The 09 F-150 did actually seem to be lacking in terms of braking performance in quite a few reviews

 

Yes I know, your truck should be a couple hundred pounds lighter than the 4,300 lb. 93-95 Lightnings.

The Lightnings had heavier engines and transmissions compared to your truck, and even the frame was made of a thicker material, which added weight over a normal RC/SB 2wd F150.

Your truck is closer to 3,800 lbs. 1990-1996 Ford F-150/250 Pickup Specs & Safety - Consumer Guide Automotive

I had a good friend weigh his '93 Lighting (w/o jumpseat) at 4,315 lbs, so their listed weights are bang on.

My S'Crew is a bit under 4,800 actually.

 

I've always considered Ford's brakes to be less than desired until I bought the '04 Expy new. Lots of dust, mushy feel in the pedal etc. Even the Expy put out too much dust. I got 45k out of the factory pads and still passed state inspection. He did tell me that they wouldn't last the year so I changed them shortly after. I bought the best pads that Autozone sells, great feel in the pedal as before and NO dust what so ever.

Tim

 

Hawk LTS, or HPS, best pad on the market for clean, HP braking

http://www.hawkperformance.com/truck/

 

Question... I haven't looked under one of the late model Dodges. Are its shocks mounted inside or outside the frame rails? I know on the previous generation of both the Ford and Dodge (leaf spring) trucks the Ford still won because its shock mounting locations help.

I don't know if its the type of wheels I have, but I've never had any problems with brake dust buildup. Maybe I'm lucky so far? The Ford rotors, however, I don't care for.

 

Serious question, at what dollar savings do you value the lighter truck? How much would you have to save? What if the heavier truck had better mileage (such as the 2009+ mileage model)? What if the heavier truck was peppier (Toyota, Dodge, GM for example)?

Many accidents can be prevented, its often the very serious accidents which can't, involving the other driver coming out of nowhere (lane crossing, t-bone, etc.) faster than anyone can react. Head on collisions account for 2% of accidents yet slightly over 10% of fatalities. Roll overs account for 2% of accidents yet 10.9% of deaths. Side impacts account for 28.9% of all crashes, and 20.7% of deaths (another place where stronger passenger compartments help).

Heavy traffic, in the right lane, one truck merging over from the right plus the truck to her left coming over at the same time. The strong roof made all the difference in the world. The trunk was smashed flat by the truck from the left and behind, the engine compartment was squashed flat... the roof and passenger compartment was intact.

The heavier roof contributes to overall rigidity of the passenger compartment. If keeps the roof from buckling up or down and the resulting accordian effect on the passenger compartment. Look at the 1997-2003 crash results... it was the roof that buckled.

 

09 Ram's shocks are on the outside of the frame rails. It is a 5 link rear suspension using a panhard bar

 

I was thinking about this yesterday. Not sure an actual dollar value on it, but say I keep my vehicles for 62,000 miles more then most people.(I do drive em till they drop!) Then say I could magically get 5mpg better, say 25 over 20. So for 25 mpg I would use 2480 gallons of fuel. For 20 mpg I would use 3100 gallons of fuel. Then lets say gas is 2 bucks a gallon. For 2480 it would cost 4960 dollars, for the 3100 gallons of fuel it would cost 6200 dollars. So that is 1240 bucks in my pocket.(IF my math is right) Doesnt seem like alot right? Add that up over a few vehicles and it does make your pocket a tad heavier!

Now if the truck was heavier, and peppier and got better mileage.. well then Im not sure. I guess I might be thinking, well if its this heavy and this peppy and gets this good of mileage, imagine if I shaved off a few more lbs haha.
I guess in the end (as I sit and think about it now) for me personally the increased fuel mileage is the real deal. It could be a heavier safer truck, as long as it got better mileage then a lighter unsafer truck.
Shame on you for making me think during the holidays!! haha

Definatly interesting facts. Out of my own personal curiousity, what were the other percentages? Happen to have a link for that I could check out?

I guess I never have really researched the crash results. Just one of those "hard to believe its that much tougher" blah blah blah then the previous generation thoughts!
I never would have thought that the previous generation was that inferior!

 

Its not really that Ford designed an "inferior" truck with the 1997-2003 (plus 2004 Heritage). Its a great truck. Its more of a situation where all the trucks that came out around 2003-2005 had so much competition, including new competition from Japan, that they really needed to crank it up. If anything, the F150 is over-engineered. Its why I think most Super Duty buyers don't need a Super Duty - the F150 will probably do what they need. I don't see many Super Duties hauling the type of weight it was designed for either.

 

I wish the manufactures wood have the curb weight on the door stcker, My GVRW IS 6100 lbs, That seams right i need to go to the local scrap yard and weigh the truck.

 

That just means you have a pretty good payload capacity, 2,000+ lbs!

 

I know on the 08 back the shocks are on the inside, as for the 09, The springs are mounted on the outside of the frame with the shocks outside as well.
Personally, I have always thought that leaf springs were fine for a truck in the rear.


You must be lucky on the dust or perhaps Roush uses different pads.

 

KISS IT YOU KNOW MY

 

Ya know this has all gotten ridiculous...since when do people care more about their fuel mileage over the safety of the passangers in a vehicle. I'd rather have a vehicle that gets 15 mpg and that i know can take a hit and my passangers are still going to be ok. People are getting so side tract on money, you can always go make more money, once a person is gone, you'll never get that back.
Second of all, how much horsepower do you want? These trucks have freakin 300 hp...and people complain that they don't have 0-60 times like they want or good 1/4 mile times? If you want that go buy yourself a car. I have a 20' gooseneck livestock trailer, I've pulled a gross weight of the trailer and cattle at 15k, not including the truck. I have been very very impressed with how these trucks pull. Yes i know it's over the rated limit, but it'll do it, and darn well. These trucks perform like they were made to do, and in my opinion outperforms what it was made to do. It's a Ford pickup, made to work plain and simple...not a ferrari.

 

Guess what I think is ridiculous?

You got it, a guy that says other people are ridiculous for wanting fuel economy over safety, yet pulls over the maximum rating of a vehicle, putting EVERYONE ELSE on the road in danger.

Least guys like me just put ourselves in danger, not everyone haha (Joke there )


I think that there has to be a happy medium between safety and mileage. I mean why not take your factory ford, weld a rollcage in it, get one of them there 5 point seat belts (or whatever they are called) wear a helmet, and be the safest/heaviest truck on the road!