F-150 comparison tests
12-17-2008, 11:01 AM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Memphis
Posts: 4,338
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
http://www.fordvehicles.com/2009f150...3016.PLATFORMA
12-17-2008, 12:27 PM
#2
Registered User
Join Date: 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.
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.
12-17-2008, 12:43 PM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,123
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!
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!
12-17-2008, 01:09 PM
#4
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Memphis
Posts: 4,338
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.
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.
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.
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!
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!
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; 12-17-2008 at 01:12 PM.
12-17-2008, 01:23 PM
#5
Registered User
Join Date: 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
* 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
12-17-2008, 01:42 PM
#6
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Memphis
Posts: 4,338
12-17-2008, 01:51 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Albany, NY
Posts: 10,287
12-17-2008, 02:34 PM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,870
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.
12-17-2008, 03:05 PM
#13
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Jupiter (NPB), Fl
Posts: 3,852
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.
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; 12-17-2008 at 03:10 PM.
12-17-2008, 03:17 PM
#14
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Memphis
Posts: 4,338
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.
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.