towing or at the very least towing something over 5k with trailer and cargo combined, then you can gain another 1 to 2 mpgs which is significant. But, the reality is, people don't want to do that because it's just easier to "set it and forget it". I understand that being able to just set the cruise is nice and the reality is, on long trips especially, if you're having to use your foot the whole time, it can definitely get "old" and be fatiguing. (God forbid what did people do BEFORE the invention of cruise control right?) But, it helps you keep the transmission in the sweet spot a lot better and not let it downshift out of 4th (0/D) when you're just climbing a really slight grade and it could stay in 4th otherwise if you were controlling it.

In this case, I understand that with having the 6-speed transmission that maybe it wouldn't matter as much. I don't know. I advocate for the V-10 as well but just hope that the person wouldn't be disappointed with the fuel mileage if they did swap it to the V-10.

 

I don't see the "snappy" acceleration. And I have 2 v10. It's literally half the tq of any new diesel and its got no more hp and tq than almost any new half ton gas made in the past 10 years. My 2010 6 speed is rated at 362 hp and 457 ft lb and that's the "more powerful" version. A new 2.7 f150 is 325/400. A new 5.0 is 400/410. A new 3.5 is 400/500. My new 5.0 is snappy and fun. Our two v10 are just tanks and they about as fast....

A new four cylinder gas Silverado Half ton is 310/430. Lol. So more than a 2v v10 and right there with a 3v. That's the BASE chevy engine. The dodge 6 cylinder is 420/460. And again that's the base engine. I like saying "got the v10" when prior ask what engine. I leave out the fact it's weaker than most half tons. Lol

i don't feel anything particularly exhilarating from my v10. Lol. In fact they feel pretty slow. And the mileage sucks. On perfect roads in perfect conditions i can hit 14 with my manual driving like I'm hauling miss daisy but 11-12 is pretty much normal driving winter mileage. No city. The same HP and TQ in any of those half tons would get near 20 mpg. Cars and trucks are just so stout today.

Even tow ratings aren't much (if any) more for the v10 trucks. My 2010 6 speed v10 is rated at 12,500. My new f150 4 door is rated at 10,900 and it's not particularly high rated and no max towing or anything. It's faster. Rides better. Far more comfortable. Double the mileage and tows as much. Lol

If you have only driven 90s and 80s trucks the v10 is awesome. But get in any truck today, even half tons, and the v10 is dated. It wasnt strong. It didn't pull that much and mileage sucked when new and compared to anything new they really aren't much except reliable.

Things have progressed A LOT. My mach one was pretty awesome in 04. Fast. Powerful. Decent mileage, an amazing 300 HP. Same for my old ws6 trans am. ....today they just suck. 300 HP would make them barely over the new car average (280 in 2024) . A new camry stands a real chance of outrunning those two. Motor trend tested the new f250 diesel with a 0-60 of 5.5. Lol. That's the same as my 04 mach one which was fast at that time.

think on that. The poster of a lamborghini countach i had on my wall in HS beside Farrah stated a 0-60 in 5.5. A brand new, nothing special, F250 diesel is just as fast in a drag race. So I'm not bashing the v10. I have two. Driving one today. BUT it wasn't particularly special in 2010. Chevy had the 8100 and even the 454 was right with the v10. Even dodge with the tiny 5.7 in the same year was 400/400 with a cam in block hemi . And it certainly hasn't made up any ground. The newer 6.6 gas chevy will leave either of my v10 in the dust. I drive a lot of them at the shop. The 5.4 was 310/365. So even that wasn't a huge drop. The phasers sucked. No doubt. I wouldn't have a 5.4 super duty but I don't think I'd go through the effort of swapping for the same HP and 50 ft lb tq. Id just throw a new 5.4 in it. And i do a lot of engines swaps. Our c10 has a 454. I swapped a legacy engine yesterday. Swapping a fairlane next week. But there has to be some pretty decent HP and Tq gains.

 

Got my motor apart today, definitely shot. Whole piston is missing. Anyways, beyond repair. Deciding between a cheap used 5.4 and sell the truck or a brand new 5.4 and keep the truck. Mileage is only 168k on it and it is a manual....

 

DM me if you wanna sell

 

Nope, gonna keep it. Getting ready to pull the trigger on a new Fraser 5.4 3v. Does anyone know if the clutch is the same between a zf5 and a zf6 tranny? I have an old broken superduty with a 5.4 2v/zf5 with a brand new Luk clutch kit in it. Will it swap into my 5.4 3v/zf6 ? Rockauto shows the same part numbers so I think it will. Just looking for more real world verification. Thanks in advance


Also, where did my piston go?

 

I think the clutch’s are the same for zf5 and zf6. I agree

 

Well, the pieces of the piston are obviously in the oil pan unless there is a hole in the block (doesn't appear to be where a piston would "shoot" out of the side though) but damn, that's crazy. As for the swapping portion, I wish I had more knowledge but don't. Personally, I'm not a fan of the 5.4 due to all the valvetrain issues they're known for but I understand that they can be okay if well maintained. The thing is though, I've heard of people that have maintained them well AND THEY STILL have issues. So, I wouldn't want to deal with it. But, I understand if the truck has semi low miles and/or is in good condition otherwise. Trying to swap with something completely different is stupid in my opinion so going with the same engine is obviously easiest. I would say to go with whatever your budget allows though really. If you can afford a rebuilt motor, then I would try to find the one that has the best reputation for quality builds and actually stands behind their warranty and go with that one even if it's a few hundred dollars more. Outside of that, just keep your oil changes to full synthetic and no more than 5k intervals and I would think you "should" be okay for 200k or more. But again, you never know. Good luck.

 

I agree. I've read that a lot of these issues are addressed in the rebuilt motors. I'm going with frasers top level build that addresses all the TSB's that have been issued for the 5.4. Truck is in great shape otherwise. Extended cab, 6spd manual , 4x4 superduty. Used to be a forest service truck so it's been well maintained. Low mile's (168k) for its age.

 

Never used Frazier. I've used powertrain products, jasper, national etc. Jasper pays labor on warranty repairs. They pay double what i charge to swap one so i tend to like those on customers cars.

No doubt, like you, I'd fix my truck with a new 5.4 assuming it was not rusted out. 168k miles is pretty early for a 5.4 to fail and I'm no expert but a piston evaporating isn't usually included in the phaser/ rattle issues. Lol. They usually sound like hell for many thousands miles before top end failure.