I see that many here have the 5.4 and you'll tell stories of tire spinning, stump pulling power, and I don't think I"m seeing any off it.

 

I hear you. My truck won't break them loose on dry asphalt. Mine is stock except for the silencer being yanked. My milage sucks too. 12~15 mpg. 60% Highway 40% City driving. The truck has 3100 miles on it. My friend is getting a F550 tow truck with a PSD and wants to race them. Maybe I shouldn't huh? The engine pulls very hard though. I never needed more acceleration when the truck is unloaded, which it usually is. You really gotta look at the little things when it comes to "smokin the tires". The gears, the tire (specific size, model, and brand, air pressure, age), the weight of the truck, the size of the rear axel, Trac-loc, and powerbraking the truck. Sounds like if the truck just sat there, it was powerbraked. All trucks will do that. Even weak *** Dodge trucks. I won't do that to mine, as I'm not out to abuse the truck. I have a Mustang that will do some mean burnouts if I want to spin some tires. But at 145 bucks a tire, I'm really not into leaving flaming piles of rubber.

------------------
2000 F150 XLT 4x4 Short Bed. Amazon Green, 5.4L, SuperCab, ORP, Tow Package, Sliding Rear Window, Electronic Shift, Keyless Entry, LT265-70-17 Tires, Clarion Pro Audio, Herculiner Bedliner, Air Silencer Removed.

1994 SVT Mustang Cobra. #1032 of 6009. Black coupe with black leather int., 3.73 rear, Bassani Exhaust, Aluminum D/S, Bridgestone RE-71 255-45-ZR17

My Home Page


[This message has been edited by 2000 F150 4x4 (edited 06-30-2000).]

[This message has been edited by 2000 F150 4x4 (edited 06-30-2000).]

 

You may just be expecting too much from a heavy Supercab 4 by 4. 330 cubes is not too much. I found that the Superchip created the most HP for the least $ and work. I don't know what gears you have, but a quicker rear end gear ratio can make any vehicle have a whole new personality. The factory trans has plenty of room for top end with 4.10s. I have several performance oriented cars to haul *** in. Handling, braking, and power to weight ratios are much easier to acheive in a car. It sounds like you have an excellent truck that is well suited for its intended purpose.

------------------
2000 F-150 XL,RC,LB,5.4,4R70W,3.55LS,
Class III tow/Payload #3/Convenience pkgs.,
4-wheel disc/ABS,Chestnut/Parchment 40/60,
Ford bedliner & gas/wheel/spare locks,
3" cold air box modification,Superchip,
Dynomax ultra-flow welded 3" cat-back.

 

just hang in there for a few more miles. I have a 2000 Off Road with a 5.4 and I was wishing I would have kept my 98 F150 because it would have waxed that 00's butt. Around the first oil change it started to seem to get a little more pep and now with about 4200 miles I think its going to be OK. I have had a superchip and a K&N filter charger on it since it was new. Im also the type of guy that is hard to satisfy. Good luck

 

Jeez -- When I made a passing remark about my 5.4 being 'wimpy' -- they came out of the woodwork crucifying me.

Don't get me wrong -- I think, for 330cid, these engines are great -- fully twice the HP of my 1980 6.2L Diesel (not twice the torque, however) -- and/but it does tow the same trailer that I've had since 1985 better than my 6.2 -- only slightly.

I believe that Ford has tuned them so they won't self-destruct if used at WOT all day long (which I did with my diesel -- with no complaints from that engine, I might add).

Face it, there is a LOT more HP available from 5.4L -- I just posted a little blurb about BMW's 5.5L naturally-aspirated 3-valve engine that puts out 400 HP !!!

Nice, but despite the marvels of German one-up-manship I wouldn't expect that engine to pull 8,000 # at WOT up a hill without the engine complaining (not to mention it probably has to have the rumpets adjusted and turn-signal-fluid changed by an expensive mechanic every month or so).

For a fairly 'spirited' truck, the 330cid does well -- but remember that only a dozen years ago it was the 300cid in-line SIX that was replaced by this whopping 5.4L V-8.

Gimme a 460 or 454 any day -- but you can keep the thirst that those monsters had.

For towing 8,000# without even moving the temperature gauge, the 5.4 is just fine, thank you very much, Mr. Ford.

Want power -- get the V10 -- I've seen it haul a load of people around in a 'theme-bus' -- and it did so without complaint.

