Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion Automotive news and discussion about upcoming vehicles

F-150 comparison tests

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 11:01 AM
  #1  
Threxx's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 1998
Posts: 4,320
From: Memphis
F-150 comparison tests

Some of you may have already seen some comparison tests done by Ford... specifically the one where they drive over the rough surface and compare frame bounce. I have too, but these are new... some new tests added and involve all of the competition's latest trucks.

http://www.fordvehicles.com/2009f150...3016.PLATFORMA
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 12:27 PM
  #2  
Gold_Rush's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,870
Like other recent ford products (all nice solid vehicles imo), it lacks in the engine department when compared to the competition.

Top engine offerings
*Silverado - 367hp 6.0L (403hp 6.2L available on LTZ crewcab)
*Ram -390hp 5.7L
*Tundra - 381hp 5.7L
*F150 - 310hp 5.4L

The SVT raptor showcased the new 400+hp 6.2L v8, but i think that engine won't be offered in the regular F150's. It's probably for use in the HD trucks, SVT raptor, and the Navigator.
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 12:43 PM
  #3  
SSbaby's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
I don't know much about the trucks but ...

The Ford had side-steps (I gather was the top range model) and the others were the base versions of each model? The top range trucks usually come with engineering goodies to separate themselves from the lower standard types. I'm assuming that was the case here.

Yeah, I'm bored!
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 01:09 PM
  #4  
Threxx's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 1998
Posts: 4,320
From: Memphis
Yeah they definitely left out any sort of acceleration test and for a very good reason too, because all of those trucks would smoke the F150 no matter how you designed the test.

I drove a friend of mine's 07 F150 work truck extended cab with the 5.4L and was amazed how slow it felt... I was convinced it had to be a smaller engine and started to wonder if they were still making the 4.6L V8 that they used to make optional in the old F150s.

Originally Posted by SSbaby
I don't know much about the trucks but ...

The Ford had side-steps (I gather was the top range model) and the others were the base versions of each model? The top range trucks usually come with engineering goodies to separate themselves from the lower standard types. I'm assuming that was the case here.

Yeah, I'm bored!
Side steps don't necessarily mean anything.

The only thing that would affect those tests that changes within the model lineup is the suspension package... like Z71 or whatever. Hopefully they were fair enough that if they put the upgraded suspension package on the Ford, they did on the others as well.

I have no doubt that the tests were fairly carefully selected and engineered to make sure the F150 came out on top and that there could just as easily be other tests run by the other manufacturers with less favorable results for the F150. That doesn't make these tests not interesting though... just consider it like listening to one political candidate make their case and realize that the other guys have their own case to make as well.

Last edited by Threxx; Dec 17, 2008 at 01:12 PM.
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 01:23 PM
  #5  
Gold_Rush's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,870
They are not base models. They seem pretty comparable as far as pricing goes (all msrp for around $31k base).
* Ram SLT Crewcab 5.7L Bighorn 4x2
* Silverado LT1 Crewcab 5.3 4x2
* Tundra SR5 Crewcab 5.7 4x2
* F150 XLT Supercrew 4.6 4x2
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 01:42 PM
  #6  
Threxx's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 1998
Posts: 4,320
From: Memphis
Originally Posted by Gold_Rush
* F150 XLT Supercrew 4.6 4x2
Oh so they do still make the 4.6.

I wonder why they decided to use the 4.6? Maybe because it's lighter so it would help out a bit in the handling tests, plus better fuel economy?

Just uneducated speculation.
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 01:51 PM
  #7  
Z28x's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
Originally Posted by Threxx
I was convinced it had to be a smaller engine and started to wonder if they were still making the 4.6L V8 that they used to make optional in the old F150s.
That use the 3v that the Mustang has. 292HP

The new 5.4L also puts out 390 tq and 320HP on E85
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 02:02 PM
  #8  
anasazi's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,604
From: Milton, FL
they need to put this in a TV commercial format
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 02:31 PM
  #9  
Threxx's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 1998
Posts: 4,320
From: Memphis
Originally Posted by Z28x
The new 5.4L also puts out 390 tq and 320HP on E85
In what? The F150? It makes 310hp with regular gas.
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 02:34 PM
  #10  
Gold_Rush's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,870
Originally Posted by Threxx
Oh so they do still make the 4.6.

I wonder why they decided to use the 4.6? Maybe because it's lighter so it would help out a bit in the handling tests, plus better fuel economy?

Just uneducated speculation.
Like z28x said, its the 3v 4.6 which makes 292hp.

Good question. I'm guessing fuel economy played a role in that choice.

F-150 Crewcab - 4.6 is rated at 15/20, 5.4 is rated at 14/20.
Tundra SR5 Crewmax: 4.7L gets 14/17 while the 5.7L gets 14/18
Ram Crewcab - both 4.7 and 5.7L v8's gets around 14/20.
Silverado Crewcab- 4.8 gets 14/19 with 4spd auto and 14/20 with 6spd. I believe the 5.3 which they tested gets around the same 14/20.

So it seems using the larger engine in those trucks didn't hurt them (it actually helped the toyota) so using the base v8 engines from those trucks wouldn't have made that much of a difference. But using the 4.6 instead of the 5.4 did give the Ford an advantage in city driving.

Don't know about the weights or the handling.
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 02:35 PM
  #11  
Gold_Rush's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,870
Originally Posted by Threxx
In what? The F150? It makes 310hp with regular gas.
310 with regular gas. 320 with e85.
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 02:50 PM
  #12  
Threxx's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 1998
Posts: 4,320
From: Memphis
Originally Posted by Gold_Rush
310 with regular gas. 320 with e85.
Wow.. it does? I've never heard of an engine making more power with E85...
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 03:05 PM
  #13  
Javier97Z28's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: Dec 1999
Posts: 3,853
From: Jupiter (NPB), Fl
My '04 F150 pulls my Camaro on a heavy *** trailer like it's not even back there and gets 13-14 MPG while doing it (highway). It has the 5.4L

Who cares how "fast" a truck is.. when you use a truck what it's really meant for anyways...

The trailer stayed dead straight the whole trip on the highway, and the truck rode smooth as butta.

Last edited by Javier97Z28; Dec 17, 2008 at 03:10 PM.
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 03:17 PM
  #14  
Threxx's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 1998
Posts: 4,320
From: Memphis
Originally Posted by Javier97Z28
My '04 F150 pulls my Camaro on a heavy *** trailer like it's not even back there and gets 13-14 MPG while doing it (highway). It has the 5.4L

Who cares how "fast" a truck is.. when you use a truck what it's really meant for anyways...

The trailer stayed dead straight the whole trip on the highway, and the truck rode smooth as butta.
Regardless of how you're driving it, a truck with power to spare and decent get up and go is nicer to drive than one that feels lethargic all the time and wouldn't have any power to spare if you needed it.
Old Dec 17, 2008 | 03:18 PM
  #15  
Gold_Rush's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,870
Originally Posted by Threxx
Wow.. it does? I've never heard of an engine making more power with E85...
Same with the upcoming fusions midlevel 3.0L v6. It makes 240hp with regular and 250hp with E85.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:28 PM.