actually, I heard, either somewhere here, or somewhere else on the net, that GM has a half-ton Crew Cab ready for production, that will have a 5.5 ft bed.
Dodge still has no plans for a CC in the Ram.
lvstang i'm not sure i understand what you mean by there is no comparison between OHC and pushrod. OHC is more complex to design mechanically, and gives you different options for timing and combustion, but what you do with that is the level of technology in my opinion. In my opinion, the GM Vortec is "higher" tech than the Ford with the special designed intake, reduced internal friction, distributorless ignition, and of course, oil monitoring system, and coolant loss-run mode. The fact that they use pushrods makes the engine less complicated, but no less high tech.
and what about the results? the GM motors pull a load just as fast as the Fords, and get 2 to 3 mpg better when doing it. I'd rather have something simple and reliable if it performs just as well as something confusing and complex.
To make sure we are comparing apples to apples, we'd have to know the specifics of the Ford you owned compared to the Chevy you own when you mention the poor performance of the Ford when towing vs the Chevy towing the same load. Assuming both trucks are 1/2 ton supercabs, we need more specifics such as engine size, axle ratio, manual or auto trans, etc. Towing a light 4k load with a similarly equiped Chevy or Ford 1/2 ton should result in almost equal performance.
A few questions and points: Vortec? Wasn't that engine originally designed for car use as well??
Nascar? Yeah, I'm a huge fan but would anyone here dare say that use of carbs are superior to fuel injection? Yes in racing for adjustments but NO for practical on-road use.
Chevy redesigned entire truck? Sure, after 12 years or so I guess it's time for a change. What did you expect them to do? Dodge overhauled in 94 and Ford in 97. That was a "forced" move by reluctant GM designers.
Diesels only matter to commecial users? Huh? Has anyone noticed the multitude of private owners of diesel trucks lately? GM really fell asleep on that one.
Push-rods are fine motors for their time. The more refinements come through for OHC engines and soon you won't see a stock engine without it.
GM simply has the latest design and it is a good one. Dominant? Hardly the case since Ford would be dropping 25-30% in sales if that was true. I still remember all of the crying about how stagnant the chevy line was last year and how they'll never sell trucks again. I never endorsed them but I knew that GM wouldn't quit competing. It reminds me of Dallas Cowboy fans when they got very quiet during the beginning of this decade. Of course, win a few games and that stupid chanting of "America's team" comes back in the forefront. I guess GM's bandwagon still has room left......
My comment on no comparison is simply based on performance capability which I do believe Ford is not utilizing right now for whatever reasons. Ford has every feature you mentioned, distributorless ignition, coolant loss run mode etc. I think we said the same thing when you replied "what you do with that level of technology" OHC has much more performance capability just because of the room for different port designs and less friction. I will repeat myself that Ford is simply keeping pace, except for the Navigator motor. In the future you will see the Ford motor maintain its level of performance AND meet the ever tightening emissions requirements. Something that will be harder to do with a pushrod design. Z, I thought we already discussed this. Bore and stroke, cam profile, intake runner length are the factors for torque. Cam placement has NOTHING to do with a motors ability to produce torque. I think you are confusing a OHC motors ability to rev at a much higher RPM due to less moving parts and a more stable valve train. Ford is not utilizing the high rev capability in its truck motors(cam profiles geared for low end torque) You are correct about drag racings professional classes but you are talking about years of research and development for 4 to 7 second runs at insane RPM's and sometimes total rebuilds between rounds. Besides if you stuff 30+ pounds of additional air pressure into anything it will haul [non-permissible content removed] even if just for a moment. I stand by my statement that the OHC design has more potential and is a more technical motor than a pushrod design. Whether that's good or bad is obviously only our opinions. Take care all.
and on and on. Chevy has historically been very slow to catch up and make improvements. But, lately they have caught up and surpassed in many lines of cars and trucks and the Sierra/Silverado is a good example. For the record the C&D report had similar gear ratio's and transmissions and the Chevy actually towed 800 lbs. more and still was able to easily whip the V-10. I like the concept of a V-10, but there is a lot of room for improvement. It amazing to me because the Ford has over 400 ft. lbs. of torque and the Chevy only 355, but tests proved it.
I also think OHC engines will eventually take over, but as long as a pushrod engine is able to keep pace with it, it won't happen.
I agree with Rocles that GM dropped the ball on the diesel's, but they can only do so many things at once. I like the way the did it though because there are clearly more 1/2 and 3/4 light dutys sold than HD's so make a good light duty and then come out with the HD's. Again, I think that this new HD will set the new standard for other to be measured - time will tell. Hopefully though they'll stay on top of this and not wait another million years to make improvements.
Everything mentioned here, even my posts, is pure opinion and preference. I have not seen facts by either side to "prove" one better than the other. Each have their goods and bads. Thats all the more I am going to say. This is a no win debate for both sides.
Take care. Its only Wednesday eve and I am going to have a couple beers.
I thought Zbad was talking about his own Ford and boat, not the C&D article. I haven't seen the C&D article. If the tow load in the C&D article was only in the 4-5,000 pound range, both trucks can easily handle that load. I think you would see the torque advantage of the V-10 when you tow a 8-10,000 pound trailer through the mountains. But like I said, Chevy engines have not been the limiting factors in their towing limitations, with the exception of the diesel.
I've got the V-10, and I'm sure most 1/2 tons with a V-8 can dust me. At the same time, I'm sure not hurting for power, even light to light. I've got awesome passing power in the 60-75 range when I need to make quick lane changes.