For fun, there's an F-350 runnin' 'round DeToilet with a Super-charged V-10 in it -- so Ford DOES have some cards yet to play, if needed.

My '97 with 3.55 would light the tires from a brake-torque shot -- while the new and improved Y2K won't -- even with the 3.73.

Hmmmmmmmm?

Well, I don't really Need it to, but like my wife says:

You're only young once...

...but you can be immature for your whole life!

P.S.: The little white '95 Ranger 3.0L 3.73LS 5-speed will do dynamite burn-outs.


<A HREF="http://www.net-link.net/~n8jg/y2k/mvc-007f.jpg" TARGET=_blank> [img]//www.net-link.net/~n8jg/y2k/mvc-007f_small.jpg[/img] </A>

------------------
Y2K™

Toreador Red, Keyless XLT SC SB 5.4L E4x4 4wDisc/ABS, 3.73LS, Skid, HD 7700# Towing, LT-245's on Chrome, Tube-Steps, Captain's, 6CD, Tonneau, named: "Nick"

 

Has anybody ran a 5.4 on the track yet to see what it's ET are. I posted a message asking about the 5.4L Power in this forum a couple of days ago thanking that maybe I had a problem with the take off power but it seems that all 2000 will not spin from take-off. But I have noticed that this year is the first year for the 260HP and maybe Ford was thinking ahead for overall speed and usability instead of smoking the tires. Believe me I am not disappointed in the power at all. But maybe we are use to not going anywhere and all we see is white smoke from the tires. Yea this might be cool but is it practical. It is alot easier to drag somebody knowing that you are going to hookup and beat them rather than watching them beat you from a cloud of smoke.

I have just installed my first add on to my 2000 F-150, it was the K&N (FIPK). From a stand still it will still hookup and when it hits 1500 to 2000 RPM is when you can feel and HEAR the differnce. It makes one of the sweetest roars I have heard from a fuel injected engine and I think that the 10-15 HP increase isn't a lie on this product. It was easy to install and took about 30-45 minutes. I am wanting to take my truck to are local drag strip (1000 ft) on the test and tune night and see what I can do. I really don't think I will be disappointed.

 

Y2K,
You bet your but about this, you are correct!, the last V8 I drove was 16 years ago a Grand Torino with a 302 in it for that size she could move, then 4's and then 6, the last one a 1998 Ranger Splash that could burn those tires for real, 5 on the floor, and you posted about the V8 being wimpy I thought you were crazy, and when I got my 5.4 F-150 I stood shy and disoriented, luckily by reading f150online I got a good Idea of mods to buy to increase power, but still did not get the feel of power of a V8, when someone said that a 4.2 will kick the 5.4 @$$ i laughed, but driving my wife 1998 Explorer with only the superchip and the Borla catback I stood there and wonderd the Explorer with those mod's and being 4.0 SOHC felt with more power than my 5.4 truck, but today as I posted in Throttle Body, the engine feel's like a real V8, now I am happy now I can say I will kick @$$, but then why spend so much to get that feeling, I paid to get the 5.4 instead of the 4.6, I should have gotten the 4.6 and then pay for the mod's, now I wonder am I a sucker?? let me clear things up before they start to ask why this why that, I haul the atv's trailer to the farm and it is a long ride and when you get there the road is awfull so I need the power to get through the mud and hills, and when on the highway cruising I need the power to pass, besides having those bmrs and mercs passing you by like if you were parked makes you feel sick, at least I want to show them I have that little pep to show off, not going all the way but al least let them know you have the POWER.


------------------
2000 F-150, S/C F/S 5.4lt Auto, 3.55 LS, M4x4, Capt. Chairs 6 way elec., 6 CD,Class III towing hitch and package, etc,etc,.
Med Toreador Red
Born 03-27-00
Mods,
Superchip UAT2
Borla Anniversary Edition Split rear cat back
K&N Gen II or FIPK
Granattely Mass Air Flow
SVT Lightning 18" wheels
285/60/18 Pirelli scorpion Zero
Hellwig Sway bar
Dark Walnut dash kit
Muth signal mirrors
White face gauge
Bosch Plat. 4's
Retrax Rolltop
Outland sport bumper guard
Rancho rsx shocks
Ford OEM bug deflector
Underhood sound insulation panel
Piaa Plat. super white Bulbs
Catch All floor mats
Lund Back Draft tailgate spoiler

 

I have a 98 5.4 4x4 ext. cab--I could and still can spin the tires (dry) almost at demand.

