Now, before posting something like that, why not some basic research, here?

How is this truck you speak of going to get better MPGs than a comparable, production model with a LIGHTER motor and a 210 HP V6?

The regular cab 4x2 Ranger, with the 4.0L V6 and a 5 SPEED manual transmission is rated at 15/20!!!

Fuel Economy

Look it up. Because "you think" doesn't make it true....but a 300HP V8 in a ranger sure would be FUN!!!



People, in today's economy, a 25 MPG pickup truck is the holy grail of the automotive world. IF it were possible to get good fuel economy with a capabile pickup, BELIEVE ME, they would do it!

 

They do have them......in a warehouse at Area 51 with the UFO's, little green men, 100mpg carbs,Elvis and the other half of all my socks....among other things!

 

simple. A v8 swapped ranger will not do 2 things that a regular truck would and result in lower mpg:

1. won't pass emissions - decent gains there usually
2. won't break a sweat and can get away with 3.08 gears or maybe even lower (numerically)


and like he said, if it's gonna be a 2wd, it's prolly gonna be lowered not lifted, which will help a bit too. a reg cab will prolly weigh just a little more than a 99-04 gt... over 20mpg would be possible with a lot of babying, but not the norm, and yeah, 25 is prolly pushing it... but in a truck that much fun, more like 12 would be the norm, at least in my case anyway

 

Good points there, but I doubt you'd see anything significant with a lower final drive ratio. Yeah, more efficient, but you still have additional losses due to the slightly less efficient V8....don't know....

I'd still love one, though!

 

less efficient? I dunno man, that 3.0 is a serious piece of neanderthall technology... but it's bullet proof and doesn't cost ford a thing to keep offering

and oh yeah, they would be fun... call it a baby lightning?

 

My 95 Stang GT w/ the T-5 and open exhaust/intake averaged 20mpg with me beating the hell out of it. I could pull 25mpg if I could keep myself from playing that long (didn't happen very often). I've heard some LS-1 creeps talk about 26-28mpg highway. Judging from this, I would think that we need something around 800hp in the F-150, so we can just idle it down the highway at maximum efficiency. Isn't that how the muscle cars do it anyway...

 

Heh...I'm gonna assume that entire post was a joke...

Whether you have 800 HP or 100...an engine is LEAST efficient when it's idling! Burning fuel and putting out very little torque or HP, losing nearly all of it's energy to pumping losses and heat.....

And Fosters, I was thinking about the 4.0, but good point with the 3.slow. Either way, you are feeding two more cylinders, pumping more air, spinning more mass, opening and closing more valves, and sustaining higher losses to friction...but not by much!

And...why not take a page from the bad ol' days of emissions controlled Mustangs and call it the Lightning II?

 

Lol, speaking of the II, Car and Driver decided to suggest some new editions of mustangs (since ford seems to have gone way overboard with the special editions). One of them was the mighty II:

 

Nice Focus!!! NOT!!!

 

I dunno...a 4.6 would make that fuccus get up and move along pretty well...