I found an article on the Banks performance enhancers that I found kind of interesting. Their least expensive Stinger system appears to be a combo of ram air and cat back exhaust system. The price for this option is $500-$600. The full Power Pak is closer to $1,500. My guess is installation will add about $400-$500 to either price. The article is at:
Someone stated that the overhead cams do not put out alot of torque and low rpms. 99 ford 5.4 345 ft.lbs. @ 2300 rpms 260 hp 99 chevy 5.3 315 ft.lbs @ 4000 rpms 270 hp 98 chevy 5.7 330 ft.lbs @ 2800 rpms 255 hp Who makes the torque down low. Might I ad the 5.4 makes 315 ft.lbs @1500 rpms and 315 at 4500 rpms, so from 1500-4500 it is making more torque than the 5.3 anywhere in its powerband. Also when put on the dyno Ford stays closer to its numbers while chevy either overated the 5.3 or they have a major loss in the drivetrain. OHCs are the future, ford is only tapping in to the power. Ford 5.4s are outrunning and towing the 5.3s. For 2000 ford improved the 6.8. so it should be as quick as the 6.0. For everyday towing the 6.8 will do better but when racing the 6.0 revs up in to its 4000-5000 rpm powerband and goes.
Yet another dreaming Ford enthusiast. What you don't put here is that the flat torque curve of the 5.3l is 300 lbs at about 2,300 rpm to 315 lbs at 4000 rpm. Ford owners love to leave this little tid bit of info out of the equation. The Ford 5.4l has 345 lbs (at least on paper. Could be a bloated figure like the cobra) at 2,300 rpm, but at 3,200 rpm QUICKLY declines. Where is the useful torque at mid rpm range?? Thats right, it doesn't exist. I congratulate Ford for being able to pull a low end torque as they do from an ohc design that normally does not reach any real useable torque until the higher rpms. However, the pushrod engine has a more useable torque across the WHOLE RPM BAND.
Again, the Ford owners mis the boat and try to overcome by marketing specs. Nice try though.
Even Fords own torque curves show that the torque declines after 3,200 rpm on the 5.4l. Their specs do not show near the torque that you claim at 4000-4500 rpm. Where did you dream those figures?
I agree that the V10 has more pulling torque on paper, but even with 2 fewer cylinders, the 6.0l is doing as much or better than the 6.8l V10 and with better fuel economy. Anytime a V8 can even do as much as "keep up" with almost a full liter larger displacement truck, there has to have been something done right. I guess now is the point where Ford owners start whining about how much heavier the V10 trucks are and thus why the V8 kicks its butt in all the tests.
I've never debated this with you because I've never had the actual figures you just quoted. But are you saying the Ford peaks at 3200 rpm and the chev at 4000? If you are you obviously don't know the difference between midrange and top end. It seems with normal gearing 3200 rpm would put you at about 90 mph. 4000 would put you at over 100 mph. While I rarely tow at 90 I've never towed at 100. Seems to me using your own figures the torque is right were it should be on the Ford, between 2000 and 3000 rpm. Please look at your tach the next time you're cruising down the highway, bet you it's between 1800 and 2500 rpm. 4000 rpm is not midrange, sorry. For the 100th time please stop on the OHC design. IT has NOTHING to do with a motors ability to produce torque. I've also agreed with the 6.0 being a better performer than the V10 in past posts. But just like diesel motors with their prodigious torque they usually aren't able to out accelerate much but don't bet against them with a full load. I don't believe the V10 was meant to be a drag racer. Please stop nitpicking on the'99 Cobra. The '96, '97, '98 performed as advertised it was during a design change on the '99 something went awry. Much like you claim GM will figure out the vibration problems Ford has also recalled EVERY 99 Cobra for upgrades. Remember our deal now. Take it easy
My main point of all that Lvstang, is that the 5.3l has 300 lbs of torque at 2,300 rpm and then 315 at about 2,500 rpm. That means that the 5.3l has peak torque from 2,500 rpm to 4000 rpm. What all the Ford enthusiasts want everyone to believe is that the 5.3l is weak in torque in the low end. That just isn't true. The torque specs are barely below Fords (claimed torque) and at almost the same start points. However, the Fords peak of 345 lbs declines rapidly after 3,200 rpm where the 5.3l continues into 4000 rpm. I agree that if you were to be continually at 4000 rpm you would be cruising at speeds that are not feasible, especially with a load. However, there is the throttle position / rpm / torque to consider. When passing or when going up hills, it is very frequent for ANY truck towing a load to hit 4000 rpm as it downshifts, etc. The Ford doesn't have that torque for passing or for going up steep grades, etc. at highway speeds. THAT is what I refer to. That is also why I had to stand on my 98 Fords accelerator on the highway to get even mild increases in acceleration, loaded or unloaded.
We both know that when towing a decent size load, NEITHER truck is running in overdrive under 2,000 rpm. Usually the truck has overdrive disabled at least on the steep grades and such. This is where the GM 5.3l clearly has more torque. For the Ford to have the same momentum to go up an equal grade, it would have to get a running start as it will quickly lose momentum and power against the 5.3l.
I did not pull those figures out of a hat. I got the torque specs right off of Ford's web site and off their marketing brochure. Even at peak torque, the Ford has very little noticeable advantage. Where torque is desparately needed on the highway when going up grades and passing, the Ford does not have as much as the 5.3l.
Let us not also forget transmission gearing and drive axle gearing. The transmission gearing on the 5.3l more than makes up for any lack of torque in comparison to the Ford 5.4l. The Ford transmissions just don't cut it, which again, is why neither my 4.5l or a buddy of mines 5.4l could tow my 4000 lb bass boat worth a damn. My 5.3l pulls it up the same grades and passes on the highway like its not even behind me. The seat of the pants feel and real world towing experience sais it all, regardless of whatever tests or marketing specs Ford throws out.
