Why Shouldnt they bring it back. They made it for over 30 years. I think that a ohc inline would be a good replacement. A diesel too?

 

No complaint about bringing a good engine back! Really appreciaate mine. K & N filter aids a lot, then maybe the superchip and gerachange. A lot of guys on the pre 1997 message board have the 4.9.

 

A BIG 10-4 on that Todd!

------------------
Thanks!

1993 F-150 302/e4od/355 Limited slip. dual exhuast w/o mufflers,2 1/4" pipes with Echo Tips, headers, accel plugs/wires(8.6mm)/rotor/cap, hypertech powermodule, NEED INFO ON BLASTER COILS Alpine cd player and Pioneer speakers.(Front, need info on rears)

1989 F-150 XLT 4x4 302/aod true duals with turbo mufflers, 30X9.50" wild country tires, 3:55 gears w/LS(want after market LS for front)

 

No doubt about it. Gotta love a straight six. If it's a diesel, it's even better. (Used to be a diesel mechanic)

------------------
Todd, Orlando FL.
93 F-150 4x2, 4.9L, E-4OD, 3.08 rearend, 31x10.5 BFG A/T's, Skyjacker Softride Hydro Shocks,K&N Airfilter, Jacobs Electronics Plug Wires/Rotor/Cap. (Next mod: Flowmaster catback exhaust!)

 

How does the old "4.9" compare in horsepower and torque to the new "4.2"? I had a 89 4.9 with 5 speed, 3.08 gears, and I just bought an 98 with a 4.2, auto, 3.55 gears . I loved the power of the old truck, I could haul about anything I could hook to it or fit in the bed. I am a little worried about being let down by this "new" motor/tranny combination. I would sure like to see some numbers. If they still offered the 4.9 I would have bought it in a second!!!!!!!!

 

About the 4.9:
When I was younger, I had a 76 F100 w/the 300 (4.9) I-6. When I obtained it, the truck had 165K and was used as a delivery truck for my father's auto parts store. It was abused daily by the parts drivers. It didn't have a straight body panel on it and the interior was hose-out friendly. The damn think leaked oil like crazy. The best part is, I never changed the oil and it ran until 250K miles. (added one to two quarts per week so it was self changing. )

I don't think the new engines will ever stand that kind of abuse and provide the long service life of the old straight six.

I would agree that, if it would fit, the 4.9 would be valuable in the ford truck line-up.

Darin

------------------

97 F150 Lariat 4X4 Ext. Cab. 5.4, AT, Gibson Side Swept, K&N, Bosch Platinum +4's (Both doors cracked:-( )

 

As you can see by my name and signature I have an inline six. Right now it sits with 73,000 miles on it. I'm guesstamating that a good 25-30,000 of those include towing and/or a decent load in the bed as it was used as a landscape and maintenance truck for almost 3 years. Since the selling of the business it has turned into a daily driver and I have "played" with it to see what kind of power I can get out of it. I personally think that this motor blows the 4.2 V-6 out of the water!! The 4.9 was around for about 30 years, it was/is a proven, durable, strong engine. Granted it's not a street rod, but it does exactly what it was designed to do....work! If it were to blow up today, I would replace it in a heartbeat. I'm counting on getting at least another 100,000 miles out of it. The only problems I've had were a belt tensioner bearing (squeeked, drove me nuts), and I managed to break both engine mounts by power shifting. With regular maintenance I see no reason why this truck shouldn't run the distance. And when it does finally give up, I'll be in a market for a 2010 F-150!! Until then, I'll keep my truck that looks like a truck, is built like a truck, and has a truck engine in it!

Don't get me wrong, the '97-present trucks are beautiful. The 4.2 is a modified 3.8 and in my opinion does not belong in a truck. The 4.6 is a decent engine, as is the 5.4. But until they produce an engine (other than lighting, drool drool) that is truly a truck engine, i.e. V-10, Power Stroke, etc. in a F-150, I'll be perfectly happy with my 4.9!

God Bless the 4.9!

