chevy vs ford??

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 30, 2006 | 07:39 PM
  #31  
raisin's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
From: Michigan
Good one, you must be right I haven't been able to find a good chevy website for my son in law (the chevy lover).
 
Reply
Old Oct 30, 2006 | 09:00 PM
  #32  
MeanGene's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,274
Likes: 6
From: Simi Valley CA
In one thread I was pointed to the TitanTalk.com and read about all of the rear end problems their having. If that helps any. I guess they used a Dana 44 when they should of used a Dana 60. It looks like Nissan will have it fixed in the 2007 model.
 
Reply
Old Oct 30, 2006 | 09:08 PM
  #33  
KDOTengineer's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
From: Piedmont, Oklahoma
I agree with raisin.

You guys are crazy if you think anything man made doesn't have flaws. Ford has flaws. They are obviously well known here as this is a Ford site. Every car has problems. German cars are supposed to be great, but according to JD Power some of them are the least reliable and most prone mechanical problems.
 
Reply
Old Oct 30, 2006 | 09:17 PM
  #34  
skyyyz's Avatar
Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
From: Toronto, ON Canada
2008 F-Series Super Duty is mimicking GM's front end. Don't like the headlamps at all, but the grill looks good.

One thing about the F150, it has a unique front end, still looks like a powerhouse, and the 04's and newer have maintained an identity of their own.

Ford, forget the stupid "I'm dizzy there's so many headlamps" look, it's ugly. You got a good thing going with the 04's and newer. Improve on it; don't mimic the competition. They have their own problems.

IMHO.

 
Reply
Old Oct 30, 2006 | 09:24 PM
  #35  
Camarothatcould's Avatar
Suspended
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,941
Likes: 2
From: NW Indiana
Ford and Chevy guy here... Got the best of both worlds.. Expedition and IROC Camaro
 
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2006 | 10:38 AM
  #36  
BROTHERDAVE's Avatar
Senior Member
25 Year Member
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,759
Likes: 4
From: Friendswood Texas
jbrew, anybody that has ever done a spark plug change on the 5.4, (espesially the first time) has to have a sense of humor.

this board is full of people with plug problems. see what you want to see.

https://www.f150online.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=258556

https://www.f150online.com/forums/sh...t=threads+plug

i personally have a 97 5.4 with 155k and a 01, 5.4 with a vortech supercharger with no problems. I take exteme caution when i change the plugs
 
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2006 | 11:46 AM
  #37  
jbrew's Avatar
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 25,641
Likes: 19
From: MI
Originally Posted by BROTHERDAVE
jbrew, anybody that has ever done a spark plug change on the 5.4, (espesially the first time) has to have a sense of humor.

this board is full of people with plug problems. see what you want to see.

https://www.f150online.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=258556

https://www.f150online.com/forums/sh...t=threads+plug

i personally have a 97 5.4 with 155k and a 01, 5.4 with a vortech supercharger with no problems. I take exteme caution when i change the plugs
I haven't been to the forums that side of the fence , 3 valve issue's looks to be a nightmare, feefer's 98 MFD has to be close mine. I never blew any plugs - a couple pistons late 2000 (Dealership) error. They replaced the motor and heads - I thought I got lucky and had PI heads - NOPE! different heads , there non PI still and they have 6.5 threads in each hole. Seams like if they were timecerted I would be able to tell. Looked normal to me when I had it apart 2004.
I can relate to the "extreme caution" taken - I purchased a procharger assembly off ebay this past summer, planned on installing this winter - My E4OD is going to hell , sold the supercharger to buddy. I opted for new trans instead this winter.
He installed the procharger on a 01 5.4 - chewed up a rear end within 3 days - fixed it , now it's down again with a blown tranny... So YEAH..To much sheit can go wrong if less that cautious..
 

Last edited by jbrew; Oct 31, 2006 at 11:51 AM.
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2006 | 12:06 PM
  #38  
sone20wink's Avatar
Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: Iowa
Well trucks are not for racing but i tell ya what i own a trucking company big rigs diesels 53ft trailers and i run west across mountains and best semi is the one who has the low RPMS! High RPMS = engine overheat and engine works much harder for same job and it burns more fuel! F150 vs. Silverado vs Ram is a no match when it comes to towing! Friend has a Dodge Ram 5.9L and that thing sucks gas like a hummer and it is very slow i mean you punch it and it takes forever and it is very heavy and he never pulled anything and tranny had problems at 46K miles! $1300reapir. uncle has a GMC Sierra Z71 2002 and he swears in his Sierra and he has tranny leaks and when we towed going to Wisconsin from Iowa his engine overheated because he was in 3000RPMS all the time while i was in 2100RPM !