I remember my deal. These guy's just need to be 100% about the specs they throw out, not just the ones that benefit their point.
I really don't hate Ford trucks. I just know that if at all, the torque and hp is not as advantagous as Ford owners like to make claim to and it is not in areas most useful to tow with. It seems to be the only focal point a Ford owner makes to claim superiority over GM. Its just not true.
Are "thedeerhunter" and "ZBAD71" the same person? If so--what's going on???
"It seems to be the only focal point a Ford owner makes to claim superiority over GM" --Huh??
Most of the Ford owners here are only defending their engines since Chevy guys only make that the single issue between trucks. The major gripe around here is between the 5.4 and the 5.3 motors in torque figures. Read the posts in this topic. Hell, usually it's some Chevy fan talking about how Ford loses everywhere hands down! Let's face it-these motors are almost identical.
What came first, the chicken or the egg? I've never claimed superiority one way or the other. In fact the GM motor of choice for me would be the 6.0l. I've just felt compelled to defend the 5.4 when people bash it when it seems that it is equal or in some tests more capable than the 5.3. I'll admit I see the Ford supporters pointing out the torque specs but it seems it's after someone claims how superior the GM motor is. I'm glad you're still happy with your truck in spite of the many problems you've posted about your dealer and otherwise. see ya.
Sorry about the double identity. I let my bro in law use my computer and the autologin didn't pick up my login. I didn't realize until I came back.
TheDeerHunter as mentioned above was non other than the dreaded ZBAD71. You all are still despising the same person! ha ha!
I don't think the 5.4l is terrible. I just know that from towing with both, the 5.3l tows much better than the 5.4l. That is just honest truth. I can admit if an engine or truck make is better at towing or some other function than my preference. I know from towing with both, the 5.4l has no advantage over the 5.3l, regardless of the tests or marketing specs. You can tell the difference just by driving and towing with both.
I would say the same thing even if I owned the Ford 5.4l. The 5.3l just tows better. The engine is smoother. The transmission shifts crisper and more responsively (no sloppy upshifts or upshift delays). The Z71 package has less squat from tongue weight than the Ford offroad package. I don't even know what the tests show, but I feel that the Silverado brakes quicker and smoother. I will admit that I have questioned the Silverado's ABS system a couple of times. The technology in the engine cooling system, oil system, chassis, wiring, the whole truck is just so much more technically advanced.
Lvstang, I know the last sentence of your post was a slam, but if you read any posts I have made about my truck, I have not had "many" problems. I have had two problems and they have both been rectified. Both were extremely minor. 1. an engine ping that was resolved by a computer code upgrade and better 87 octane gas (Texaco). 2. A windshield noise from a loose windshield molding that was resolved by a little bit of silicone sealant under the molding. I admit my dealer has not been very helpful, but I can name MANY Ford dealers that have been even worse, not to mention the useless Ford Zone Reps. The Ford Zone Reps only help the dealers that won't help you! I have gone to a second dealer who treats me like a million bucks. They go well above the expected. Although I have not had my truck given this treatment yet, this service department even washes the trucks they service in their own wash bay after servicing. I don't know of any Ford dealerships that do that. Your slam was a nice try, but is not relevant to me at all.
Have we ever heard what axle ratios were used pulling that 4,000 bass boat? If the comparison is a 3.55 or less on the Ford and the 3.73 on a Chevy, that's not apples to apples. Also, it sounds like zbad had the 4.6L Ford (which appears to have been the 4.51, since that is what he mentions). The 4.6L is not going to handle a load as well as the 5.3.
My wimpy 99 V-10 drops down out of OD when passing someone doing 50 and quickly accelerates through 70mph before I complete the pass and duck back into my lane in front of the slower traffic on winding two lane hwys. Of course, that is with my slide-in camper in the bed, so my total rig weighs close to 12,000 pounds when I'm making that pass. A lack of passing power when carrying a load is not a weakness of the V-10. I can only imagine how the higher powered 2000 V-10 performs the same function.
For the record, I've got the 4.30 axle ratio and am turning about 2400 rpms at 70mph in OD.
Brutus brought up a good point:rear ratio. What was yours on the F-150 Zbad?
One comment about dealerships: They're like people--some suck and some don't. I've dealt with many dealers of different brands over the years buying trucks and they ALL VARY. I've had great Ford dealers and crappy Chevy ones--vice versa.
I have mentioned before that the axle ratio was a 3:55, but I also mentioned that I pulled the same boat and trailer with a buddy's 5.4l ext cab 4X4 with 3:73 gear. So I am talking apples to apples and oranges to oranges.
My Silverado also has a 3:73 gear diff. I am not talking about the V10 in this debate. I know well enough that the V10 is no sloucher. I never said it was a bad truck either. The only reason I don't respect it any more than I do is because the 6.0l V8 can at the very least "keep up" with the Ford V10 and do it with less fuel. I have not driven a V10 extensively enough to make a truly experienced decision. My dad's wife drives one. I am not sure what the gear ratio on it is, but my 1 ton with 454 seems to pull a loaded trailer much better and it has 226,XXX miles on it! Now, granted, it does not do it with better fuel economy, but still an almost ready for replacement 454 still out-tows a new Ford V10. I don't have much respect for it. All the tests show the 6.0l to out-perform it. Now, I will be the first to say that I don't hold much respect for the magazine tests as they are usually paid off some way or another or persuaded by bias or brand loyalty, but com'on most ALL the tests are showing it.
