This is like that "four door coupe" crap. If it's got more than 2 doors, its not a damn two door, nor is it a coupe. Period.

 

Too bad, I was hoping to see the truck horsepower wars heat up with SVTs entrance and possibly a GM entry to battle the SRT-10! I love fast trucks as well. I just wish someone would make a blower for the Hemi!

 

Cutting through the "spin", the much heavier F150 would have taken up an extrordinary amount of fuel to outdo the equally thirsty SRT-10 Ram, and Ford decided to pull the plug on the truck till it get's the weight out. The heat Ford took over the fuel economy of the Excursion a few years ago (till the H2 diverted the ecologist groups attention) didn't help.

This was hinted at a couple of months ago when John Colletti mentioned that the future of truck performance was in cutting weight over adding horsepower. SVT could have used the GT's engine, but it would have sent the Lightning above Ford's target price, and would have sold in fewer numbers.

In the end, it was a choice between putting out a relatively expensive, fuel guzzling, lower production Lightning than in the past, or pulling the plug on the rig till SVT & Ford found ways of getting more performance without jacking the price or sending MPG into the toilet. Since SVT has the mantra never 2nd best, the rig got canned for now.

 

1. What you forgot was the issue of drivetrain durability. The Dodge Ram SRT-10 is the only Chrysler product that doesn't carry the 7/70 powertrain warranty.

2. Weight is the fundimental problem with the entire 2004 F-150 line. If Ford had fallen back on the old tactic of slapping a new front clip on the '97-vintage F-150 (just like the '81 F-150 which actually received 3 different front clips in its 15 year lifespan), the result would have been a lighter, more economical and quicker truck than the current lard-o.

3. That SVT mantra of "never 2nd best" didn't appear to be in effect before 2003 for the Mustang Cobra.

 

Wasn't it noted somewhere (like an official quote from Ford or SVT) that the 12-16 mileage was hurting their overall product line mileage too much?

nevermind. its right there in the article I'm soo smart someimtes. Doh!

 

thanks...i knew deep down that this was ultimately an MPG issue