im on new south, atkinson, thinking abt west next year since im in engineering. itd be cool if we met up sometime or sumthin.....and yeah struts on a truck are rediculous

 

I sent you an email Nick

 

Ok, big brakes I will not dispute, but I am fairly sure that despite that one advantage, the new and "improved" F150 would be dead three times over if subjected to the heavy duty work and hauling I put my '96 through. I have to be fair and say that any of the "Old Guard" Pickup Trucks would put a hurtin' on the new half tons as far as work and durability is concerned. The trucks I'm talking about are the 1996 and earlier F-150, the 1993 and earlier Dodge Ram 150, and the 1987 and earlier Chevy/GMC C/K10 series. The newer F-150 is rated to tow more than the old ones? The older trucks were seriously under rated in that department. I and many others like me have hauled and towed way more than the factory ratings with no ill effects. The new truck is over rated to allow it to compete with the pie in the sky numbers from the other guys. Will I admit to liking the new F-150 more than the other new half tons? Absolutely. But as long as the Argo has breath in her, I'd take her over the new one any day. By the way, I am willing to bet that if they re-released the '96 F-150, Straight Six and all, and sold it side by side with the "new and improved" F-150, the '96 would sell as much, if not more. Perhaps I am wrong, but I am sure that for those of us who would work our trucks hard, we who do serious work with our trucks would buy the old model. So would fleet owners. I doubt that any new half ton could touch any of the "Old Guard" trucks for that. Build quality? New one's have it. Ride Quality? Again, the new ones have it. Neato widgets, gadgets, and doodads? New ones have it in spades. A good old fashioned work ethic? The new ones are nothing more than puffed up blowhards.

 

The four wheel drive needs a solid axle up front. IFS don't hold up as well. I'm susprised the crown vic has been droped and ford isn't making intercepter f150s crew cabs.I heard back 96 automakes were going to make the half ton trucks more inviting to people who owned F Crown vic, C Caprices,C Impalas ss, L Town cars, M Grand Marquis,etc. it looks like we are going to see more rear wheel driven cars after the M Marauder,D Magnum

 

[QUOTE=Argo] By the way, I am willing to bet that if they re-released the '96 F-150, Straight Six and all, and sold it side by side with the "new and improved" F-150, the '96 would sell as much, if not more. QUOTE]
Couldnt have said it better myself.
And about the front axle, yes it needs to be solid, but will it? No because women wouldnt like the stiff ride of a solid axle, that is who the new trucks are marketed towards. When was the last year the solid axle was available.......um 96 I think?
Oh how I long for the early to middle 90's

 

I have been driving Ford trucks along time. I make an annual trip to the Fall Hershey Flea market where I vend and I load down whatever I'm driving beyond what I should and head for the hills of PA. Here are my observations over the years.

65 Ford Ext Van 3 speed manual 240CI I6 (Father of 300) - no problem
77 F150 extended cab short bed automatic 351 Cleveland - poor in the hills
81 F150 extended cab long bed automatic 302 - poor in the hills
88 F150 std cab long bed 300CI I6 5 speed - no problem
98 F150 std cab long bed 4.2L V6 5 Speed - no problem

Do you see a pattern. Stick a good manual transmission in a truck and you have control. The autos had to be pulled into second and raced at way under the speed limit to pull the hills of PA loaded (I'm talking a ton+ on a 1/2 ton truck with overload springs). The sticks give much better control.

I was concerned when I bought the 98 because I really liked the 300 and the 240 that I had previously owned. I took it on a long test drive and found some steep hills and took a chance and I'm a convert. Just as responsive and plenty of pulling power. I sometimes put 1/2 ton on the back and pull a car trailer with a small car on behind and have no problems on the highway or hills.

Oh and I consistently get a couple of mpg more with the 4.2 than the 300CI.

I don't know what I will replace the 98 with in a few years if Ford doesn't get their act together, the new F150 design with no manual transmission doesn't do it for me. Give me the Super Duty 6 Speed manual in the F150 then we can talk new truck. May have to find an older truck instead of a newer.

Jim...