Again, its just my opinion and my preference. I may be a Ford owner again someday. I don't buy from loyalty alone. I buy the best product for what it will be used for. I think I did that buying the Silverado over the F150 hands down.
i would like to iterate a point Brutus kinda made. the advantage of the GM motors is having mid to high rpm torque for passing and acceleration situations. the ford v10 has a very flat torque curve, just like the GM motors do. it carries 90% of its torque well thru the upper rpm ranges. thats why in a comparison between the ford and dodge v10s, the ford outpulled the dodge by utilizing the wide rpm range.
like brutus said, even a large engine will downshift when pulling a load uphill or passing. yes, the ford has 5-10% more torque at low rpms, but you only notice this if you are pulling up slight grades. under extreme conditions, ALL engines will downshift, except for diesels. and when they downshift, they will be in the 3000-4000 rpm range, where it is nice to have 95%-100% of the peak torque. thats what makes the GM motors tow great, drive one and you will see. the fords aren't 'bad' at all, they just don't have that 'passing power' when they downshift like the GMs do.
Overhead cams have nothing to do with the torque output at rpm ranges. don't know who made that up, but its mechanically not true. the ford is a very capable motor, the it really matches well against the GM counterpart, but not the 6.0. i don't know why people compare the 6.0 to the v10, the v10 has substantially more low and high end torque. the 6.0 is a powerful light duty puller, but for loads over 8000#s, you really need the torque of the v10.
the ford 5.4 pulls great at low rpms, lower speeds. the GM pulls great at higher rpms, when accelerating or passing at higher speeds. start both of them from a stop, and they'll reach the same point at about the same time, just in different ways. so which would you like? C&D website used to have a pulling comparison between the two, and the zero-60 acceleration under full load was very close: 17.0 sec for the Chevy, 17.1 sec for the Ford. for me personally, i like the GMs because of the simpler design, and better mileage. but many many folks like to see that tachometer stay lower, and don't care about the mpg diff. Ford for them.
There was some discussion a couple dozen posts back about staying on the cutting edge technologically speaking. I mentioned some plans Ford had concerning a smaller diesel. I found a little more info about it. It's farther along than I thought. It's a 4.5L V-6 diesel that will be made for the 6000-8500 GVWR vehicles. Initial estimates are that it will have 345 ft-lbs of torque. It's scheduled to be introduced in the 2002 Expedition and then in the Econoline and F-Series F-150 and F-250LD. There are no plans to introduce it in the Ranger and there was no mention of the Explorer either. Ford expects to sell 50,000 of these smaller diesels in 2003.
The bigger surprise to me was that Ford is planning to introduce its 2nd generation Powerstroke around the same time to replace the 7.3L Powerstroke. The new diesel will be a 6.0L and is expected to get a little higher mpg. The engine will be 200 pounds lighter than the current 7.3L and will have 305hp and 550 ft-lbs of torque.
"ALL engines will downshift, except for diesels. and when they downshift, they will be in the 3000-4000 rpm range, where it is nice to have 95%-100% of the peak torque. thats what makes the GM motors tow great, drive one and you will see. the fords aren't 'bad' at all, they just don't have that 'passing power' when they downshift like the GMs do."
This has been the point I have tried to make and may not have done a very good job at it. Thank you for saying so precisely my point. I don't think the Ford trucks are terrible trucks. I drove them for 15 years. However, I don't like the new model with ohc. I am not a mechanical expert so all I can associate with what changed is ohc design. I apologize if this is not what has brought on the undesireable change in the Ford powertrain. I just know that the 5.3l in my Silverado tows better for the type of towing I use my truck for - relatively light towing (4k lbs + gear) at highway speeds and up inclines and passing slower traffic. My driving experience tells me the 5.3l does it much better for me.
As far as the V10, yeah, maybe I do compare the V10 to the 6.0l too much. They really are not in the same class of engine. Like you said, the 6.0l has a lot of power for light duty towing. However, when going up against the heavy duty use that the V10 is used for, it has still proven "capable". Now, I would not want to use a 6.0l engine to tow heavy loads over 8k lbs frequently. My only point is that it CAN do it and has out-performed the V10 in many tests. Thats not to say that I feel the 6.0l can "replace" the V10's capability, but that the 6.0l is just an extraordinarily robust V8 and not the target of ridicule that the Ford owner likes to portray.
My only other arguement is that the V10 does not provide a benefit that, to me, is worth buying it. If that V10 provided a "significant" difference in power, even with it being a gas hog, I would be more impressed. However, the V10 is not really a "class of it's own engine". It does not stand out in the crowd of gas truck engines, in my opinion. In my opinion, it should be a real power monger having the extra displacement and two extra cylinders. More like a competitor to the Powerstroke. A gas engine that is comparitively capable to a diesel. That is what I would picture the V10 to provide. I just have not seen anything that impressive from it. I would buy the Powerstroke over the V10, even as a daily driver. Again, not saying its not a capable engine, but the 6.0l is just as capable. I just wouldn't want to subject the 6.0l to that kind of work on a daily basis. That is the only benefit that I feel the V10 has over it. It can do the work a little easier than the 6.0l does.
Again, just my opinion. It has only taken one 1/2 Silverado to change the opinion of a 15 year Ford owner. That's saying "something".
To me that would not be something of any interest. I would prefer a gas engine and the gas engines already provide the torque and hp that you show this new diesel to provide.
Diesels are higher maintenance and cost, i.e. more expesive oil changes and regular upkeep, are a pain in the tail during the cold climates, etc. They last longer than gas engines and have some other benefits but overall are not a good alternative to the light duty truck owner like myself.