One thing I did notice, I could spin them effortlessly when I had the stock muffler on the truck.

I had it replaced with a Flowmaster three chamber muffler. When I did that, I lost (noticably) low end torque. I did not modify the exhaust beyond the muffler.

Hope this helps, Regards---

------------------
Rick Medina
Las Vegas, Nevada

 

Wow, I wasn't expecting this much this soon.

 

I too have been wondering where the power is. My '66 Mustang w/300+hp, 2.80 gears, & C4 automatic will eat up a set of BFG's in one sitting. Where I have yet to break loose these 17" GY's on dry pavement. Offroad the truck seems to have plenty of 'umph' to get me where I need to be and I'm glad for the large amount of 'throtle play' when offroading.
Could it be the introduction of this LEV (low emissions vehicle) engine?
Since I do have a toy to play with I'm not looking to drag race this beast, but it would be nice not to be beat'n by some V6's out there in a stoplight to stoplight attack.
Sorry 'bout this long winded talk.

------------------
Y2K,XLT,SC,SB,4X4,ORP,5.4L,4R70W,3.55LS
13 APR 00 Build
11 MAY 00 Pick Up
Mods will come.

 

These are trucks, not race cars. I drove a 4.6 4x4 for two years, and I can tell you that my y2k 5.4 has sooooo much more get up and go. You had to keep your foot through the floor on the 4.6, not so on the 5.4. It's not a race car but the drivability is so much better. I also get about the same mileage I did in the 4.6.

------------------
[img]//albums.photopoint.com/j/View?u=688831&a=5017225&p=21112778&Sequence=7[/img]
2000 reg cab sb XLT 2WD
5.4
silver
3.55 LS
4 wheel antilock discs
K&N
17x8 TSW Trackers
285/60-17 Pirelli Scorpion Zeroes
Downey SST Tonneau
Gibson Stainless Split Rear Catback
2 inch drop shackles
Ford factory fog light kit
Superchip Flip Chip



[This message has been edited by 2000regcab54 (edited 07-01-2000).]

 

There is one thing I think everyone is forgeting. It's not HP that gets you going or spins the tires, it's torque at low RPMs! By opening up the exhaust system, you are freeing up some of the back pressure of the motor. Less back pressure does mean more HP, but also means less torque and moves your power curve higher up in the RPM range. That is why the PSD feels like it wants to rip your head off when you stomp on it. 505#'s of torque at 1800 RPM in a 7,000# truck is an awesome torque/weight ratio, considering most 18 wheelers are only around 900-1000, and look what they can pull and how quick they are when bob tailing! The 5.4L only has 355#'s of torque at 2500 RPM in a 6,000# truck, much lower torque/weight ratio. And with diesel technology now, there really isn't any difference in throttle response as there was in the past. That's why the PSD is so popular now, cause it really does kick ***. My opinion is the diesel engines will eventually make gas non-existant.

HP only comes into play in the upper RPM range and gas truck motors just aren't built like that.The reason cars have more HP is the stroke of the motor. Cars are built on the theory that they usually won't be pulling a trailer, or boat, or anything for that matter. Just the weight of the car and it's passengers is all that is considered. Performance car motors are built with a much shorter stroke(how far the piston actually goes up and down) which allows the motor to reach a much higher RPM. Higher RPM means a larger range to achieve more HP, but also means less torque. This is why a "stroker" motor is so popular. It combines the short stroke of a car design motor with a larger bore size(ie. a chevy 383 is a 400 block with a car design 350 crank, larger bore, shorter stroke). This allows you to increase your engine size without sacraficing the higher RPMs of a short stroke motor, thus making more HP.

Truck motors are built with a longer stroke than cars. This changes the HP/torque ratio so that there is more torque than HP, usually much more. It also means motors with a longer stroke can't reach the higher RPMs that cars do. Ever take note where red lines are in cars compared to trucks? Most performance cars usually red line over 5500, and built motors aim at around 7500. When was the last time you saw a truck red line that high? Take my old Bronco for example. I had a 1989 Bronco with a 5.8 liter(351 Winsor) motor. It didn't matter what I did, that motor would not go over 4000 RPM, even sitting in park floored. Now some of the 80's mustangs came with a 351 Winsor, and the red line on them was 6000, and they would go over that. Same motor, shouldn't be any difference right? NOT! The mustang was a much shorter stroke crank, thus creating much more RPM and HP, but a lot less torque and totally different power curve.

