Can you give any insight into how much better it was?

Thank you for the correction Mike.
So with the new tranny does it get loads rolling as fast as the V10?
Looking at the gearing of the 6 speed auto I would think it could, if the torque difference is not to big.

 

this is probably the first time i ever read every post in a thread this long, first i want to say thanks to both of you its great for us to know ford really cares what we want.

V10 guys who are nervous about this- remember when ford went from a 7.5 (what i have and love) to a v10 (that i agree is a great motor) that was a hard see too, but low and behold look what the v10 ended up being. Now its happened again losing some displacement for a higher rev making everyone nervous while we're being told this is going to be a great towing motor. Lets see what this thing can do. (I am a manual trans fan too though i prefer auto because i drive a lot for work loaded and/or trailering, but new autos are very good and do things manuals sometimes just can't while still being able to lock into a certain gear.)

Here's my question- for our work trucks we always have gone diesel in the 350s or 250s (mine being an exception), but lately the talk of going gas has come up. Will this 6.2 pull bobcats, rock, tools, etc capable enough to replace and do as well as the diesels have or the v10 could? Would we be disappointed with the decision to change? --(i know this is a loaded diesel vs gas question I'm not trying to go there just want to hear from the engineer what his overall feeling is on this)--

 

I agree, but its still hard to see the V10 go.

I have ripped the **** out of mine and it has been a 100% bullet proof engine that has pulled every thing I have put behind it and done it well.

Now I know how you 460 guys felt in 1999!

 

Mike, thanks for sharing some insight into durability testing. Good to know that it's somewhat of an evolution in progress vs being limited to a set in stone spec requirement. I for one, can't wait to drive one. Can you offer any comparison between the 6.2 in a SD vs a F150 (specifically a 6.2 for the masses vs just a Raptor), will it be the same with different calibrations or are there more differences?

 

Mike,
I would like to say "Thank You" for taking the time to enlighten us to the new engine. As a die hard gas engine guy, they will do everything a DSL will do except the punishment of towing day and day out.
I have owned 4 250/350 trucks in the past 20+ years all have over 225,000 miles on each, all driven by me except for one which I received at 100,000 miles. Now this '08' at 73,000 miles put on in the past year and 4 months. When the time comes I'm sure this new engine will do everything that is expected of it to make a living. Keep up the good work.

 

If it were me, and if I were pulling bobcats around all day - let's say 10K - 15k trailers, day in and day out, I would go with the Diesel. The new 6.7L is a torque monster and the gas mileage is outstanding. There, I said it. While I love the 6.2L it doesn't get close to the capability of the diesel.

For those folks on the forum that just can't get along with the diesel, then I recommend giving the 6.2L a shot.

If you can't get a test drive yourself, read the magazine reports from the media event coming up soon (within the next month). We'll have the jounalists putting the trucks through some tough tests and the trailer tow ratings, HP and torque numbers will be published.

 

Just as a plug, one of our users will be there too


svt2205 - in a previous post, Mike mentioned the only difference between the SD engine and the Raptor was Camshaft overlap (and I assume the programming to go with it).

 

I can only compare the 6.2L in SD to the 6.2L in the Raptor. It is essentially the same engine other than the cams (slightly less overlap for a smoother idle).

Obviously the F150 is a little quicker due to less weight, and rides a little better.

 

I thougt the tailpipe comment was funny too!

Mike,
What diameter tailpipe/exhaust will the 6.2 have, and will this engine lose torque if upgrading to a larger dia exhaust like the Triton line does?

 

Here is another question, don't know if it will be within your scope, but when the tow ratings are released on the new 2011 trucks, will they follow the new SAE guidelines?

 

No--not until 2013 MY per SAE implementation timing agreed to by OEM's

 

1. How do the flow numbers of the 6.2 intake port compare to the new 5.0 Coyote intake port?

2. If I recall correctly, the 6.2 uses a 2.10" intake valve, what is the maximum size valve the 6.2 chamber can physically accommodate?

The 6.2 as a Mustang swap candidate interests me greatly.

 

The 5.0L port outflows the 6.2L port up through 12mm of lift, which is the max lift of the 5.0L.

The 6.2L is 580 lbs versus 430 lbs for the 5.0L. That would be a lot of weight over the front axle.

Valve diameter is 52mm for 6.2L. I think you can squeeze a 55mm valve in if you try.

 

Thanks for all the information Mike it makes me fell a lot better about the day I will have to give up my 2000 V10. I think that with a 4.30 rear end and the gearing in the 6 speed transmission the smaller motor will do fine pulling our 16K 5ver. I'm not ready yet but the day will come when we will have to give up our V10 maybe by then the power will be even higher. I was a die hard 460 fan and now a die hard V10 fan so maybe someday I will become a die hard 6.2 fan.

Denny

 

FWIW, I for one would like to see the 6.2L (or derivitives of the 6.2L) developed for heavy duty commercial use. I know a lot of guys have had good experiences with the 3 valve V-10, but I never liked he idea of an engine will all those moving parts in it (10 pistons and rods, 30 valves and cam followers, 2 cams, a balance shaft, ect.). There has to be a lot of mechanical drag in an engine like that! Throw in high piston speeds too. Anyway, just think of the possibilites of a 7.0L version of the 'Boss' in the 450, 550, and maybe even the 650 Super Duty. Could be a very cost-effective alternative to diesel for a commercial customer that doesn't put a lot of miles n their trucks.