Whats up with Fords stereos? Sad but true, GM does it again with better sound and looks. Whay does Ford insist on ugly sound systems that dont look like a part of the truck? GM blows Ford away with not only the new engine but with options as well. Yet I am looking for a new truck and feel drawn to the Ford for some odd reason. The GM seats are far more inviting and look like it. Ford, plain Jane and unappealing.
Zbad and other Chevy guys, Have any of you guys ever really checked you gas mileage by how many miles you actually drove divided by how much fuel you burned? NOT what your odometer read. You know, according to mileage markers or something. Because it is a fact that Chevy has had a very bad reputation of the speedometer being off by 10%-15%. This has two effects. First, it makes you think your truck really runs better. Second, it makes you think you are getting 2-3 miles per gallon better mileage. Just thought I'd ask. A buddy of mine in his 6 cylinder Chevy with a five speed, got 20-21 flat out on Kansas highways. I get that in my 5.4 auto (with my foot in it).
Oh yeah Zbad, About this totaly awesome frame under the Chevy, everything I have heard claims it is the strongest frame ever put under a Chevy. We both know that's not saying much. Those Z-Frame's would bend if you hit a speed bump too fast. Seriously, how do they match up with frames from other companies, not just compared to themselves? I am asking here. I really don't know.
Your theory of the gas mileage thing is reaching, REALLY REACHING. I think you are messing up with your calculation of your 5.4l's gas mileage. NOBODY but you is getting that kind of fuel economy. If Ford owners [non-permissible content removed] about anything, poor fuel economy is the #1 thing on the list. Most of the 5.4l owners are getting 15-16 tops with a light foot. I was lucky to get 14-15 mpg with the 4.6l 3:55 diff F150 I had on its best day.
As far as the frame of the new Silverado, it is the strongest put under ANY 1/2 ton truck yet to date. I don't have a clue where you pull your data about the Chevy having a weak frame. If you go to a reputable body shop, they will tell you that very few Chevy trucks are "totalled" after a serious accident that bends the frame, because the GM trucks frames are the only ones rigid enough to straighten and hold up afterwards. Also, the easiest to make almost 100% "true" again. If a Ford gets hit and it bends the frame, its history for two reasons #1. Its frame is not as rigid and usually can't be made "true" again to a reliable point. #2. The Ford's don't hold their value near as well and usually it costs more to fix it than to just total it out. That is a fact. Check it out if you like.
The information is indeed out there - Trailer Life magazine is one example. There are advertisements for ready-made kits for GM trucks to strengthen their weak frames. They are called something like Frame Kits (I can't remember the exact name). They consist of strengtheners that bolt onto the frame in critical areas to help make them sturdier. Check it out!
I think we're getting a little hung up on the extra two cylinders for the V-10. It's a replacement engine for the 460 V-8. Ford found a way to produce a more efficient engine than the 460 that provides more hp and torque with less cubic inches and it gets better gas mileage. To top it off, they can make it for it alot less than the 460 because it shares a high percentage of it's parts with the 5.4L. The 460 required it's own assembly line. When they designed the Triton line, they had the V-10 in mind.
The comparable Chevy engine is the 454. At this point, Chevy has been able to make enough changes to the engine throughout the years to get more efficiency out of the engine, so they have no need to develop a V-10. If they ever reach limitations with the V-8 design, they may eventually develop a V-10, but they're not at that point yet. The Ford V-10 is not some monster engine designed to blow away the 454. It's just the newest competitor by Ford.
As far as the V-10 being a gas hog, people are averaging 14 on the hwy at 70ish with the 3.73 axle ratio. My 92 with the 351 and 3.55 axle ratio only got 14-15 on the hwy, and it didn't have near the power or towing ability as the V-10. That's progress. Even if the 454 gets better mpg, I would find it pretty hard to believe that it gets much better than 14-15 on the hwy at 70 with the same axle ratio.
Most of the truth behind the strongest frame can be found in the GVWR, tow rating, and GCWR. I don't have the figures for the 1/2 tons in front of me, but I will guess that those figures are almost identical for similarly equiped Silverado and F-150 trucks. A good comparison would be to compare a 5.3L Extended Cab Silverado with a 3.73 axle ratio to a 5.4L Extended Cab F-150 with a 3.73 axle ratio. If those numbers turn out to be equal (or very close), there is not any real significance in the differences between the frames since they can do the same job.
I have the CD/Cassette stereo in my Ford and it plays louder than I need it to play it without distorting, and I do occasionally like to hear my music at a pretty decent volume. However, I lost the desire to make sure the surrounding cars at a stop light knew my musical tastes (and bass and treble preferences) when I sold my 70 GTO back when I was 19....many moons ago.
I will get an exact publication if you desire but in most off road magazines there is a "fix" for chevy frames to keep them from cracking at the steering box. The ad is usually a 1/8 page ad in the back of the mags. Now to recollection. Even though I haven't seen it for a while there used to be a fix for the chevy hoods too. It seemed they tended to buckle upwards in the middle and had to be reinforced. Can't debate one way or the other on the new frames, I suppose time will tell, but there was an improvement needed. See ya.
never heard of a frame fix, but i do know that right between the cab and bed on the C/K frames there was 'collapse' point. when i was rear ended, the adjuster took careful look at that spot to make sure it didn't buckle, he said it was pretty common.
brutus, i don't think you can look at tow and GC ratings to determine absolute frame strength. there's too, too many other factors that are limiting those numbers: tranny, rear end, springs, tires. i would say that out of those four + frame, frame would be the strongest link on any vehicle.
I'll add 2 cents worth... There is a "kit" for fixing old GM frames with stress cracks where the steering box attaches. I had one on a 74 1/2 ton Suburban. Seems that with 100k plus miles, a crack would sometimes develop between the bolts.