Maybe I'm a little long winded, but let's not compare apples and oranges here. Truck engines are designed to give you lots of torque at low RPMs and last doing it. They will never compare to a car motor in HP, no matter what you do. All we can hope for by adding simple bolt-on things to our trucks is a little bit more fuel miledge, better exhaust sound, and maybe some more HP and torque, of which torque being more important than HP.



------------------
Boss™

 

I suspect the vehicle weight has a lot do with your situation. Like Max said, a heave 4x4 supercab probably won't give you a big burn-out. My 4x2 regular cab would absolutely thrash the OEM Generals. If I want, it will spin the the new 285/60 Goodyear Eagle GT IIs. Plus, if you drive like granny, you'll get granny performance.


------------------
1997 4x4 Expedition- 4.6L, true dual exhaust w/glass-packs, K&N air filter, SuperChip, airbox mods, Edelbrock shocks, 285/75R16 BFG ATs, 2000 "XLT" wheels, 4.10 gears, Auburn LS, Clarion In-dash CD player, Smitty Bilt push bars and nerf bars.

2000 4x2 F150 XLT Reg. Cab LWB- 5.4L, Tow Pkg, 3.55LS, CD player,Remote Keyless Entry, Sliding back glass, Special Appearance Pkg., tinted windows, Line-X bedliner, 285/60R16 Goodyear Eagle GT IIs and Prime #155 wheels.

http://members.visualcities.com/NoMo

 

Does the 2000 low emission rating come into play here too? Please read my old thread in the gen discussion forum. If anyone has info, please post there: https://www.f150online.com/f150board...ML/001081.html
thanks

 

Despite not being able to impress the neighbors with smokey burnouts, the 5.4 is quite a surprising tow vehicle.

First gear is, like Little Red Riding-Hood sais: "Just Right". Right off idle, the torque converter lets the engine pull at the engine's torque RPM -- and if you take a reasonable pull, it shifts before 3,500 RPM right into the torque range of second gear. Really nice!

Second gear is absolutely perfect for WOT pulls up a tree fully loaded -- at 50 MPH -- and for pulls around Dolly Pardon's Theme Park, third gear, with the convertor unlocked, holds very nicely at over 60 MPH.

A friend of mine has a 350 Corvette engine in the bed of his S-10 pickup (where it runs -- not where it lies) -- and he's found that his 1/4 mile times suck with a big transmission -- not because the tranny is bad -- but because the inertia of the torque-converter is such that it takes about as much HP to spin up the converter as it does to spin up the truck WITH the converter.

Solution: itsy-bitsy transmission with a tiny torque convertor.

Where does this tie with the discussion?

Simply that the truck does it's best when it is pulling -- not accelerating. They're not the same thing.

I think that the gear ratios of the tranny and the shift points are so close to where I'd put them if I could program them myself -- that I can only think of one thing that I'd change (I'd like to be able to hold the gear locked up at MY discretion).

For my towing situation -- which happens to be just shy of the truck's max -- it is perfect.

Towing the same trailer with my '97 (3.55) was very comfortable -- and when compared to the 6.2L Diesel that preceded it the fuel mileage was right on target (12 MPG with the diesel vs 7.75 MPG with the 5.4) -- which is right on target with physics (diesel is 125% of gas). Neither truck would do it in OD -- and I don't like running thru planetary gearsets under load anyhoo.

Love this board -- Almost as good as walking around the campground and comparing war-stories.

Go Steve!

I just got back from buying $75 worth of Mobil 1 and their gold-dipped filters -- and gonna go change the oil in the trucks and then cool off on the 'Wing.

Happy Holiday!


<A HREF="http://www.net-link.net/~n8jg/y2k/mvc-007f.jpg" TARGET=_blank> [img]//www.net-link.net/~n8jg/y2k/mvc-007f_small.jpg[/img] </A>


------------------
Y2K™

Toreador Red, Keyless XLT SC SB 5.4L E4x4 4wDisc/ABS, 3.73LS, Skid, HD 7700# Towing, LT-245's on Chrome, Tube-Steps, Captain's, 6CD, Tonneau, named: "Nick"