MPG's vs HP/TRQ
Senior User
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
From: South Africa
the reason your 300 pull so well is the way it delivers that 260 ft/lbs odd. agree 250 hp in a (diesel) "halfton" is plenty. Guess 420 trq should be good to.
Senior User
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
From: South Africa
I’m going to get flamed on this, but I really feel this has to be one the lamest things that Ford have come up with in sometime. Why in the world would you choose a displacement 4.4L in a V8 format? What is the bore and stroke going to be, little and a little less? This is a recipe for a motor that has to be spun up to make any torque. Could they not go with V6 or dare I say an I6?
Senior User
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
From: South Africa
Most likely they did this so they could engineer one engine in the 6.7L and then scale it down to the 4.4L. A V6 would have been a better design in my mind, but that involves a complete redesign of V angle and engine balancing. Also, probably not enough room in the engine compartment for an I6.
Senior User
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 216
Likes: 0
From: South Africa
You are absolutely right, it uses an 2.4l crd I4 making 121hp and 266ft/lbs. The Range Rover 3.8 V8 crd is to high tech for a truck engine for my likikng... Does the fact that Land Rover now belongs to the Indian Tata automaker affect Ford ror using that desighn you think?
Elder User
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 725
Likes: 1
From: Upstate New York
The 300 I put in my Bronco with a 5 speed only has 140hp but a decent 285 ft/lbs of torque at 1800 rpm. It averages 22 mpg, has enough acceleration to pull out onto high speed roads without getting rear ended, and it pulls a 2000 lb trailer nicely, even on hills. A little more torque wouldnt hurt, but the truck runs great the way it is. The 300 is as close to a diesel as you can get without actually burning #2 oil.The '91 5.9L Cummins swap in the '78 Bronco I'm building will have 215hp and a nasty 440 ft/lbs of torque at 1600 rpm on the stock engine, and guys I've spoken with at fordcummins.com as well as Cummins reps have agreed with me that the mpg should be 25-30 highway. With that much torque, you can gear the truck high, and run the engine at a very low rpm, while still easily maintaining speed on hills.The thing is, there's no emissions on my diesel Bronco, that's what's dropping the fuel mileage of these new diesel trucks. They make them run cleaner, but then make them burn twice as much fuel in the process. heh
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
From: E Washington
now that this thing has played out a bit it is no wonder why ford will not put a diesel into the F150. If you go to the website and build a fully loaded F150 it costs darn near as much as the F250's. there is no way enough people are going to spend that kind of money on a 1/2 ton diesel to make it worth it for them to do it. just my opinion.
Lead Driver
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,757
Likes: 5
From: Corvallis, OR
now that this thing has played out a bit it is no wonder why ford will not put a diesel into the F150. If you go to the website and build a fully loaded F150 it costs darn near as much as the F250's. there is no way enough people are going to spend that kind of money on a 1/2 ton diesel to make it worth it for them to do it. just my opinion.
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
From: E Washington
I think they would. You don't have to get a fully loaded one. If there was a diesel F150 option I'd love it in just a XLT or similar package. The F150 would get better mileage due to less weight and more aerodynamic, a diesel would probably achieve lower 20 mpg range on the highway, tuned possibly 25 or so.
Maybe just wishful thinking....
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
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
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
Lead Driver
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,757
Likes: 5
From: Corvallis, OR
I would still go with an automatic. I have no problem driving a manual, grew up on tractors and first car was a manual, I just can't give up the comfort and convenience of an automatic. They are neck and neck with manuals in mileage now with the low viscosity fluids and lockup converters.
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
From: E Washington
I would still go with an automatic. I have no problem driving a manual, grew up on tractors and first car was a manual, I just can't give up the comfort and convenience of an automatic. They are neck and neck with manuals in mileage now with the low viscosity fluids and lockup converters.
Elder User
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 725
Likes: 1
From: Upstate New York
I would still go with an automatic. I have no problem driving a manual, grew up on tractors and first car was a manual, I just can't give up the comfort and convenience of an automatic. They are neck and neck with manuals in mileage now with the low viscosity fluids and lockup converters.
Lead Driver
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 6,757
Likes: 5
From: Corvallis, OR
My dad is the same way. Been driving truck for UPS 35 years and loves the automatic in his SuperDuty.
Thread Starter
|
Senior User
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
From: E Washington
It is now a forgone conclusion that this motor will never happen and it probably has alot to do with it competing with Super Duty sales. why do they not just make a V6 diesel put it into the 150 and get it over with otherwise dodge is going to do it with them having nothing to lose and then it will take away from the super duty sales and move them to dodge. I understand there is an arguement for and against it but if they just do it and get it over with it will benefit all involved. Lets do this FORD you do not want to see dodge make a pile of dough at your expense do you?
Elder User
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 509
Likes: 1
Ford is already building the 4.4L V8 diesel in Mexico, for the Range Rover Vogue. An Australian website tested the Range Rover 4.4L V8 diesel, and was able to average 6.5L per 100km. This converts to 36 mpg (US gallons). That's likely a best case scenario ever, but still very good given that it is achievable.
Keep in mind it does have an 8 speed ZF auto transmission, but it is constantly in 4x4!
Review: http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/t...209-1am4e.html
Range Rover Vogue weight: about 6200 lbs
Drag Coefficient: 0.38
0-60: 7.8 seconds
Power: 308HP
Torque 516 lb-ft.
According to 2011 Ford F-150 | Detailed Vehicle Comparison | Ford.com
The Curb weight of a 2011 F-150 Lariat Crew 4x4 long box, is 5716 lbs. (Worst case scenario here, obviously)
So the Range Rover is actually heavier by about 4-500 lbs over the heaviest F-150 (disregarding the difference in weight between the engines). I was unable to get a drag coefficient for the F-150.
Keep in mind it does have an 8 speed ZF auto transmission, but it is constantly in 4x4!
Review: http://smh.drive.com.au/motor-news/t...209-1am4e.html
Range Rover Vogue weight: about 6200 lbs
Drag Coefficient: 0.38
0-60: 7.8 seconds
Power: 308HP
Torque 516 lb-ft.
According to 2011 Ford F-150 | Detailed Vehicle Comparison | Ford.com
The Curb weight of a 2011 F-150 Lariat Crew 4x4 long box, is 5716 lbs. (Worst case scenario here, obviously)
So the Range Rover is actually heavier by about 4-500 lbs over the heaviest F-150 (disregarding the difference in weight between the engines). I was unable to get a drag coefficient for the F-150.