This should not be discused any more let me ask you something? If you were riding a bike would you rather wanna paddle 3000 times in a minute or 2100in a minute to get the some job done? Less work = will last longer and they look nicer
 
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2006 | 12:21 PM
  #39  
Coda95's Avatar
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by MeanGene
In one thread I was pointed to the TitanTalk.com and read about all of the rear end problems their having. If that helps any. I guess they used a Dana 44 when they should of used a Dana 60. It looks like Nissan will have it fixed in the 2007 model.
They use that POS rear end in Grand Cherokee's. It's not a truck read end. Hell, my brothers grenaded in his Heep light wheeling, can'tagine trying to tow anything with it.
 
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2006 | 12:36 PM
  #40  
Peacemaker's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,552
Likes: 0
The old Ford vs. Chevy vs. Dodge debates between consumers are what keeps the manufacturers battling to out-do each other. It's what keeps the bigger, better, more luxurious, and more powerful vehicles rolling into the dealers. Keep up the good work!
 
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2006 | 01:53 PM
  #41  
ws6_guyscrew's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 2,599
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by skyyyz
2008 F-Series Super Duty is mimicking GM's front end. Don't like the headlamps at all, but the grill looks good.

One thing about the F150, it has a unique front end, still looks like a powerhouse, and the 04's and newer have maintained an identity of their own.

Ford, forget the stupid "I'm dizzy there's so many headlamps" look, it's ugly. You got a good thing going with the 04's and newer. Improve on it; don't mimic the competition. They have their own problems.

IMHO.


I kindof agree with some of what you are saying, I HATE that new headlamp style... The headlamp beams are below the parking lamps, thats too Chevyish, The huge grill looks badass though, but those headlights make it look weird. The Harley version of that will look funny black background with the orange strip in it if thats how they plan that.
 
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2006 | 07:41 PM
  #42  
Scandall's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
From: San Diego
Originally Posted by sone20wink
Well trucks are not for racing but i tell ya what i own a trucking company big rigs diesels 53ft trailers and i run west across mountains and best semi is the one who has the low RPMS! High RPMS = engine overheat and engine works much harder for same job and it burns more fuel! F150 vs. Silverado vs Ram is a no match when it comes to towing! Friend has a Dodge Ram 5.9L and that thing sucks gas like a hummer and it is very slow i mean you punch it and it takes forever and it is very heavy and he never pulled anything and tranny had problems at 46K miles! $1300reapir. uncle has a GMC Sierra Z71 2002 and he swears in his Sierra and he has tranny leaks and when we towed going to Wisconsin from Iowa his engine overheated because he was in 3000RPMS all the time while i was in 2100RPM !

This should not be discused any more let me ask you something? If you were riding a bike would you rather wanna paddle 3000 times in a minute or 2100in a minute to get the some job done? Less work = will last longer and they look nicer

First of all I had a 5.9L dodge and I would still have it if some stupid asian chick (only spoke english when the police arrived) hadn't pulled in front of me causing me to hit her and then another car at 45mph. And I drove the truck home. (she was found guilty and had to pay for all the cars).

That truck was the first year of the new Rams it had over 250,000 miles on it. I think my dad only changed the oil like every 25,000 miles. He would race that thing everywhere. It was always expected to perform and we never gave it a break. Only problem was the torque converter went out at 75,000 miles but they fixed it for freee. Also I went through alot of brake pads but thats what happens when you travell 300 miles a day for 2 years. That thing was fast you hit the gas and the tires would lightup and it would out run people up hills at stop lights etc.

Its an older truck (1995) producing around 215 Hp at the wheels so it can't really compare to the newer trucks but it defenitly held its own. My dad would race anything in it. For pulling it was crazy- remember the 5.9L had the commercials were at idle it was pulling a locamotive or 3 other brands trucks. So it could really pull.

You can't compare an old engine like the 5.9L to newer technologies. Thats why they are called advancements. Think about it like this the Mustangs used to be 5.0 but Ford designed a better performing 4.6L. Advancements.

Would I ride my bike peddling 3000 times per minute or 5000 times. I wouldn't do either thats why its called gas. You want a computer to perform 3000 calculations per minute or 5000? Your not the one doing the work the vehicle is or the gas is. My dodge never pulled high rpms it always ran around 2000 unless I wanted it to (bone stock). Even when I pulled either my 25 foot boat or a 1977 cadillac eldorado over a 600mile trip. Whats wrong with high rpms tell all the Yamaha/Honda/Suzuki owners that there motorcycles suck because they have such high rpms. Some cars are designed for it.

In final everyone has a story about a vehicle performing badly and others have stories saying the opposite. My dodge 5.9L was a great dependable,fast and reliable truck that could pull anything it also took a huge accident and kept going and it didn't deserve to leave the way it did. Now would I give up my 04 F150 for it.. Helllll no. But I would love to have the truck back. Also If you really want to tow something buy a bigger truck. Thats why I have a F250.
 