Just so you know I'm not GM bashing... I sure do like my new black 2000 GMC Extended Cab Stepside Z71...
HMMM! Well, I guess I can't deny it. Many here have had the same story and some even GM owners. I have never heard any frame problems and for 15 years I was the blacksheep of the family for owning a Ford truck. My whole family has been die hard GM owners from my Great Grandparents on down the line. Never have I heard anything about weak GM frames. Can't be too much of an issue or more people would be mentioning it. I "DO" know that what I said about the body shops and GM and Ford trucks. Most of the time, the insurance companies want to "fix" bent frames on the GM trucks because they hold their value so well. It's cheaper to fix one than to total one. It has to almost be a hit at all angles before they will total a GM truck. The Fords get totalled very easily because its more cost effective to total the truck than it is to fix a damaged one. That is a fact. I used to be a licensed insurance salesman when I was going to college. I talked to appraisers/adjusters daily. Any reputable insurance company will tell you this is true.
Off this subject somewhat, I thought it was very interesting what I got from the news last night. They had police report statistics of what vehicles get stolen the most often. I don't recall the whole list, but GM trucks were #3, Ford trucks were #7. I am a little embarrassed for all big three trucks to report that the number 1 vehicle stolen was the Honda Accord, 2nd most stolen, the Toyota Camry.
I noticed there were no heavy duty dually trucks on the list. I will sleep better.
In Southern CA and Dallas, I found the Club to be an adequate deterrent. The way around a Club is to take a hacksaw to the steering wheel, bu if your Silverado or F-150 has a Club, the thief is more likely to just move to the next truck that doesn't have one. As for alarms, they went off so regularly that people often ignored them.
for the 460 V-8 as someone pointed out earlier, having had a 460 as a company truck. But, as ZBad pretty much said, there is still much room for improvement. Don't know anything about the new Silverado frams, but can only imagine that they have improved upon them. None of our company truck have ever had any fram problems and we do a lot of towing, but generally don't carry a whole lot in the bed... Take care..
Zbad, I was not reaching about the FACT that Chevy's have speedo's that are off by 10-15%. You did NOT answer my question. Have you or any other Chevy guys checked your fuel mileage by a map or mileage markers, etc?
Frames: You mention you don't know where I get my information, yet I offered no info, I was asking a question about the new frames. The old, and I mean pre "Z-Frame" Chevy's, I'm sure were very tough, but when they redesigned in, what was it, '88, that new "Z-Frame was very weak, especially at the point between the cab and box, Cdean mentioned it. I don't know what body shops you are talking to, but I've had personal experience with many a bent frame. Yes Ford frames will bend, especially at the front, in front of the cross member. It is designed to bend to give a longer moment during impact. Many cars are designed with this in mind. Of course the four corners are the easiest to bend, they are also the easiest to fix. I have never seen, although it can and does happen, a Ford with a bent frame under the cab or under the box. From what I have seen it would take a horrendous crash to cause this. Mileage: I have a F-150, short wide, auto, with towing package, 3.55 gears. It will get 20 miles to the gallon on the highway every time. I took a trip to West Virginia, close to 20 hours from here, it got 20, almost on the nose, every time. That's going 70-80 mph. Now around town, with my foot in it, I admit it only gets 14-16.
One more thing: Have you had any personal experience with a new, I mean, '99-'00, Ford 5.4? It seems you always compare your old 4.6 vs. the new Chevy 5.3. A comparison between the '97-'98 5.4 vs. '99-'00 5.4 is not even close. The new heads make these totally different engines. It might surprise you.
Brutus, I'm glad you mention extended cab, 4X4, with 3.73 comparisons, check out Truck Trend online. It pits the Dodge, Chevy, and Ford against each other. The Ford beats the Chevy in acceleration empty and loaded. The dyno numbers are interesting, especially since the show RWHP. Zbad likes to talk about how at higher RPM's the Chevy, with its wider flatter torque curve, has more hoss, but you can see that even at the point where the Chevy has its peak torque, the Ford is higher. The Ford torque also REMAINS higher throughout the test range of RPMS until 5000, even at 4500 the Ford has 24 ft.lbs. more. The Chevy's peak torque is around 221.7 and peak hp is around 182.8. Did I mention that was PEAK hp? Ford's 97-98 engines did die off significantly, but the new heads keep the powerband strong out a lot further. Oh yeah, the newest article in the October issue, with Toyota vs. Dodge vs. Ford vs. Chevy shows almost the same stats. I felt the most intersting was the fact that the Ford finished 3rd overall, even though it was the best at everything you get a truck for. Have fun everyone.
find that hard to believe. Not saying it can't happen, but I've owned many cars and trucks by Ford and Chevy and have never heard of this. I can't believe any company would do this and try to get away with it - just seems, as ZBad said, to be a stretch... Take care..
There is No negotiable difference in the frame quality between GM and Ford. Don't want to hear it. No way. There are no "facts" or "stories" out there unless they're completely fabricated. Don't claim "fact" and then challenge others to actually find out if true or not.
Give the torque stuff a rest. Its the same thing that Ford owners talk every time. Nothings changed. Nobody can make you Ford owners see anyting but the blue oval torque and hp specs and thats ok. You have chosen your make of truck. If you choose to be snowed by the specs, thats your preference. However, the tests are biased and the control groups they use are usually nothing in comparison to the test groups. They always test differently equipped trucks.
We have been over this a million times and cdean said it best and so.... I will leave it at that.
