Should Ford bring back the 5.0L and turn it into a Triton? Then Ford would offer 3 v8's, which would be interesting.

------------------
Fast46Triton

1999 Ford F150 XLT Supercab, Shortbed, 4x2, 4 wheel disc brakes/4 wheel Anti-Lock Brakes, Cloth Seats, Amazon green, 16" All season tires, Soft Tonneau Cover, CD Player, 4.6 liter Triton V8, 3:55 ls, towing package, 4 speed auto, K&N Airfilter
Future Mods:
1)Superchip
2)Airbox Mod
3)Gibson Exhaust

 

No. but they should make something bigger than the 5.4 that isn't a V-10, like a 6.0 V-8.

 

why?

------------------
99 XLT SC 4x4 STYLESIDE ORP 5.4,AUTO & 3.73 POSI
MED. TOREADOR RED
EXTANG TONEAU,BED MAT,
K&N FILTER & WOOD DASH KIT

 

Yeah, but it (the 4.6) costs three times as much to make and produces equal or less horsepower. The 4.6 has potential, but it's got problems too.

------------------
'95 Eddie Bauer F-150 SC & '64 Falcon/Ranchero
-------------------------------------
Are you A.S.E. Certified ? If so, ask me about
iATN...the best tool you'll ever have ! ! And it's
free


[This message has been edited by PKRWUD (edited 10-03-1999).]

 

doesnt matter what it costs now when it gets more popular its cost will go down. technology also developes generations every ten yrs. regular rocker arms are already outdated as a rotating one is being tested now. its round and spins instead of going up and down.

 

seacrow, chevy has a 6 liter, so how about a 6.1 or 6.3l?

------------------
Fast46Triton

1999 Ford F150 XLT Supercab, Shortbed, 4x2, 4 wheel disc brakes/4 wheel Anti-Lock Brakes, Cloth Seats, Amazon green, 16" All season tires, Soft Tonneau Cover, CD Player, 4.6 liter Triton V8, 3:55 ls, towing package, 4 speed auto, K&N Airfilter
Future Mods:
1)Superchip
2)Airbox Mod
3)Gibson Exhaust

 

Why not bring the flat head back as well while your at. The 302 was a great engine but its time to move on to the future of engines with over head cams you can get more power and it can handle more revs and it also gets better gas mileage than the old push rod type.

[This message has been edited by hmustang (edited 10-03-1999).]

 

hmustang

Where do you get that from? GM's new pushrod engines get the best fuel economy over Ford and Dodge. The 5.3l gets 15 city and 18 highway. The people that own them are actually getting closer to 17 city and 19 highway.

Don't knock the pushrod engine. It is still
delivers more hp and torque per cubic inch displacement, is solid as they come, has years of technology behind it, and lasts longer than overhead cam engines.

I am not knocking the oh cam engine, but its still too new in a truck engine to make the claims you make.

my peace.

 

With the exception of our trucks the overhead cam actually produces more HP per cubic inch.
ex: my 1.6L Honda (100cu in) produces 150HP thats 1.5hp per cubic inch.
Show me 1 stock pushrod engine that will do that.(supercharged doesn't count)
Its a pity our trucks get so poor Cu in/HP ratings compared to most modern engines.
330cu in/260 hp less than 1 hp per cu in.
I think the reason we have so poor cu/HP ratings is our engines are tuned for torque not HP.
Oh yea about reliability the japs have been using OHC engines for quite some time and they are some of the most reliable engines.
Heck my Nissan had OHC and went 106000 miles without any problems not even a water pump alternator starter nothing!

[This message has been edited by 54regcab (edited 10-04-1999).]

 

So why did you buy a ford then? I'm not knocking Ohc engines, but I agree with Basscat, the pushrod engines have been around forever now, they're perfected for the most part and they can make some serious horsepower. Maybe not directly from the factory, but most any small block v8 can obviously be turned into a serious powerhouse! I agree that the gas mileage isn't the greatest, but that's what you have to accept when you buy a truck. Also, yeah a honda can rev make 150hp with 1.6 liters, but look how high it's reving! Those babies redline in the 8's! The higher the rev, the more wear the engine sees. I'll never buy anything other than an american V8. That's just my point of view.

