Ford V10 vs Dodge
Senior User
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 458
Likes: 1
Ford V10 vs Dodge
>Ivstang:
>>
>>While your personal experience is more real world than a
>>magazine article, a lot of what you say is exactly what some
>>of the mags say BUT with the Ford having the better
>>powerband and the torque curve better matched to the trans.
>>
>
>I think that one of the more reliable aspects of my
>comparison between the Dodge and Ford V10's is that I had a
>manual transmission in each. The Dodge had a NV4500 5sp and
>the Ford a ZF 6sp. There are a *lot* more variables with
>modern automagic transmissions that you simply do not have
>with real transmissions. I was more closely comparing the
>two engines, not the engine/auto transmission combinations
>which would be affected by different torque converters,
>electronics, interactive engine/transmission controls, etc.
>
>>
>>In the last test by TRUCK TRENDS the Ford beats the Dodge in
>>most all performance tests and EVEN WHEN TOWING!!! They
>>claim the dodge just flat runs outta breath.
>
>Not my experience with manual transmissions. And being in
>control of the transmission of engine power to the rear end
>without being over-ridden by the auto transmission controls
>is just one of the reasons why I prefer manuals.
>
>>
>>The only guess I can make(especially with your excellent
>>MPG) is you're short shifting the Ford. My auto V10 tachs to
>>5K before shifting when I'm on it.
>
>No short shifting once past the proper engine breakin
>period. I drove both exactly the same and I had control
>over when they shift. Besides, we are talking about
>available maximum power, not everyday driving. When passing
>a car at 11,000' feet on a Colorado pass, I would be in the
>upper reaches of the powerband and have I bounced off the
>rev limiter on more than one occasion. Again, I would
>suspect a transmission related reason for what they
>observed. I suppose one other *possible* issue is that I
>had a '95 Dodge to compare with a '02 Ford and maybe the
>newer Dodge engine has lost some of its previous glory. A
>look at the total 'area' under the hp and torque curves
>usually explains the real story of an engine's capability.
It's hard to argue with someone whose lived it. I'm confused as to two paradoxical satements, however. The "area under the curve" and "available maximum power" are two different statements. Just seems to me that with the very little peak difference AND the ability to rev higher AND the 6 speed(vs. your older 5 speed) the Ford should do well.
If you have these curves, feel free to post 'em. I'm under the impression not only does the Ford make most of its power down low but its peak is higher giving it a wider powerband.
I applaud your apples to apples comparison concerning transmissions. It's just hard for me to grasp the performance difference not being the same when comparing auto to auto or manual to manual.
>>
>>While your personal experience is more real world than a
>>magazine article, a lot of what you say is exactly what some
>>of the mags say BUT with the Ford having the better
>>powerband and the torque curve better matched to the trans.
>>
>
>I think that one of the more reliable aspects of my
>comparison between the Dodge and Ford V10's is that I had a
>manual transmission in each. The Dodge had a NV4500 5sp and
>the Ford a ZF 6sp. There are a *lot* more variables with
>modern automagic transmissions that you simply do not have
>with real transmissions. I was more closely comparing the
>two engines, not the engine/auto transmission combinations
>which would be affected by different torque converters,
>electronics, interactive engine/transmission controls, etc.
>
>>
>>In the last test by TRUCK TRENDS the Ford beats the Dodge in
>>most all performance tests and EVEN WHEN TOWING!!! They
>>claim the dodge just flat runs outta breath.
>
>Not my experience with manual transmissions. And being in
>control of the transmission of engine power to the rear end
>without being over-ridden by the auto transmission controls
>is just one of the reasons why I prefer manuals.
>
>>
>>The only guess I can make(especially with your excellent
>>MPG) is you're short shifting the Ford. My auto V10 tachs to
>>5K before shifting when I'm on it.
>
>No short shifting once past the proper engine breakin
>period. I drove both exactly the same and I had control
>over when they shift. Besides, we are talking about
>available maximum power, not everyday driving. When passing
>a car at 11,000' feet on a Colorado pass, I would be in the
>upper reaches of the powerband and have I bounced off the
>rev limiter on more than one occasion. Again, I would
>suspect a transmission related reason for what they
>observed. I suppose one other *possible* issue is that I
>had a '95 Dodge to compare with a '02 Ford and maybe the
>newer Dodge engine has lost some of its previous glory. A
>look at the total 'area' under the hp and torque curves
>usually explains the real story of an engine's capability.