 

Wouldnt a 77 have a 351M in it instead of a 351 C , ofcourse unless it was changed out, but I'd have to say if it was a 351C you would still be trying to get outta the seat, especially if it had the 2bbl heads so it would be street friendy,

 

Wouldn't argue if it was a Cleveland or not it has been awhile. It was what ever 351 was stock in 1977 F150.

Probably my CRS flaring up.

Jim...

 

There a real good article about engine dynamics that explains why the I six, V12 and the opposed sixes and twelves were dynamically the best designs. Thats part of the reason the bulk of the large truck engines are big sixes. All other engine designs are comprimises. Fours only exist because they are compact but they have evil dynamics and vibrate like hell. V8s are identical to fours but the placement of the other four cylinders and good balancing eliminates some of the evil fours bad dynamics. V6s and the other odd crap only exhists because they are compact like the V6 and really good balancing and in some countershafting makes them fairly smooth but not as efficient as the I6.
The radial engines have the best efficiency and power to weight ratio but how do you mount a 1000 cube +++ seven or nine cylinder engine in an over the road vehicle?
Ford did modify the 300 near the end with an improved cross flow head and it almost made the cut but decisions made by UPS to go to propane and diesel as well as ford wanting to shorten and lower the pickup front end killed it and it only made it to the prototype and field tests and then ford killed it. Too bad , because from what I understand the cross flow 300 design was much improved.

 

Sorry 'bout that. I got it confused with the Colorado's I5.

Judging from your smartassed reply, I see you took offense to my post. I meant no offense with my first (incorrect) correction or my last (correct) one.

 

women don't know what a rough ride is my last truck was a 86 gmc 3/4 ton 2wd regular cab and everytime it hit a bump with the back axle you think the thing was going to cut you in half . You needed a good ton in the box to make feel any better
my 1 ton 4x4 rides alot(feels like I bought a rolls royce compared to that gmc) better empty. I was afraid that a one ton truck would be the pits after owning that 3/4 ton thank god for test drives. The 4x4 99+ superdutys have solid axles in the front the duallys have a dana 60 and the srw have a dana 50. also The dodge trucks 4x4 2500 and 3500 still have a solid front axle.

 

Im lookin to sell my 76' and get a 93'-96 F150 4x4, and now, I think Ill look for one with an I6. I love my solid front end, the ride is rough but I love it. Ive put my truck through hell and back, and still has plent of pulling power for near dead 360. Ive alwasy thought that Ford went downhill from 97-up. Never really like their newer models and the whole automatic 4wd pushbuttom crap. Id rather dig a hole around my tires to get to my hubs than push a button lol.

 

I am so ill over this new truck delima, I've been pouring over the "Build your own" sections of the full size truck makers all morning and no luck. Ford and Chevy only offer electronic controlled auto transmissions in any 1/2 ton V-8 pick-up, same for Nissan too. Toyota does offer a manual with the V-6 in the tundra... but no manual for the V-8 tundra. Dodge was the only full size that I could get a V-8 Manual in a half-ton truck, but only the magnum V-8, If I want manual I can't have a Hemi. None of them offer an I-6 engine in any form... I give up, I think I'm going to shift gears and find a good extended cab F-150 from the mid 90's and if it doesn't have the I-6/Manual combo I want I'll drop the 4.9L and 5 speed out of my 95 F-250 regular cab in it and be happy.

 

Man you guys sure are bashing the 4.2 V6's. Yes, they may not be as good or as strong or long lasting as the 300 I6, but that does not make them a bad motor. I have had two F150's both with the 4.2, and I have been very satisfied with the performance of both of the trucks. I really do take offense to you guys saying that the engine in my truck is crap and nothing but junk. It suits my needs.

 

First off, I dont think anyone here specifically said anything derogatory in regards to the 4.2 specifically. The original question was the pros and cons of the V6 and I6. I have stated in my truthful opinion what I think the pros and cons are. Like I previously stated, I have a 3.0 V6 and I think its great. I have 150,000 miles on it and it pulls 25 MPG. Its a great little motor in my Ranger. But when it comes to full size truck engines the 4.2 is nowhere near as good as the old 300, and I, as well as many others just stated that Ford really, really lost something great when they went to the new bodystyle and did away with the 300 as the base engine. The 300 was quite possibly the best base engine ever put in a 1/2 ton truck. Just my $.02