View Poll Results: which engine will be in your next F150?
V6
6
0.93%
low/mid v8 - prolly a 4.6/5.4 mod motor
58
8.95%
6.2 boss - new gas v8
173
26.70%
4.4 diesel - let the halftons have torque!
411
63.43%
Voters: 648. You may not vote on this poll
so which engine would you choose?
Lead Driver
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 6,900
Likes: 3
From: Campbell River, B.C.
Originally Posted by Going_Going_Gone
We could always export some of our high-risk mortgage slimeballs to qualify Canadian people to purchase homes they can not afford. Within two years, that ought to bring the value of your dollar crashing down as happened here.
Actually, if you want a really boring history lesson, the real reason why the canuck buck fell out of favor in the past, was the rise of the soverenty movement in the province of quebec, back in the 60s and 70s. Economic pressures played a part, but political instability did the real damage, but oil was also a lot cheaper back then (thresh hold for profitability in alberta tar sands was pegged at $50/barrel, when prices hit that mark, things started to change at an alarming rate).
New User
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
I think I would go with the 4.4L deisel. Though I don't own a deisel, I know people that do and they say the milege is better, to an extent, over a gas burner. I drive 60 miles one way to work so gas milege is always on my mind. I wish they would bring back the 300 six like whats in my 94 F-150. Paired with a 5-speed OD tranny and a 2.72 rear end, I get 25 mpg on the highway!
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,842
Likes: 2
From: hillsborough nj
Originally Posted by lilgriz
I think I would go with the 4.4L deisel. Though I don't own a deisel, I know people that do and they say the milege is better, to an extent, over a gas burner. I drive 60 miles one way to work so gas milege is always on my mind. I wish they would bring back the 300 six like whats in my 94 F-150. Paired with a 5-speed OD tranny and a 2.72 rear end, I get 25 mpg on the highway!
Senior User
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by lilgriz
I think I would go with the 4.4L deisel. Though I don't own a deisel, I know people that do and they say the milege is better, to an extent, over a gas burner.../ !
I've owned a Diesel F250 for 20 years...and due to the high price of Fuel...I've had enough!
*Give me something that burns regular Gas.
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,842
Likes: 2
From: hillsborough nj
Originally Posted by HamerDown
To a very "small" extent. However in many areas such as mine Diesel Fuel is also 1/3 more than regular grade Gas!
I've owned a Diesel F250 for 20 years...and due to the high price of Fuel...I've had enough!
*Give me something that burns regular Gas.
I've owned a Diesel F250 for 20 years...and due to the high price of Fuel...I've had enough!
*Give me something that burns regular Gas.
Senior User
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by glasseater
so your diesel is about 4.20 per gallon?? let's be more realistic... it's roughly 40cents higher than regular gas
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 6 Best Deals Available on New Fords & Lincolns Right Now
Brett Foote
This Hennessey Takes the Expedition Tremor's Off-Roading Capability to the Next Level
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Fords at 2026 Carlisle Ford Nationals
Joe Kucinski
3 Best / 3 Worst Parts of Modern Ford Ownership
Brett Foote
10 Amazing Upgrades That Solve Common Ford Truck Owner Headaches
Pouria Savadkouei
Every 2026 Ford Engine Explained
Brett Foote
10 Ugly Ford Trucks That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Freshman User
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
4.9 always.
If 2009 coming out, the base engine should be a true to the street, resurrected 4.9 L, I-6 replacing the so-so 4.2 or 4.6L...too many plastic in those two engine that it can't be truck engine. We love Diesel but the picture of oil price is very intimidating and my neck of woods, diesel is too much to pay for.
95 F 150, 300 sixer, manual 5(102k and counting, we know we go 300k for sure)
94 Ranger, 2.3L, manual 5, little gas saver! (193,450k and counting)
So, 2009 or 2011, don't matter, bring them on.
95 F 150, 300 sixer, manual 5(102k and counting, we know we go 300k for sure)
94 Ranger, 2.3L, manual 5, little gas saver! (193,450k and counting)
So, 2009 or 2011, don't matter, bring them on.
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,842
Likes: 2
From: hillsborough nj
Originally Posted by mtr999
If 2009 coming out, the base engine should be a true to the street, resurrected 4.9 L, I-6 replacing the so-so 4.2 or 4.6L...too many plastic in those two engine that it can't be truck engine. We love Diesel but the picture of oil price is very intimidating and my neck of woods, diesel is too much to pay for.
95 F 150, 300 sixer, manual 5(102k and counting, we know we go 300k for sure)
94 Ranger, 2.3L, manual 5, little gas saver! (193,450k and counting)
So, 2009 or 2011, don't matter, bring them on.
95 F 150, 300 sixer, manual 5(102k and counting, we know we go 300k for sure)
94 Ranger, 2.3L, manual 5, little gas saver! (193,450k and counting)
So, 2009 or 2011, don't matter, bring them on.
Lead Driver
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 6,900
Likes: 3
From: Campbell River, B.C.
Originally Posted by glasseater
the only problem is emmissions... that's why you won't see another I6 in that
The only reason why every displacement designation has been used up, is becuase of marketing perceptions, if something is old, it must be oblotete, so when it comes time to offer an "all new" vehicle, they always use a new displacement. A 4.4L diesel gives the impression of being compact and fuel efficient at a first glance, and once they have your attention, the sales pitch can start.
If emissions were the only problem with the 4.9, then they could have simply redesigned the head, but in reality, the 4.9 has a lot more potential than all the ford engines currently avalable, its fuel economy and durability is what makes me believe this.
Elder User
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 502
Likes: 1
From: Middle of South Dakota
I would think they could easily make beter emmissions from the 300. Why create a whole new engine when you could redesign it. From what I know GM is stilling pretty much just redesigning their small block. I could be wrong.
Hell GM is making a I-5 now these days. From the people i know that own one they said it has ***** and tt also gets pretty good mpg.
Ford should bring the 300 back to life. If ford would put the 300 back into the f-series i would take it over any engine they would offer, even the diesel but, well its never going to happen. Why can't ford just listing to their consumers?
Hell GM is making a I-5 now these days. From the people i know that own one they said it has ***** and tt also gets pretty good mpg.
Ford should bring the 300 back to life. If ford would put the 300 back into the f-series i would take it over any engine they would offer, even the diesel but, well its never going to happen. Why can't ford just listing to their consumers?
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,842
Likes: 2
From: hillsborough nj
Originally Posted by David85
If emissions were the only problem with the 4.9, then they could have simply redesigned the head, but in reality, the 4.9 has a lot more potential than all the ford engines currently avalable, its fuel economy and durability is what makes me believe this.
Senior User
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
If they load the 4.4 up with all the emissions crap like they did with the 6.4, that doesn't do anything 4 me, I don’t want the new diesel engines. All these emissions add ons do is rob me of power and MPG. If that is no longer found with the "Clean Diesel," I see no point in buying one. the mark up for Diesel engines are pretty steep and I can't see 1 being worth the price if it no longer has any major advantages, $3-$5 thousand is allot of gas.