Reply
Old Oct 31, 2006 | 11:33 PM
  #43  
sone20wink's Avatar
Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: Iowa
Originally Posted by Scandall
First of all I had a 5.9L dodge and I would still have it if some stupid asian chick (only spoke english when the police arrived) hadn't pulled in front of me causing me to hit her and then another car at 45mph. And I drove the truck home. (she was found guilty and had to pay for all the cars).

That truck was the first year of the new Rams it had over 250,000 miles on it. I think my dad only changed the oil like every 25,000 miles. He would race that thing everywhere. It was always expected to perform and we never gave it a break. Only problem was the torque converter went out at 75,000 miles but they fixed it for freee. Also I went through alot of brake pads but thats what happens when you travell 300 miles a day for 2 years. That thing was fast you hit the gas and the tires would lightup and it would out run people up hills at stop lights etc.

Its an older truck (1995) producing around 215 Hp at the wheels so it can't really compare to the newer trucks but it defenitly held its own. My dad would race anything in it. For pulling it was crazy- remember the 5.9L had the commercials were at idle it was pulling a locamotive or 3 other brands trucks. So it could really pull.

You can't compare an old engine like the 5.9L to newer technologies. Thats why they are called advancements. Think about it like this the Mustangs used to be 5.0 but Ford designed a better performing 4.6L. Advancements.

Would I ride my bike peddling 3000 times per minute or 5000 times. I wouldn't do either thats why its called gas. You want a computer to perform 3000 calculations per minute or 5000? Your not the one doing the work the vehicle is or the gas is. My dodge never pulled high rpms it always ran around 2000 unless I wanted it to (bone stock). Even when I pulled either my 25 foot boat or a 1977 cadillac eldorado over a 600mile trip. Whats wrong with high rpms tell all the Yamaha/Honda/Suzuki owners that there motorcycles suck because they have such high rpms. Some cars are designed for it.

In final everyone has a story about a vehicle performing badly and others have stories saying the opposite. My dodge 5.9L was a great dependable,fast and reliable truck that could pull anything it also took a huge accident and kept going and it didn't deserve to leave the way it did. Now would I give up my 04 F150 for it.. Helllll no. But I would love to have the truck back. Also If you really want to tow something buy a bigger truck. Thats why I have a F250.
I have 21semi drivers and they all drive pickup trucks and they all have ford f150 5.4L engines and they all know what it means 1600rpms vs. 1900rpms
f150 5.4 1600rpms friends dodge 5.9L 1900rpms at 65PMH me getting over 20MPG and he is struggling to get 14MPG! Wanna talk about how many miles trucks turn? Granpas 1997 F150 Lariat 319K pulling miles on flat grounds of Iowa that thing aaalways has at least 5K LBS hooked to his back. My 1988 Ranger 2.0L engine 248K miles had it since 180K miles only use it to haul trash or junky stuff and i had 3K LBS on bed in October i was trowing old shingle material from roof and that thing was mad heavy when guy scaled me he could not belive i had over 3K LBS on back of my Ranger and i told him wait i will be back because i need to do 2more loads today and he finally believed me then. Standar load for garbage is $9 and i ended up paying $38dollars for one load.
I **** on your dodge i wont say nothing about chevy because my uncle has one and it is a descent truck but when we pulling i am sure my uncle would rather have lower rpms! Oh both F150 and Dodge Ram are 2001s!
 
Reply
Old Nov 1, 2006 | 12:46 AM
  #44  
skyyyz's Avatar
Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
From: Toronto, ON Canada
Originally Posted by ws6_guyscrew
I kindof agree with some of what you are saying, I HATE that new headlamp style... The headlamp beams are below the parking lamps, thats too Chevyish, The huge grill looks badass though, but those headlights make it look weird. The Harley version of that will look funny black background with the orange strip in it if thats how they plan that.
I think I was drunk when I posted that. LOL (Grill still rocks!)

I was fixated on the revamped headlight design. It immediately made me think of the dogs breakfast that Chev came up with.

I mean, what the.... ????

 
Reply
Old Nov 1, 2006 | 02:36 AM
  #45  
ExPartsMan's Avatar
Member
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
From: SoCal
Originally Posted by MeanGene
In one thread I was pointed to the TitanTalk.com and read about all of the rear end problems their having. If that helps any. I guess they used a Dana 44 when they should of used a Dana 60. It looks like Nissan will have it fixed in the 2007 model.
Titan in 2007: It's still the Spicer (Dana) 44...with new internals...but...it's still a Spicer 44. Severe axle wrap...Nissan needs to install Traction Masters as standard equipment.

The same basic rear end Ford used in cars and light trucks 1949-1956.

Studebaker used it from 1947-1966.
 
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:41 AM.