oh and all you 5.4 lovers come get you some of this

https://www.f150online.com/forums/19...-99-5-4-a.html

 

HI!... I'll run ya with my 4.0L V6........ I'll even give ya the "HIT"........

 

Sheesh! That's the 2V 4.6L. The 3V 4.6L would leave both of those in the dust!

 

When do you 4.6 fanboy's wanna line up?

 

As long as you're talking stock engine to stock engine, I'll race a 5.4L fanboy anytime. Not only does the 3V 4.6L feel faster when driven back to back, but the dyno charts confirm that.

The 4.6L 3V has 5 more RWHP and it stays near peak power over a much broader RPM spread. The 5.4L doesn't go above 250 RWHP until it gets to 5300 rpm while the 4.6L 3V is already outputting 250 RWHP as soon as 4700 rpm. That's 600 rpm's earlier for the 4.6L 3V. Then, it stays above 250 RWHP past 6000 rpm's while the 5.4L bounces off the rev limiter at a measly 5625 rpm's! Less power over a narrower rpm range and more weight = slower drag times.

Here's another way to look at it: From 4200 to 6200 the 4.6L 3V makes more torque as well as more RWHP than the 5.4L at any equivalent rpm.

Check out the dyno charts of bone stock engines. They are posted right here:
https://www.f150online.com/forums/ch...-f150-v8s.html

That's a short stroke motor for you. When it comes to 0-60 or 0-100, there is no comparison. The 4.6L 3V has an almost perfect 1:1 bore/stroke ratio. Plus, the 4.6 weighs 110 lbs. less.

 

HI!... Well I just went and looked at the dyno graphs you posted the link to. Both engines make their max H.P within 100RPM of each other.......... Also if you look at the 1ST post in the thread you linked to, you can see that Ford is running a lot more aggressive tuning in the 4.6 than the 5.4. Superchips only gets 10RRWH.P/19RWTQ extra on the performance tune on the 4.6 where they get 38RWH.P/57RWTQ on the 5.4. Just like back in 99 when the Mustang 4.6 made the same H.P (260) that the 5.4 did. Install a 5.4 in that same Mustang and due to the TQ difference it would run faster in the 1/4 mile. I say take too same trucks, one with each engines and tow a 5000LB trailer behind both. I bet the 5.4 truck will win. Also once you start modding both the 5.4 will gain more compared to the same mods on a 4.6. Been there, done that.



Here is some power data on what the product delivers:

5.4L F-150 tested:
91 Performance file produced +38 RWHP and +57 RWTQ.
87 Performance file produced +18 RWHP and +43 RWTQ
Tow file produced +12 RWHP and +37 RWTQ

4.6L F-150 tested:
91 performance file produced +10 RWHP and +19 RWTQ.
87 Performance file produced +2 RWHP and +4 RWTQ
Tow file produced +3 RWHP and +5 RWTQ

 

my bad. it seems the 4.6 does make a few more hp. it kinda embarrasing that it makes 2 hp with a programmer. really why bother. might as well buy a 5.4 and gain 20 hp with the 6 speed which will show that little man off.

the 4.6 is an awesome engine, i will not deny that. it outperforms the current 5.4 and smooth, efficiency, and mpg is way beyond the current!. but if i had a truck, i would prefer the low end tq of the 5.4 (with programmer) to propel my ride. and i would prefer towing at a lower rpm to save gas and less stress on the engine. and last, to me its a mans truck or nothing.

i will say the 4.6 is a very nice technically advanced engine and i hope the 5.4 is not far away.

 

i'll take my 5.4 against your 4.6 any day. 0-60 or 1/4 mile.. whatever

 

All stock powertrain here. I'll race you 0-60,0-100 whichever you want. BTW I've driven an 09 with the 5.4 and a 2010 with the 3v 4.6 so i'm not just jumping the gun calling the 4.6 a weakling cause it's definately ballsy now. Both trucks were 2wd crew cabs with 3.55 gears. Only difference being the motor size. I also do realize you live a long way's away from me but I had to stop by and do some cyber racing and rattle some nerves.

 

i'd like to hook axle to axle with your 4.6 and c what it has for this 5.4

 

I'm not going to lie, I wish I would have waited for the 2009's now. The engines are just that much better, even if the bodies are a bit on the ugly side.

 

Looks like I got three takers!

But I find it telling that all of them are thousands of miles away. And 2 out of three of them want to race my bone stock 4.6L with their modified and tuned 5.4L!

But if anyone with a STOCK 5.4L wants to make the journey or lives in the area, I'm more than willing to pit them head to head. This isn't about winning at all costs, it's just a fun experiment, one in which I think the 4.6L has the advantage due to it's broader spread of power. However, I have a 4x4, 3.73 gears and wider/larger diameter tires than stock so I admit that a 5.4L 4x2 with lighter tires (stock or better) and running well would be a very close race indeed and might even win. But it would be a fun experiment since the 4.6L 3V is often disrespected on these forums by the majority of F-150 owners who mostly have the 5.4L and assume the displacement advantage translates to better acceleration.

I'm willing to help create some real world data (in addition to the dyno charts) to challenge that outdated notion.

 

I have respect for the 4.6. The 4.6 in my mustang is strong enough to keep my adrenaline pumping. When it blows i'll be swapping the 2v for a 3v though.

 

I'll take my V6 SuperCab 2wd over my Fathers 5.4 SuperCab 4x4 anyday.

That being said I am quite impressed by 4.6's I truely have respect for them. Those 3V's are sick.

Plus for sound 4.6>5.4

 

Actually, in general, a modern engine has less stress on it when it is spinning at a higher speed and using less of it's available torque at that rpm when compared to an engine spinning at a lower speed and using most of the available torque. Also, at lower intake manifold vacuum, fuel mileage will often be higher, even if the engine is spinning faster. It's not like the old days when the radiator fan and inefficient water pumps, alternators, etc. would be spinning like crazy and ruining fuel economy. Modern engines are much more efficient when spinning than older designs and this is especially true with engines having shorter strokes.

I got over 13 mpg (manually calculated) pulling a tall, two-horse, two axle trailer between Milwaukee and Seattle, through numerous mountain ranges, in mostly frigid winter temperatures with headwinds and crosswinds (no tailwinds except for the last 90 miles outside of Seattle). And that included a fair amount of sight-seeing and forays with the horse trailer into the downtown areas of some of the larger cities on the route. But, even with the head and cross winds, the 4.6 rarely needed to downshift from 6th to maintain 60 mph (1600 rpm's) except for grades steeper than gentle. Loaded with horses I'll be in 5th and 4th more often but the short-stroke motor is quite efficient, even when spinning 2000-2500 rpm's (and very quiet and smooth as glass). That's why I call it a great little mill.

I would only select the 5.4L if the primary purpose of the truck was to haul heavy loads with poor aerodynamics long distances and, even then, either engine would work reasonably well with the six-speed tranny and other modern enhancements to the design. But this is the racing forum and, with that in mind, I don't think the stock 5.4 can compare favorably.