As far as the frames, I apologize if I presumed fact about one makes frame being weak. Like Rocles said, I didn't know either makes frames had ever been "weak". I do know that the new Silverado hydroformed frame is the strongest in 1/2 ton history. What I meant to elaborate, is it was "fact" that for insurance purposes, Fords generally are totalled when the frames are bent. The cash value of the truck is less than it would cost to repair. I know this to be true from 3 years in the insurance business.
Hope I didn't start another war here. I will admit that I don't know any facts about weak frames, etc. I do know the insurance business. GM owners always hate to hear that the frame was bent because they know they will be stuck with a truck that was fixed rather than totalled. Ford owners usually get a check rather quickly, hoping the owner will just let it slide, take the money and run.
there is error in the math for your mileage calculations. None of the 5,000 Ford owners on www.f150online.com have ever claimed anywhere near 20 mpg with the 5.4l, even cruising behind a tractor trailer all the way! Some have claimed 18 mpg, but based on my personal experience with the 4.6l (14-15 mpg combined and maybe 16 highway at best)and also a buddy's 5.4l who has never seen over 17 mpg on his many trips to Colorado or Arizona, I would definately say that 20 mpg shows something ary. The thousands of personal experiences kinda discredits the mileage you are getting. I am not discrediting you personally so please don't take it offesively. Something is just not right in your calculation or how you are tracking your mileage.
Talk about being snowed in by specs. Yes, tests are biased. That's why the Ford lost overall, after the subjective analysis. If the article is so biased, why didn't they run their dyno to show the Chevy to be far superior in hp and torque? Do you ever read entire posts or are you trying to dodge questions? Have you checked your mileage? Simple question. I have, I get up to 20 on the highway depending on length of trip. I get 14-16 in town. Of course in town I have to use my odometer to check, so it may not be as accurate as interstate travel. Have you driven a '99-'00 Ford 5.4? Simple question. Thanks for your answers.
I love it when everyone who disagrees with anyone else just says, oh, no way. I don't believe it. Never any evidence, no matter how weak or inconclusive, to support your opinions.
There ARE guys on F-150 online who get 20 out of a 5.4. Everyone of them, however, is set up just like me. 5.4, reg. cab, short bed, 3.55. None of the SC or 4X4 guys are getting 20. That's obvious. I would like to see the Chevy, 5.3, SC 4X4 that will get 20 with me driving it.
Nobody, including me wants to answer your questions or address the things that you bring up because the subject matter is exhausted in previous posts and people on "both sides" are tired of hearing about it. I don't know where you get these people getting 20 mpg with the 5.4l 4X4 Ext Cab trucks. I have visited that site since Dec 98 when I bought the F150 I "had". Nobody I have seen posts of have posted that kind of fuel economy. That seems to be the Ford owners biggest complaint and for a good reason. They ARE NOT getting 20 mpg. If your truck is, then you I would suggest you hold on to it till it rusts to the earth, because you have the only one that gets that kind of mileage.
And no, I have not driven a 99-y2k Ford. Why should I? I already drive the best truck on the road today.
I am not dodging your questions. You just are posting the same stuff we have all debated over and over and over again. Its always a torque/hp debate with Ford owners. Torque and hp is important, but so very insignificant between the two at the peak, and Ford lack's it in the upper ranges. Torque and hp makes up for about 1/10 of 1% of importance to make the best truck. Ok. If it makes you happy and feel better and if you will give the same topic debated to death a final rest, I will say the Ford has a torque advantage.
If you would read my posts rather than spouting off info you get from Chevy's homepage, you might realize that I never said anyone got 20 with an extended cab, or 4X4, let alone both. In fact, I said the exact opposite. Only guys with trucks similar to mine a quoting 20. Thank you for finally admitting Ford has more torque. The 99-00 models are a LOT LESS lacking in the upper RPM's. As a matter of fact, from what I have seen they are still on top up till about 5 grand. Actually, never mind those last two sentences, I don't want to get you started about the differences at higher RPM's. Later.
I did read a document from the Eaton Corp. which makes many automotive products that the frames on some GM trucks were actully getting bent during transit. I believe Quad touched on this subject in an earlier post. In their personal stress tests they felt that the older frames were stronger than the newer design. I am not making this bs up. And by the way I do not think I was suppsed to see this document.
"HP and torque make up 1/10 of 1% of the importance of a truck?"
Give me a break. I'll admit that it's a combination of factors that make up the importance of the truck. Raw hp and torque figures don't mean much until you see how they are distributed. Is the torque there when you need it most? Obviously, having a tranny and drivetrain that can handle the torque are important as is the suspension.
All of these factors are important and each one individually makes up a lot more than 1/10 of 1% of the importance. Unless, of course, you are just getting a pickup for appearance and to do occasional towing, which alot of people do. I've got no beef with people buying pickups simply because they like pickups. That's actually why most people buy pickups. You can tow a 4,000 pound boat with a V-6 Chevy Astro if you want. I'd definitely prefer a pickup to an Astro even if I wasn't towing anything.
However, for that segment of the pickup market that really needs the muscle, torque and hp and how are they are distributed is a lot more important than 1/10 of 1%.
i think you ARE reaching on the odometer 15% error. I HAVE checked mine vs mileage markers and other vehicles' ododmeters. in fact, i almost always check odometer vs mileage markers whenever i get out on the road. every GM that my family has owned has had dead on accurate odometer. when compared to other vehicles, maybe a .5% diff, and thats probably because of tires.
if they couldn't engineer an accurate odometer, how the hell do they build the rest of the truck...
