Diesel Technology makes the same amount of Torque from rev 1. It always has. There in is the beauty of that type of engine. . . . The function of a tuned turbo set up is to amplify power output by cramming more air into displacement in effect increasing useable potentials by increasing compression ratios to max the engine's eficiencies.

When diesel technology goes EFI, & we start playing with E-PROM programming other tweaks & perks available thru digital management, to time worn & proven mechanical technology such as the Diesel, the gains tend to be Astronomical.

Yeah, sure, Pugeots & Volvos et al with the old Bosch, mechanical speed density type diesels with lazy A/T's or Undergeared Manual Set ups were really slugs compared to today's diesel engines & available enhancements. Audi/VW is playing with a true small displacement diesel turbo getting a reported 65-70 mpg at highwy (Autobahn) speeds.

After the basic concept primer/intro above, Audi also runs a Diesel in P-1 in American LeMans road course series. It dominates against Porsche, BMW & the others. For you who do not follow this venue, P-1 = Proto type #1 in ALM series. Sort of an equal to F-1's of the Internationally Reknowned Formula racing. ie: Top Dog class of car.

My friend's 2005, F-350, Turbo Dually, runs 13s . It's in street trim. My Neighbor has a old 2000 F-350 with a chip, as his work truck. He's a pool contractor here in FL. It is certainly No Slouch. He has his chip set for economy. He claims 28-30 mpg with it and he ofetn pulls a 16'- 2 axle flatbed trailer w/ equipment etc. on it. He also runs an '85 Mustang Hatchback on gasoline, in the 11's, so he grasps performance concepts too.

If you want an overview, go check out Diesel & late model F series sites right here at FTE.

Also the more y'all think about what I said in post #10 of this thread, the more you will see the logic and sense within it. I think U.S. Auto Mfgr's need to get over their Fitz All concept and make what people want, rather than what they, or one of their bean counters, Think people should have. . . . .

I say when FoMoCo re-Issues Aerostar, it should come from Ford's Truck/ Commercial division, not a people mover primarily, but a light to medium duty truck based vehicle with flexibility of being used as a people mover if need be.

Really think this through and fire off a letter to FoMoCo on the subject. I know I will. My current Aero is at the quarter million mile mark right now. It's great but it can't last for ever, ya know. . . .?

FBp

 

My Aero is noisy with a gas engine. I would have to crank up the stereo with a diesel right below be. I like the idea of a new RWD or AWD Aero designed around one though.

 

Maybe my thinking is a little warped, but listen....
When I went bawling to Ford about having botched replacing my cylinder heads, they were much amused and slightly sympathetic.
The parts guy said they weren't much into that kind of work anymore (disassembly and repair), they were more into unit replacement. Offered me a rebuilt motorcraft 4.0 for 2600. plus 16-20 hours labor at 80. per to install it. Kind of a drastic solution to my particular problem, but suppose you took your tired old aero and put 4k into a known rebuilt engine rather than buy an unknown "newer" something? You would probably say yeah, but the next thing to go would probably be a 2000 dollar tranny. Not that likely, all at once anyway. So for 4-6 grand over a couple of years, or a unknown something else, which is better?
At least thats what I keep telling myself. Love my aero!
George

 

Call me old fashioned, but why doesn't he do his own work? It's not like he's a doctor or something.

The best I can recommend is a small pickup with a long bed. He could add a topper but would have the option to remove it if he needs to move trees or something. They are a lot easier to work on too, so if he insists on not learning to do it himself, it won't cost as much to get worked on.

 

The best way is to use diesel, that is used by Ford now. Ford tried to use A4LD/4r44e tranny on transit with 2.8 turbo. Slowwwww.... But with 5st tranny diesel runs well. May be there was no diesel aero, becouse auto does not fit old diesel engines well and customers were not ready to bue multy-purpose van without auto, but ford lost european market for aero. Aero with 2.5-2.8 turbo and auto tranny could be bestsailer in Europe, becouse in 90-s Europe liked vans much. Chrysler installed 2.5TDI to Voyager and Voyager and Dodge Ram Van with diesel are popular in Europe, but aero is built much better.

 

Hi- My computer was down for nearly a week, just now am getting back on here.
First, my son is not mechanically inclined, and never was. That's just the way it is, and that's why he doesn't do his own work. For that reason also, he's asked me for advice on what to get.
Pickup and a trailer is what most landscape people use around here but he lives in a condo with no place to put a trailer. Also he now prefers a van to enclose his equipment so it won't get stolen.
So that's why I felt the best idea was something a couple of years old with a transferable warranty, both for his benefit and to save me from getting involved with fixing something older when it breaks down.
Ray Mac.

 

E150 Ford van

the soccer mommy vans won't carry any weight over time

 

Yes, the 150 van sounds to be the best idea. Do they make that with a 6 cylinder?
Ray Mac

 

As I remember 6-cyl 4.3 pushrod engine is the samllest but fuel mylage of aero is much better.

 

The standard engine that comes with the E150 used to be the 300 CID straight 6. But that's a large truck engine; very strong, but quite different from the v6's in the Aerostar.

 

I used to drive E150 with Mercedes 6 cyl engine. Good van, but difficult to park.