It's hard to argue with someone whose lived it. I'm confused as to two paradoxical satements, however. The "area under the curve" and "available maximum power" are two different statements. Just seems to me that with the very little peak difference AND the ability to rev higher AND the 6 speed(vs. your older 5 speed) the Ford should do well.
If you have these curves, feel free to post 'em. I'm under the impression not only does the Ford make most of its power down low but its peak is higher giving it a wider powerband.
I applaud your apples to apples comparison concerning transmissions. It's just hard for me to grasp the performance difference not being the same when comparing auto to auto or manual to manual.
Junior User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
From: Durango U.S. of A.
Ford V10 vs Dodge
>It's hard to argue with someone whose lived it. I'm confused
>as to two paradoxical satements, however. The "area under
>the curve" and "available maximum power" are two different
>statements. Just seems to me that with the very little peak
>difference AND the ability to rev higher AND the 6 speed(vs.
>your older 5 speed) the Ford should do well.
I'm sorry that I didn't make that clear. The seat of the pants metric that I was using in my comparison was for a WOT acceleration from, say 1500rpm to red line in any gear. I did not mean to imply that the 'available maximum power' necessarily coincided with the peak hp or torque peak, but instead referred to the ability to accelerate from just off idle to red line. Also, I did not mean to imply that the Ford doesn't do well. It is a very powerful, smooth engine, but of the two engines in the two individual trucks I owned, the Dodge just accelerated noticably harder and faster, mostly evidenced by passing another vehicle while ascending mountain passes or on level highways.
I have not seen any evidence of the Ford being able to rev any higher than the Dodge I had. Every engine has a point beyond which you fall off the torque curve and are better off shifting up to get back into the a rpm area with more available torque. Reving beyond that point probably is counterproductive, so a higher redline may, or may not, be important.
The 5 and 6 speed were very similar, as far as gearing goes, as both has similar granny's, first gears, second to highest gears (1:1), and overdrives. I actually preferred the 5 speed because with the prodigious torque of the Dodge V10 and such a broad powerband, I didn't have to shift as often. I find the gearing on the Ford to be unnecessarily 'short' between gears. That might be well and fine for a small engine with a peaky torque curve, but not needed on a powerful engine.
>
>If you have these curves, feel free to post 'em. I'm under
>the impression not only does the Ford make most of its power
>down low but its peak is higher giving it a wider powerband.
I will see if I can find the literature I got with the Dodge when I bought it. The torque curve did show 400+ ft-lb from 1000rpm up to red line. The Ford's torque curve hits 400 above 2000 rpm and drops off faster at the higher end.
>
>
>I applaud your apples to apples comparison concerning
>transmissions. It's just hard for me to grasp the
>performance difference not being the same when comparing
>auto to auto or manual to manual.
I think the different autos could have enough differences to account for the discrepancy that doesn't show up with the manuals. As you stated, the one of the biggest issues is how an automatic transmission is 'matched' to the characteristics of the engine. Maybe Ford just did that better than Dodge? Dodge was never known for having quality automagic transmissions for its more powerful engines. The last point that I will come back to in my comparison of the two engines in the two trucks was that the Dodge had 3.55's and my Ford has 4.30's. I would have thought that the comparative power of the Ford with the shorter gearing would be greater, but it was not. Thanks for your thoughful questions!
>as to two paradoxical satements, however. The "area under
>the curve" and "available maximum power" are two different
>statements. Just seems to me that with the very little peak
>difference AND the ability to rev higher AND the 6 speed(vs.
>your older 5 speed) the Ford should do well.
I'm sorry that I didn't make that clear. The seat of the pants metric that I was using in my comparison was for a WOT acceleration from, say 1500rpm to red line in any gear. I did not mean to imply that the 'available maximum power' necessarily coincided with the peak hp or torque peak, but instead referred to the ability to accelerate from just off idle to red line. Also, I did not mean to imply that the Ford doesn't do well. It is a very powerful, smooth engine, but of the two engines in the two individual trucks I owned, the Dodge just accelerated noticably harder and faster, mostly evidenced by passing another vehicle while ascending mountain passes or on level highways.