Neal Coppola
Las Vegas, NV

FYI, 145 Hp, 235 ft/lbs Torque stock.....I could be wrong, but it sounds close.

------------------
'94 F-150, 4.9 6cyl., K&N FIPK, Mangecor 8mm wires. Gibson 3" Side Swept, MSD Blaster Coil, superchip. Pioneer DEH-P835R Head Unit, Rockford Fosgate 200a1 pushing 2 RF 10" subs, components and another amp will go in when funds are allocated! Est. 200 hp 300ft/lb. Torque! Not bad for a straight 6!! New project: '82 Stang, 351 Windsor, now on jackstands....blew up the rear end, oops!

 

I guess I should state my opinion, although I figure that I will get some blowback on this statement. As most of you know, I am fond of the pre-97 era. Ya I know its dead. But the Inline six was paired together with the 240 I-6 built in the 1961? F-100 and most F-250s and run to model year 1996. The 300 is dead, and I feel that the 4.2L is a good engine, but in no means is true competition with the old inline. I would like to think that Ford would eventually replace the 4.2L with a ohc I6. Maybe by the year 2017? Gives the 4.2L 20 years to build up of my confidence. hmmm? Just a thought

 

The inline enggine is and was a great engine and Ford is stupid if they dont bring an inline-6 back, I know people who had 300,000 miles on this engine before any kinda major problems, i think Ford stopped making it b/c it was so damn reliable.

 

Wylie,

The new 4.2l makes 205hp and 255lbs-ft torque. The 4.9l makes 145hp and 265lbs-ft torque. The 4.2 should have no problem blowing the 4.9 away at the drag strip. But the 4.9l can out-tow the 4.2l.


94 F150,

I think the 4.2 does belong in a truck. ITs hard working, good running, etc. I wonder how the 3.9l runs with the Ram. Can you say slow!

 

This has nothing to do with the subject, but Ford DID have a v-6 in the 1980, '81, '82 F-100's and F-150.s In fact, the 3.8L is still being used in the current v-6 mustang. But it really sucked in the Pickups.

 

Pastmaster,

It runs terrible with the mustang now, and was terrible with the truck then.

 

I would just like to add a comment to "Straight Six's" post. He/she said that it was " just too damn reliable." This is a very valid point. From a business viewpoint, how would Ford make any money if it weren't selling parts and service designed for a motor that needed no parts or service!? It all comes down to $$. I believe that it was a good business move on Ford's part, but they should just look at these boards to find more about what customers want! All in all, good for Ford, not necessarily good for Ford customers!

Neal Coppola
Las Vegas, NV

------------------
'94 F-150, 4.9 6cyl., K&N FIPK, Mangecor 8mm wires. Gibson 3" Side Swept, MSD Blaster Coil, superchip. Pioneer DEH-P835R Head Unit, Rockford Fosgate 200a1 pushing 2 RF 10" subs, components and another amp will go in when funds are allocated! Est. 200 hp 300ft/lb. Torque! Not bad for a straight 6!! New project: '82 Stang, 351 Windsor, now on jackstands....blew up the rear end, oops!

 

Another comment to Fast4.6:
You proved my case exactly, the 4.2 is a hard working engine. The harder that an engine has to work to do it's job, the shorter it's life. This engine HAS to work hard to move a 4,000+ lb. truck. Thus, the reason I don't feel that it belongs in a truck.
As for the 4.2 and towing.... I wouldn't even think about hooking up my boat to the back of one!!

Neal Coppola
Las Vegas, NV

 

The 4.2 V-6 will never be as stong nor as reliable as the 4.9L inline-six. Inline engines are inherently stronger than V engines and the 4.9 is and was a perfect ex. of this,plus look at big rigs what do they inline engines. Yea since it was so reliable (4.9),it didnt make Ford money in parts and repairs guess thats why automakers need to look at Jap. car makers.They dont stop making things b/c they are reliable they make them better,instead american automakers replace good things with inferior things. Thought JOB 1 was suppose to change all that.