Mike

------------------
97 Bright Red, S/C, Off Road XLT, 4.6, 5speed, 3.55 LS.
Sunvisor, Bug shield, Nerf Bars, Leer Cap (for winter), Flowmaster 40 series, Airbox mods, K&N, Eclipse Stereo.

 

I opened this topic for answers, not to start a war. So please keep it cool

------------------
Fast46Triton

1999 Ford F150 XLT Supercab, Shortbed, 4x2, 4 wheel disc brakes/4 wheel Anti-Lock Brakes, Cloth Seats, Amazon green, 16" All season tires, Soft Tonneau Cover, CD Player, 4.6 liter Triton V8, 3:55 ls, towing package, 4 speed auto, K&N Airfilter
Future Mods:
1)Superchip
2)Airbox Mod
3)Gibson Exhaust

 

I bought a Ford because it was IMO the best of the full size trucks.
I drove all 3 full size trucks before deciding and when I drove my F150 I knew it was coming home with me.
Yes you do have to rev the heck out of the Honda to get the ponies out of it but a small 4cyl is designed for that.
The torque of the Honda is could be a lot better especially after driving a V8.
It's hard to beat that grunt that only a V8 can give you.
As far as a long lasting motor Hondas last a long,long time.
If you don't belive me pick up an issue of consumer reports and see how well the Honda does in reliabilty.
If you want to use Ford power in the comparision how about a Cobra's HP to cu in ratio?

 

My I shed some light????????????Ford always seems to be a step ahead of the rest. They were the first to offer the 3door super cab. The first to offer an air bag shut off on the front of the passenger side. The first to offer the sohc engine. All have followed suit. Except GM engines! Sure they have good engines but rest assured they will offer a sohc later. The sohc has less moving parts and can procuce more hp per ci than a pushrod motor. All due respect to Bass Cat but the 4.6 sohc has as much hp as the 95 351V8 did. AND it is only 281 ci!!!!!!!!!!!! They like to rev! No question about that. But along with the high capacity oil pump and the 6 qt oil capacity with low friction enternals the Triton family of engines were designed to the 150,000 mile life expectancy. Some have seen 300,000 miles!............................. I may work for Ford but do you folks think I am NUTS????????????????????

------------------
97 F-150 4.6 auto, 4x2, 3.55 LS, trailer tow pkg, Air box modification with K&N, Dynomax Super Turbo exhaust.
Oh yeah, it's Oxford White with crome wheels, Legacy shell & custom grill, mlaugh-Meridian, Idaho.

 

Looks to me like the "lowly" 4.6L used in the Expedition makes more HP (240@4750) than the 5.0 (215@4200) still being used in the 4 door Explorer. It also makes more torque (293@3500 vs 288@3300).

All this while having 21 fewer "cubes".

I think pushrods are like all metal trucks- gone forever.

Neal


------------------
1997 4x4 Expedition- 4.6L, true dual exhaust w/glass-packs, K&N air filter, SuperChip, airbox mods, Edelbrock shocks, 285/75R16 BFG ATs, Optima "T-Bone" wheels, and Clarion In-dash CD player. Just added Smitty Bilt push bars and nerf bars!!

1993 4x2 F150 Reg. Cab LWB- 5.0L, cat-back dual exhaust w/glass-packs, K&N air filter, Superchip, fresh paint, and Line-X bedliner.
http://members.visualcities.com/NoMo

 

Had a 1987 with the 5.8 engine. Let me tell you, the 1997 with the 4.6L engine was a hell of a lot better truck. Not only was it cheaper running, but it performed better and even towed the same weight better. It was simply amazing to see such a small engine perform so much better than the 5.8.

Going back to a pushrod engine is a step backwards.