2009 - 2014 F-150

Harley 6.2 L is real

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 17, 2009 | 04:11 PM
  #1  
Rambo's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,763
Likes: 0
From: USA
Harley 6.2 L is real

That settles it. The pics of the Harley showing the 6.2 L are not in error.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2009/02...4liter-v8.html

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/02/17/6...rley-davidson/

 
Reply
Old Feb 17, 2009 | 05:03 PM
  #2  
Barritia's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,798
Likes: 0
Why does the engine with almost another whole 1 litre bigger only get an extra 80bhp and 10ft/lb tq? I hear so many people say the 5.4 is underpowered and the 6.2 has hardley anymore so is that also underpowered?
 
Reply
Old Feb 17, 2009 | 05:20 PM
  #3  
Power Kid's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,828
Likes: 0
From: Home of Crown Royal
Whoa check your numbers. The 5.4L on gasoline is 310/365 and the 6.2L is reportedly min 400/400 on Gasoline. Your confusing the 5.4Ls e85 numbers of 320/390.

So in reality its 90hp and 35ft/lbs tq more at a minimum. And a lot more room upwards from there.
 
Reply
Old Feb 17, 2009 | 05:25 PM
  #4  
shaunakadub's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
From: Boston
Originally Posted by Power Kid
Whoa check your numbers. The 5.4L on gasoline is 310/365 and the 6.2L is reportedly min 400/400 on Gasoline. Your confusing the 5.4Ls e85 numbers of 320/390.

So in reality its 90hp and 35ft/lbs tq more at a minimum. And a lot more room upwards from there.
Mmmmmmmmmmmmmm 6.2. There is absolutely no replacement for displacement


Another thing to consider is the fact that it is probably going to come with a VERY strict tune to keep the MPG's up... I'm thinking the 6.2 is going to be a friggan' beast with the normal add-ons (intake, exhaust, tune)
 
Reply
Old Feb 17, 2009 | 05:29 PM
  #5  
Power Kid's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,828
Likes: 0
From: Home of Crown Royal
Exactly.......
 
Reply
Old Feb 17, 2009 | 05:40 PM
  #6  
Barritia's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 1,798
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Power Kid
Whoa check your numbers. The 5.4L on gasoline is 310/365 and the 6.2L is reportedly min 400/400 on Gasoline. Your confusing the 5.4Ls e85 numbers of 320/390.

So in reality its 90hp and 35ft/lbs tq more at a minimum. And a lot more room upwards from there.
What would the 6.2 put out on e85 then? Should be pretty good numbers if it's a boost like the 5.4 gets from using it. Still rather see these engines putting out more power than they do. I remember back in 2000 when my mate had a honda which had 240hp from a 4 cylinder 2.0litre. Crazy why they cant get 100bhp/litre from NA engines over here. Not like companys have been doing for over the last 10 years.
 
Reply
Old Feb 17, 2009 | 08:48 PM
  #7  
truckncrew04's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 716
Likes: 0
From: Indiana
Well tell Honda to build the truck with an engine like that and maybe it will happen. Oh wait they haven't even built a truck yet with an available V8
 
Reply
Old Feb 17, 2009 | 08:52 PM
  #8  
shaunakadub's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 869
Likes: 0
From: Boston
Originally Posted by Barritia
What would the 6.2 put out on e85 then? Should be pretty good numbers if it's a boost like the 5.4 gets from using it. Still rather see these engines putting out more power than they do. I remember back in 2000 when my mate had a honda which had 240hp from a 4 cylinder 2.0litre. Crazy why they cant get 100bhp/litre from NA engines over here. Not like companys have been doing for over the last 10 years.
How much torque did that mentioned Honda engine make?
 
Reply
Old Feb 17, 2009 | 11:48 PM
  #9  
Rambo's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,763
Likes: 0
From: USA
'Kudos to Levine for noticing Ford's pants down. Similar tip o' the hat to Drew Phillips at Autoblog for taking the shot.'

link: http://jalopnik.com/5155042/2010-for...-whos-the-boss
 
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2009 | 12:01 AM
  #10  
hwm3's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 0
From: Cary, NC
Originally Posted by shaunakadub
How much torque did that mentioned Honda engine make?
153 ft-lbs @ 7500RPM.

Don't expect the 6.2L in a Harley to put up great numbers at the track. If they were to offer it in a reg cab though.
 
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2009 | 12:42 AM
  #11  
DARK KNIGHT08's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,016
Likes: 0
From: Fairfield,CA
Originally Posted by hwm3
Don't expect the 6.2L in a Harley to put up great numbers at the track.
Trucks aren't meant to go fast. If you want to go fast buy a sports car.

BTW 2010 Harley looks great!!!
 
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2009 | 01:14 AM
  #12  
Power Kid's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 1,828
Likes: 0
From: Home of Crown Royal
Originally Posted by hwm3
153 ft-lbs @ 7500RPM.

Don't expect the 6.2L in a Harley to put up great numbers at the track. If they were to offer it in a reg cab though.
My wife's sewing machine has more tq than that.

If you want a truck with power characteristics of your Honda, get a 5.3L chevy. No tourque and hp at high rpms.
 
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2009 | 08:35 AM
  #13  
JBMX928's Avatar
Graphics Contributor
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,367
Likes: 0
From: Buffalo NY
Damn that thing is a beast.
 
Reply
Old Feb 18, 2009 | 09:22 PM
  #14  
Marc Carignan's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
From: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan CAN
Originally Posted by hwm3
153 ft-lbs @ 7500RPM.

Don't expect the 6.2L in a Harley to put up great numbers at the track. If they were to offer it in a reg cab though.
BWAHAHA, that's the torque spec for my Lightning's lug nuts!
 
Reply




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:57 PM.