I have not seen any evidence of the Ford being able to rev any higher than the Dodge I had. Every engine has a point beyond which you fall off the torque curve and are better off shifting up to get back into the a rpm area with more available torque. Reving beyond that point probably is counterproductive, so a higher redline may, or may not, be important.
The 5 and 6 speed were very similar, as far as gearing goes, as both has similar granny's, first gears, second to highest gears (1:1), and overdrives. I actually preferred the 5 speed because with the prodigious torque of the Dodge V10 and such a broad powerband, I didn't have to shift as often. I find the gearing on the Ford to be unnecessarily 'short' between gears. That might be well and fine for a small engine with a peaky torque curve, but not needed on a powerful engine.
>
>If you have these curves, feel free to post 'em. I'm under
>the impression not only does the Ford make most of its power
>down low but its peak is higher giving it a wider powerband.
I will see if I can find the literature I got with the Dodge when I bought it. The torque curve did show 400+ ft-lb from 1000rpm up to red line. The Ford's torque curve hits 400 above 2000 rpm and drops off faster at the higher end.
>
>
>I applaud your apples to apples comparison concerning
>transmissions. It's just hard for me to grasp the
>performance difference not being the same when comparing
>auto to auto or manual to manual.
I think the different autos could have enough differences to account for the discrepancy that doesn't show up with the manuals. As you stated, the one of the biggest issues is how an automatic transmission is 'matched' to the characteristics of the engine. Maybe Ford just did that better than Dodge? Dodge was never known for having quality automagic transmissions for its more powerful engines. The last point that I will come back to in my comparison of the two engines in the two trucks was that the Dodge had 3.55's and my Ford has 4.30's. I would have thought that the comparative power of the Ford with the shorter gearing would be greater, but it was not. Thanks for your thoughful questions!
Senior User
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 391
Likes: 1
Ford V10 vs Dodge
In Ford OHV engines it has been my experience that you get best performance running them tight up to (but not over) the red line.
As far as hp/l, lighter vehicles do better, all other things being equal because they have to cam the engine more for peak tq and less for peak hp.
Motorcycles they have to avoid too much peak tq or you loose traction or flip over. One great marketing way to do this is to run the hp way up and sacrafice peak tq.
Cars have closer power to weight ratios to trucks. Yet being lighter than can be much better. The v-6 SHO makes 220 HP from a 3.0l engine. Never seen a truck engine close to that, and don't expect to - the same engine tuned for a truck would probably make 200 hp but more peak tq.
Best hp/L I know of in a truck engine is for a smaller truck, the 4.2l at 270 hp and relatively high torque. But they cheat by using variable valve timing (wish my v-10 had that!). It's about the same as the first V-10 6.8l engines, but I'm sure far less peak torque, even though it is a straight 6 which are good for low end, other things being equal.
-Jim
As far as hp/l, lighter vehicles do better, all other things being equal because they have to cam the engine more for peak tq and less for peak hp.
Motorcycles they have to avoid too much peak tq or you loose traction or flip over. One great marketing way to do this is to run the hp way up and sacrafice peak tq.
Cars have closer power to weight ratios to trucks. Yet being lighter than can be much better. The v-6 SHO makes 220 HP from a 3.0l engine. Never seen a truck engine close to that, and don't expect to - the same engine tuned for a truck would probably make 200 hp but more peak tq.
Best hp/L I know of in a truck engine is for a smaller truck, the 4.2l at 270 hp and relatively high torque. But they cheat by using variable valve timing (wish my v-10 had that!). It's about the same as the first V-10 6.8l engines, but I'm sure far less peak torque, even though it is a straight 6 which are good for low end, other things being equal.
