3.7 test drive
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,711
Likes: 5
From: Rhode Island
That is exactly why I am looking at it. I have a 80+ mile a day commute, so the idea of 15mpg is a real turnoff. I started looking at the Tundra 5.7, but the 14-15 combined turned me off. After that, I was thinking Taco - we have a 4runner now, and the room is OK, I love the 4.0l V6, but I really wanted a full size. (plus the Taco crew cabs look goofy) Then I hear about the new Ford motors.
I really want to like the 3.7. The idea of getting a real combined of 19-20 in a full size crew cab gets me excited. :o
However, 2 things are holding me back. One is the 6-2 shift. If it was followed by a swift kick in the a$$, I would not mind, but getting a screaming motor for 10 seconds every time I need to merge is a downer (says the guy driving a 12 year old auto/civic - I swear that car does a 4-1 shift just to **** me off). The second is, when I had my '97 Scab, I kept telling myself my next truck would be a 4x4. But the 3.7 can't come Screw 4x4... 
Do I really NEED 4x4? no - it would get used maybe 1-2 times a year, mostly on beaches that a 2wd would do OK on. But "I's wants its".... 
what to do, what to do....
....
I really want to like the 3.7. The idea of getting a real combined of 19-20 in a full size crew cab gets me excited. :o
However, 2 things are holding me back. One is the 6-2 shift. If it was followed by a swift kick in the a$$, I would not mind, but getting a screaming motor for 10 seconds every time I need to merge is a downer (says the guy driving a 12 year old auto/civic - I swear that car does a 4-1 shift just to **** me off). The second is, when I had my '97 Scab, I kept telling myself my next truck would be a 4x4. But the 3.7 can't come Screw 4x4... Do I really NEED 4x4? no - it would get used maybe 1-2 times a year, mostly on beaches that a 2wd would do OK on. But "I's wants its".... what to do, what to do....
....
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
From: Coastal Tx
For anyone interested, I think this is sticker from the truck I test drove:
http://fordlabels.webview.biz/webvie...EW1CM8BFA19341
I looked it up to find the rear end ratio - 3.73
http://fordlabels.webview.biz/webvie...EW1CM8BFA19341
I looked it up to find the rear end ratio - 3.73
Thread Starter
|
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
From: Coastal Tx
FOr what is's worth, I looked at about 5 -7 window stickers from that dealer this morning, all the 3.7's had 3.73's.
I don't know if that is the dealers pick, or what Ford is shipping... It is listed as a "No Charge" option - I wonder if that means it is a "standard option"? as in, can't get a 3.7 Screw without it?
I don't know if that is the dealers pick, or what Ford is shipping... It is listed as a "No Charge" option - I wonder if that means it is a "standard option"? as in, can't get a 3.7 Screw without it?
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 43,530
Likes: 817
From: Joplin MO
According to the order guide, the only 3.7 that comes with a 3.55 is the 2wd standard cab with 3.73 as an option. All others come with 3.73 only.
Last edited by glc; Jan 5, 2011 at 04:07 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,172
Likes: 1
From: Missouri
I still think the 4.2l can run circles around the new 3.7l and Ecoboost. Why? It's industrial grade. Same goes for the Triton V10 6.8l.
I don't see Ford promoting Ecoboost nor the 3.7l anywhere in the lineup of Ford Power Products Matrix of engines and there is no talk of it. Until they do, I won't buy one, because it is still considered a "consumer/household grade" not an industrial engine. When I start seeing these put in industrial emergency hospital grade gensets and water pumps, then I'll reconsider. But I highly doubt it will happen for some reason or another.
Edit:
I also call a bluff on that whole schmeal with the ecoboost running a 24 hour track at WOT pulling a loaded trailer at 80 mph. My truck can pull that same trailer in 5th doing 80 mph under 2500 rpms. So I don't believe it. Secondly, it would get enough momentum to get beyond 80 mph as it says. There's just something really fishy about it. Heck, my buddy pulls his 9000 lb travel trailer and does 90 in on I95 with his overloaded F350 5.4l. I just don't believe it.
I don't see Ford promoting Ecoboost nor the 3.7l anywhere in the lineup of Ford Power Products Matrix of engines and there is no talk of it. Until they do, I won't buy one, because it is still considered a "consumer/household grade" not an industrial engine. When I start seeing these put in industrial emergency hospital grade gensets and water pumps, then I'll reconsider. But I highly doubt it will happen for some reason or another.
Edit:
I also call a bluff on that whole schmeal with the ecoboost running a 24 hour track at WOT pulling a loaded trailer at 80 mph. My truck can pull that same trailer in 5th doing 80 mph under 2500 rpms. So I don't believe it. Secondly, it would get enough momentum to get beyond 80 mph as it says. There's just something really fishy about it. Heck, my buddy pulls his 9000 lb travel trailer and does 90 in on I95 with his overloaded F350 5.4l. I just don't believe it.
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 43,530
Likes: 817
From: Joplin MO
no doubt one of the worst engines to put in a half-ton pickup
"There are two types of people that will hate on the V6 F-150: the envious and the ignorant."
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,919
Likes: 0
From: Western Massachusetts
Thanks to the OP for the review. I too have been looking for real world impressions of the 3.7.
I will be getting back into an F150 in the coming year. I've been driving this Edge for a few years. It's a good car. The 3.5/6 speed auto are good. It's comfortable. It's a car. I want to be back in a truck.
I was thinking, after driving this smaller vehicle for a while, that I would get a smaller pick up. I was eager to see what Ford had planned for the Ranger. I guess nothing? The current Ranger is just too antiquated to invest that kind of money in. I'd like to stick with Ford, but if they don't have what I need...
So, I've checked into the Tacoma and the Frontier. They both look like nice trucks. They would suit my needs. I can get a little more for the money with them than I can with a Ford. Two issuse with both. Low on power, and poor fuel economy. I'm still young enough to want some git-up and go but getting old enough where I'd rather spend my money on things other than gas.
I guess that what I'll be looking at is a regular cab 4X4 with the 3.7. It gets better fuel mileage than either of the foriegn trucks. Looks better and has more power.
Time will tell. I hope that Ford is on top of things with these new engines.
Thanks again OP.
I will be getting back into an F150 in the coming year. I've been driving this Edge for a few years. It's a good car. The 3.5/6 speed auto are good. It's comfortable. It's a car. I want to be back in a truck.
I was thinking, after driving this smaller vehicle for a while, that I would get a smaller pick up. I was eager to see what Ford had planned for the Ranger. I guess nothing? The current Ranger is just too antiquated to invest that kind of money in. I'd like to stick with Ford, but if they don't have what I need...
So, I've checked into the Tacoma and the Frontier. They both look like nice trucks. They would suit my needs. I can get a little more for the money with them than I can with a Ford. Two issuse with both. Low on power, and poor fuel economy. I'm still young enough to want some git-up and go but getting old enough where I'd rather spend my money on things other than gas.
I guess that what I'll be looking at is a regular cab 4X4 with the 3.7. It gets better fuel mileage than either of the foriegn trucks. Looks better and has more power.
Time will tell. I hope that Ford is on top of things with these new engines.
Thanks again OP.