Forum Discussion
Turtle n Peeps wrote:
Put a two speed computer control 2 speed rear end in it
Seems simpler to keep all the gears in the transmission. Heavy (aka real) trucks don't use 2 speed rear ends much if at all anymore except for off road applications like dump trucks. A few years ago I drove a truck with an 18 speed box and 2 speed rear ends. That's a lot of gears, but I digress. :)womps wrote:
February's Car and Driver has a 1/2 ton test of the big 3 plus the Tundra. The new F150 has the 3.5 Ecoboost. The GM has the 6.2 liter. The other 2 have the 5.7 liter engines.
Yeah I just read that. The Eco was a hair faster than the Chevy to 60 and a hair slower in the quarter mile. Pretty comparable performance in terms of acceleration. The Ford had a 2020 payload rating which I thought was pretty good for a Platinum trim model. I think the Chevy was around 1800, the Ram around 1500 and the Tundra around 1300.
C&D had the F150 1st with the Chevy close behind, and then more distant was the Ram at 3 and the Toyota at 4.- February's Car and Driver has a 1/2 ton test of the big 3 plus the Tundra. The new F150 has the 3.5 Ecoboost. The GM has the 6.2 liter. The other 2 have the 5.7 liter engines.
- I know it was a V8 challenge, but I wish they would've tossed a 3.5 in the mix. It's not a V8, but it's in the same performance category. Even if it couldn't officially compete in the V8 category, it would've been nice to see how it stacked up against the rest. I know they're going to test the V6's separately, but they'll probably be loaded more lightly than the V8's.
Bionic Man wrote:
I also would question the choices. Seems the boosted V6s from both Ford and RAM should have been included, plus the 5.3. Not sure why they would leave Ford and GMs largest selling engines off the comparisons.
I guess seeing the base V6 offerings may be interesting as well. Would like to see what % of the sales those account for.
Apparently they are going to compare the 3.5L EcoB with the NA V6s. In 4x2 truck's costing less than 35K? Making it difficult to directly compare to the V8 test. I wonder why?That report will include many of the same tests and types of data for several V-6 half-ton pickups with their own specific criteria to meet (less than $34,000, V-6 engines and 4x2 setups). That means we'll have comparative numbers for the Ford F-150 2.7-liter and 3.5-liter V-6 EcoBoost engines as well as the 4.3-liter V-6 Chevrolet Silverado 1500, the Ram 1500 3.6-liter Pentastar and Ram 1500 EcoDiesel.
ksss wrote:
Turtle n Peeps wrote:
ksss wrote:
The 6.2 really makes the 5.3 seem irrevelent. The mpg is similar and yet the 6.2L is just an incredibly strong preforming engine. However GM really limits the configuration that you can get that combo in. I am not sure why that is but they have no problem selling vehicles with that engine. My neighbor has 300k on one of his older 6.2L 1500s. He bought one of the first 2014's available with that motor. If your in the market for a 1500, I am not sure why you would opt for anything other than that engine. This reminds me of the 4.8 verse the 5.3 from years ago. I really wished that the 6.2L was available in the HD's.
If you saw how the blocks were designed and built you would understand why they are not a HD engine. Great race engine! HD truck engine......aaaaaaaaa not so much.
Perhaps what I should say is that I would like to have a gas engine in the HD's that performs like the 6.2L. I have been happy with what I see out of the 6.0, but you read and talk to guys with the 6.2 and you cant help but to want to graze on what certainly looks like a greener pasture.
Yep, I totally agree with you. If I were doing it, I would:
1. Make it a CGI block (like Hone suggested)(great idea Hone!)(Ford hit a homerun with this)
2. Make a 4 bolt splayed main (Dump the cross bolt BS)
3. Big steel crank
4. Bolt the LS heads to it
5. Put a good GM designed towing cam in it
6. Set it to around 425 to 450 HP
7. Put a really nice 6 (Allie maybe??)speed auto in back of it
8. Put a two speed computer control 2 speed rear end in it
9. Have Ford advertisers advertise it because they are the best in the business by far. :)
10. Sell it for twice what it's worth for more profit margin because Ford advertisers can sell anything.
Did I get it right? Or did I miss some things? :BFishOnOne wrote:
Bionic Man wrote:
I also would question the choices. Seems the boosted V6s from both Ford and RAM should have been included, plus the 5.3. Not sure why they would leave Ford and GMs largest selling engines off the comparisons.
I guess seeing the base V6 offerings may be interesting as well. Would like to see what % of the sales those account for.
X2 on the engine selections and the grade of truck was not equal either which can play a bit in the driving dynamics.
Also I was surprised that the Tundra's performance was the slowest. I've driven my fishing buddy's '11 5.7 Tundra and thought it was very strong.
They said they are going to do the V6's in the next test.Bionic Man wrote:
I also would question the choices. Seems the boosted V6s from both Ford and RAM should have been included, plus the 5.3. Not sure why they would leave Ford and GMs largest selling engines off the comparisons.
I guess seeing the base V6 offerings may be interesting as well. Would like to see what % of the sales those account for.
X2 on the engine selections and the grade of truck was not equal either which can play a bit in the driving dynamics.
Also I was surprised that the Tundra's performance was the slowest. I've driven my fishing buddy's '11 5.7 Tundra and thought it was very strong.N-Trouble wrote:
My takeaways
1) Made no sense to have two 6.2l GM trucks.
2) Ecoboost should have been included.
3) Toyota really has some work to do...
Not surprising results with the Tundra since they have not upgraded anything other than cosmetics in nearly 8 years.- I also would question the choices. Seems the boosted V6s from both Ford and RAM should have been included, plus the 5.3. Not sure why they would leave Ford and GMs largest selling engines off the comparisons.
I guess seeing the base V6 offerings may be interesting as well. Would like to see what % of the sales those account for.