-Jim
New User
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Ford V10 vs Dodge
Hi guys,
This is my first post, and it's on a subject that I definitely know about. I currently drive a 1999 350 crew cab 4x4, with 4.30 gears, and 33" bfg at's. My previous truck was a 1997 Dodge 2500 with a v10. it was an extra cab 4x4 with 4.10's. Same tires. Let me just say that without a doubt, the dodge v10 is far stronger than my Ford. I'm not knocking the Ford at all, but facts is facts. Dodge is too stupid to make a real crew cab, and that just gave Ford another customer. However, I have to agree with the guy who has also had both vehicles. The Dodge would easily pull the Cuesta grade that I drive everyday, in overdrive, and accelerate at any time, while my Ford can't do it in overdrive at all, and if I have to slow down at all, here comes second gear! Anyways, both trucks are as similar as possible, 4x4's, auto trans, 4.30 & 4.10 gears, long beds, same tires, etc. The Dodge just has a lot more power. Granted, my '99 is down some serious power on the newer models, but I really don't think it would matter. By the way, I averaged 11mpg with the supposedly thirstier dodge, and only get about 9.5 with the Ford. The only difference is the trucks, everything else is the same. Well, I hope I didn't start on the wrong foot, and I have enjoyed reading the posts. I just couldn't stand reading how magazines say the ford has more power, and people saying how much better mileage you would get with the smaller ford engine. Sometimes, a bigger motor not working as hard as a smaller one doing the same job will get better mileage.
This is my first post, and it's on a subject that I definitely know about. I currently drive a 1999 350 crew cab 4x4, with 4.30 gears, and 33" bfg at's. My previous truck was a 1997 Dodge 2500 with a v10. it was an extra cab 4x4 with 4.10's. Same tires. Let me just say that without a doubt, the dodge v10 is far stronger than my Ford. I'm not knocking the Ford at all, but facts is facts. Dodge is too stupid to make a real crew cab, and that just gave Ford another customer. However, I have to agree with the guy who has also had both vehicles. The Dodge would easily pull the Cuesta grade that I drive everyday, in overdrive, and accelerate at any time, while my Ford can't do it in overdrive at all, and if I have to slow down at all, here comes second gear! Anyways, both trucks are as similar as possible, 4x4's, auto trans, 4.30 & 4.10 gears, long beds, same tires, etc. The Dodge just has a lot more power. Granted, my '99 is down some serious power on the newer models, but I really don't think it would matter. By the way, I averaged 11mpg with the supposedly thirstier dodge, and only get about 9.5 with the Ford. The only difference is the trucks, everything else is the same. Well, I hope I didn't start on the wrong foot, and I have enjoyed reading the posts. I just couldn't stand reading how magazines say the ford has more power, and people saying how much better mileage you would get with the smaller ford engine. Sometimes, a bigger motor not working as hard as a smaller one doing the same job will get better mileage.
Senior User
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 117
Likes: 2
Ford V10 vs Dodge
While HP/liter has been mentioned here, I haven't seen much discussion of vehicle weight. How do the new Ford, Dodge and Chevy SD pickups compare in weight?
My extended cab long bed mid-90s F-250 7.5L weighs 5,700 lbs on certified scales, no driver and 25 gallons of fuel, and with an always-full steel toolbox in the bed that likely weighs 200#. From what I'm seeing, a comparable new F-250 V-10 would outweigh my truck by at least 500 pounds. Extra baggage like that is going to make a perceptible difference both going uphill and accellerating.
My extended cab long bed mid-90s F-250 7.5L weighs 5,700 lbs on certified scales, no driver and 25 gallons of fuel, and with an always-full steel toolbox in the bed that likely weighs 200#. From what I'm seeing, a comparable new F-250 V-10 would outweigh my truck by at least 500 pounds. Extra baggage like that is going to make a perceptible difference both going uphill and accellerating.
Postmaster
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 4,742
Likes: 8
From: OK
Ford V10 vs Dodge
Excellent thought El Guapo!
My 2001 XLT Crew cab 4x4 w/long bed & V10 weighs about 7000 lbs with nothing but a full tank of gas. Actual certified weight with me, my wife, and 5th-wheel hitch (no trailer) was 7520 lbs.
My 2001 XLT Crew cab 4x4 w/long bed & V10 weighs about 7000 lbs with nothing but a full tank of gas. Actual certified weight with me, my wife, and 5th-wheel hitch (no trailer) was 7520 lbs.
Senior User
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 391
Likes: 1
Ford V10 vs Dodge
Sean,
Welcome aboard. I for one would much rather see fair compairisons to the competition and give credit where credit is due.
The hp/lb thing is a very good measure of performance in my book, compared to hp/l. Still not perfect, but good for vehicles within say 30% weight of each other.
-Jim
2001 E-450 Cutaway with 31' Motorhome attached
Welcome aboard. I for one would much rather see fair compairisons to the competition and give credit where credit is due.
The hp/lb thing is a very good measure of performance in my book, compared to hp/l. Still not perfect, but good for vehicles within say 30% weight of each other.
-Jim
2001 E-450 Cutaway with 31' Motorhome attached
Sit. Stay.
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 18,308
Likes: 20
From: Washington State
Ford V10 vs Dodge
The Super Dutys are considerably heavier tha nthe competition in almost all the available configurations.
Edmunds should give you the mfg. posted curb weight.
Edmunds should give you the mfg. posted curb weight.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
Elder User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 529
Likes: 1
From: Fairbanks USA
Ford V10 vs Dodge
The power curves are a very important decision in purchasing a truck but another important consideration is (in My Opinion) The ford Superduty Trucks with the V10 or V8 Looks sweet. The Dodge with any engine or power curve is Butt Ugly. I'd drive a ford with 200hp before I'd drive a dodge with 1000hp. The viper is another story. Cool car.
Just my 2 cents.
2000 F350SD,RC,5spd man,V10, Front Leveling Kit,4.30 gears
Just my 2 cents.
2000 F350SD,RC,5spd man,V10, Front Leveling Kit,4.30 gears
Posting Guru
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,245
Likes: 16
From: Vancouver Wash USA
Ford V10 vs Dodge
I'm a Ford guy, I drive Fords. That's why I like the Fords better. Now I don't LOVE all Fords, but I'd drive a 6 cyl Ford before I'd drive a V-10 Dodge. And I would PEDAL before I'd drive a frikkin General Mess of Crap (GMC). I am in LOVE with that nasty little snarl of that V-10 when you stand on it. And that power just builds and builds and BUILDS all the way to 5200 RPM, which has a sweet sound in it's own right, eh boys ? Hooty-Hoo ! V-10's RULE !!
New User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Ford V10 vs Dodge
I know this is an old thread but I just happened to see it.
As a former owner of several good Ford trucks (1966 Camper Special, 1972 1/2 ton, 1997 3/4 ton among others) I am not against Fords.
I don't have any experience with the surprisingly small Ford V10 (why have a V10 with V8 size cubes?), but I own a 1999 V10 Dodge Ram 1 ton and can tell you it is a killer engine. At 113K miles, it has never burned a drop of oil, rattled, leaked, or done anything other than run strong. It's not a Viper drag racing engine; it's not supposed to be. I've towed well over the factory limits with it and have yet to run out of steam (provided I am in the right gear). A very underrated engined.
Just my .02...
As a former owner of several good Ford trucks (1966 Camper Special, 1972 1/2 ton, 1997 3/4 ton among others) I am not against Fords.
I don't have any experience with the surprisingly small Ford V10 (why have a V10 with V8 size cubes?), but I own a 1999 V10 Dodge Ram 1 ton and can tell you it is a killer engine. At 113K miles, it has never burned a drop of oil, rattled, leaked, or done anything other than run strong. It's not a Viper drag racing engine; it's not supposed to be. I've towed well over the factory limits with it and have yet to run out of steam (provided I am in the right gear). A very underrated engined.
Just my .02...
Sit. Stay.
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 18,308
Likes: 20
From: Washington State
Ford V10 vs Dodge
>I don't have any experience with the surprisingly small Ford
>V10 (why have a V10 with V8 size cubes?),
In a word: Modular. It is a member of Ford's modular engine family.
>A very underrated engine.
Well, I guess the two engines have more in common than the number of cylinders.
Thank you for your input! It is nice to have a different take on things every now and then.
I should say that a friend of mine has the Dodge V10 and has absolutley NO complaints! It is torquey and powerful and gets the job done the way he wants it done. I guess that's all that really matters when you get right down to it. Hey, it's all gonna "burn in the end" anyway...
>V10 (why have a V10 with V8 size cubes?),
In a word: Modular. It is a member of Ford's modular engine family.
>A very underrated engine.
Well, I guess the two engines have more in common than the number of cylinders.
Thank you for your input! It is nice to have a different take on things every now and then.
I should say that a friend of mine has the Dodge V10 and has absolutley NO complaints! It is torquey and powerful and gets the job done the way he wants it done. I guess that's all that really matters when you get right down to it. Hey, it's all gonna "burn in the end" anyway...
New User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
From: West Chester, PA
Ford V10 vs Dodge
I had a 1997 Ram 2500 Club Cab, 4x4, 4.10LS, automatic, V10. That truck was flat out fun. This was a 300hp/450 lb-ft Federal truck. Dual manifolds and cats from the factory. True duals - I put Borla headers and exhaust on. Mileage...well, 9-10. Best highway was 14. And all I ever hauled in that truck was AZZZZZ....
I have not driven the Ford V10 (I have a PSD, as you can see from my sig), but, I can say, there weren't alot of trucks on the road that were faster (exceptions: Lightnings, modded trucks, etc). I would still have that truck, except I was drunk for more power, and I went and had a Paxton supercharger put on. WHAT A MISTAKE! Long, story,...truck was no longer reliable. Couldn't sell it, and took a BATH on the trade in (not even counting what I lost with the supercharger). Prior to this stupid MOD, the only issue I had was that the engine drank coolant. No leaks, or contaminated oil, though. Dealer was never able to pinpoint, although I did get a new radiator under warranty (even though the truck was already out of warranty - there are some good dealers out there). It is my understanding that there were some bad head castings on some early engines.
One problem with the Ram V10 is dealer support - they want to sell Cummins. You can go to any Chevy dealer, and find several 8.1s on the lot. Same with Ford - most dealers have at least 1 or 2 V10s on the lot. But Dodge dealers won't touch em. My dealer had to locate mine 200 miles away. One of the largest Dodge truck dealers in my area has had a beautiful 2000, black, 2500 V10 4x4 on his used lot for at least two months now. I drive past it every day on my way to work. Can't get rid of it. Since I bought mine in 97, I have probably seen less than 2 dozen on the road. I am surprised Dodge still offers the engine.
If I could afford two trucks, I would go buy that one I mentioned above. Well, even if I could afford it, the better half would probably run me out.....
I have not driven the Ford V10 (I have a PSD, as you can see from my sig), but, I can say, there weren't alot of trucks on the road that were faster (exceptions: Lightnings, modded trucks, etc). I would still have that truck, except I was drunk for more power, and I went and had a Paxton supercharger put on. WHAT A MISTAKE! Long, story,...truck was no longer reliable. Couldn't sell it, and took a BATH on the trade in (not even counting what I lost with the supercharger). Prior to this stupid MOD, the only issue I had was that the engine drank coolant. No leaks, or contaminated oil, though. Dealer was never able to pinpoint, although I did get a new radiator under warranty (even though the truck was already out of warranty - there are some good dealers out there). It is my understanding that there were some bad head castings on some early engines.
One problem with the Ram V10 is dealer support - they want to sell Cummins. You can go to any Chevy dealer, and find several 8.1s on the lot. Same with Ford - most dealers have at least 1 or 2 V10s on the lot. But Dodge dealers won't touch em. My dealer had to locate mine 200 miles away. One of the largest Dodge truck dealers in my area has had a beautiful 2000, black, 2500 V10 4x4 on his used lot for at least two months now. I drive past it every day on my way to work. Can't get rid of it. Since I bought mine in 97, I have probably seen less than 2 dozen on the road. I am surprised Dodge still offers the engine.
If I could afford two trucks, I would go buy that one I mentioned above. Well, even if I could afford it, the better half would probably run me out.....
Elder User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 755
Likes: 1
From: Campbell, California
Ford V10 vs Dodge
>>I say this because the Ford has the highest torque and horsepower per liter.
>
>
>Does that really drive an arguement? I have in my garage a
>'98 Kawasaki ZX-7R. Certainly not cutting edge but it's
>749cc engine will generate 120 (modified) HP.
>
>That is 160HP!! per Liter.
>
>I still don't want one in my truck.
>
>____________
>
>I know...I know... this "arguement" doesn't count. I just
>thought I'd throw it out.
I got a Honda CR-500 in my garage that puts out about 65 HP and its only half a liter. So that's 130 HP per liter.
Of course it's a two stroke engine, do you think that might have something to do with the power output? Brrrrrrrrrrrrr
Let's see, 130 HP times 5 = 650HP. Sure wouldn't mind having that under the hood of my truck. Hey, I can dream can't I?
Wow, just think of all that blue smoke.
>
>
>Does that really drive an arguement? I have in my garage a
>'98 Kawasaki ZX-7R. Certainly not cutting edge but it's
>749cc engine will generate 120 (modified) HP.
>
>That is 160HP!! per Liter.
>
>I still don't want one in my truck.
>
>____________
>
>I know...I know... this "arguement" doesn't count. I just
>thought I'd throw it out.
I got a Honda CR-500 in my garage that puts out about 65 HP and its only half a liter. So that's 130 HP per liter.
Of course it's a two stroke engine, do you think that might have something to do with the power output? Brrrrrrrrrrrrr
Let's see, 130 HP times 5 = 650HP. Sure wouldn't mind having that under the hood of my truck. Hey, I can dream can't I?
Wow, just think of all that blue smoke.
New User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Ford V10 vs Dodge
1995 Dodge Ram 2500
Curb Weight - Manual (lb.)
LT HD Reg. Cab 8-ft. Bed 2WD 4705
LT HD Reg. Cab 8-ft. Bed 4WD 5125
LT LD Reg. Cab 8-ft. Bed 2WD 4600 LT LD Reg. Cab 8-ft. Bed 4WD 4905
ST Club Cab 8-ft. Bed 2WD 5030
ST Club Cab 8-ft. Bed 4WD 5335
2002 Ford F-250 Super Duty
Curb Weight - Manual (lb.)
Lariat Crew Cab Long Bed 2WD 6245
Lariat Crew Cab Short Bed 2WD 6076
Lariat SuperCab Long Bed 2WD 5998
Lariat SuperCab Short Bed 2WD 5780
XL Crew Cab Long Bed 2WD 6039
XL Crew Cab Short Bed 2WD 5870
XL Short Bed 2WD 5356
XL SuperCab Long Bed 2WD 5803
XL SuperCab Short Bed 2WD 5585
XLT Crew Cab Long Bed 2WD 6132
XLT Crew Cab Short Bed 2WD 5963
XLT Short Bed 2WD 5449
XLT SuperCab Long Bed 2WD 5896
XLT SuperCab Short Bed 2WD 5678
Curb Weight - Manual (lb.)
LT HD Reg. Cab 8-ft. Bed 2WD 4705
LT HD Reg. Cab 8-ft. Bed 4WD 5125
LT LD Reg. Cab 8-ft. Bed 2WD 4600 LT LD Reg. Cab 8-ft. Bed 4WD 4905
ST Club Cab 8-ft. Bed 2WD 5030
ST Club Cab 8-ft. Bed 4WD 5335
2002 Ford F-250 Super Duty
Curb Weight - Manual (lb.)
Lariat Crew Cab Long Bed 2WD 6245
Lariat Crew Cab Short Bed 2WD 6076
Lariat SuperCab Long Bed 2WD 5998
Lariat SuperCab Short Bed 2WD 5780
XL Crew Cab Long Bed 2WD 6039
XL Crew Cab Short Bed 2WD 5870
XL Short Bed 2WD 5356
XL SuperCab Long Bed 2WD 5803
XL SuperCab Short Bed 2WD 5585
XLT Crew Cab Long Bed 2WD 6132
XLT Crew Cab Short Bed 2WD 5963
XLT Short Bed 2WD 5449
XLT SuperCab Long Bed 2WD 5896
XLT SuperCab Short Bed 2WD 5678