Comments
Dodge still has no plans for a CC in the Ram.
lvstang
i'm not sure i understand what you mean by there is no comparison between OHC and pushrod. OHC is more complex to design mechanically, and gives you different options for timing and combustion, but what you do with that is the level of technology in my opinion. In my opinion, the GM Vortec is "higher" tech than the Ford with the special designed intake, reduced internal friction, distributorless ignition, and of course, oil monitoring system, and coolant loss-run mode. The fact that they use pushrods makes the engine less complicated, but no less high tech.
and what about the results? the GM motors pull a load just as fast as the Fords, and get 2 to 3 mpg better when doing it. I'd rather have something simple and reliable if it performs just as well as something confusing and complex.
To make sure we are comparing apples to apples, we'd have to know the specifics of the Ford you owned compared to the Chevy you own when you mention the poor performance of the Ford when towing vs the Chevy towing the same load. Assuming both trucks are 1/2 ton supercabs, we need more specifics such as engine size, axle ratio, manual or auto trans, etc. Towing a light 4k load with a similarly equiped Chevy or Ford 1/2 ton should result in almost equal performance.
Vortec? Wasn't that engine originally designed for car use as well??
Nascar? Yeah, I'm a huge fan but would anyone here dare say that use of carbs are superior to fuel injection? Yes in racing for adjustments but NO for practical on-road use.
Chevy redesigned entire truck? Sure, after 12 years or so I guess it's time for a change. What did you expect them to do? Dodge overhauled in 94 and Ford in 97. That was a "forced" move by reluctant GM designers.
Diesels only matter to commecial users? Huh? Has anyone noticed the multitude of private owners of diesel trucks lately? GM really fell asleep on that one.
Push-rods are fine motors for their time. The more refinements come through for OHC engines and soon you won't see a stock engine without it.
GM simply has the latest design and it is a good one. Dominant? Hardly the case since Ford would be dropping 25-30% in sales if that was true. I still remember all of the crying about how stagnant the chevy line was last year and how they'll never sell trucks again. I never endorsed them but I knew that GM wouldn't quit competing. It reminds me of Dallas Cowboy fans when they got very quiet during the beginning of this decade. Of course, win a few games and that stupid chanting of "America's team" comes back in the forefront. I guess GM's bandwagon still has room left......
Z, I thought we already discussed this. Bore and stroke, cam profile, intake runner length are the factors for torque. Cam placement has NOTHING to do with a motors ability to produce torque. I think you are confusing a OHC motors ability to rev at a much higher RPM due to less moving parts and a more stable valve train. Ford is not utilizing the high rev capability in its truck motors(cam profiles geared for low end torque) You are correct about drag racings professional classes but you are talking about years of research and development for 4 to 7 second runs at insane RPM's and sometimes total rebuilds between rounds. Besides if you stuff 30+ pounds of additional air pressure into anything it will haul [non-permissible content removed] even if just for a moment.
I stand by my statement that the OHC design has more potential and is a more technical motor than a pushrod design. Whether that's good or bad is obviously only our opinions.
Take care all.
I also think OHC engines will eventually take over, but as long as a pushrod engine is able to keep pace with it, it won't happen.
I agree with Rocles that GM dropped the ball on the diesel's, but they can only do so many things at once. I like the way the did it though because there are clearly more 1/2 and 3/4 light dutys sold than HD's so make a good light duty and then come out with the HD's. Again, I think that this new HD will set the new standard for other to be measured - time will tell. Hopefully though they'll stay on top of this and not wait another million years to make improvements.
Take care. Its only Wednesday eve and I am going to have a couple beers.
Later.
I've got the V-10, and I'm sure most 1/2 tons with a V-8 can dust me. At the same time, I'm sure not hurting for power, even light to light. I've got awesome passing power in the 60-75 range when I need to make quick lane changes.
I found an article on the Banks performance enhancers that I found kind of interesting. Their least expensive Stinger system appears to be a combo of ram air and cat back exhaust system. The price for this option is $500-$600. The full Power Pak is closer to $1,500. My guess is installation will add about $400-$500 to either price. The article is at:
http://rversonline.org/ArtBanksQ%26A.html
99 ford 5.4 345 ft.lbs. @ 2300 rpms 260 hp
99 chevy 5.3 315 ft.lbs @ 4000 rpms 270 hp
98 chevy 5.7 330 ft.lbs @ 2800 rpms 255 hp
Who makes the torque down low.
Might I ad the 5.4 makes 315 ft.lbs @1500 rpms and 315 at 4500 rpms, so from 1500-4500 it is making more torque than the 5.3 anywhere in its powerband. Also when put on the dyno Ford stays closer to its numbers while chevy either overated the 5.3 or they have a major loss in the drivetrain. OHCs are the future, ford is only tapping in to the power. Ford 5.4s are outrunning and towing the 5.3s. For 2000 ford improved the 6.8. so it should be as quick as the 6.0. For everyday towing the 6.8 will do better but when racing the 6.0 revs up in to its 4000-5000 rpm powerband and goes.
Again, the Ford owners mis the boat and try to overcome by marketing specs. Nice try though.
I agree that the V10 has more pulling torque on paper, but even with 2 fewer cylinders, the 6.0l is doing as much or better than the 6.8l V10 and with better fuel economy. Anytime a V8 can even do as much as "keep up" with almost a full liter larger displacement truck, there has to have been something done right. I guess now is the point where Ford owners start whining about how much heavier the V10 trucks are and thus why the V8 kicks its butt in all the tests.
Take it easy
We both know that when towing a decent size load, NEITHER truck is running in overdrive under 2,000 rpm. Usually the truck has overdrive disabled at least on the steep grades and such. This is where the GM 5.3l clearly has more torque. For the Ford to have the same momentum to go up an equal grade, it would have to get a running start as it will quickly lose momentum and power against the 5.3l.
I did not pull those figures out of a hat. I got the torque specs right off of Ford's web site and off their marketing brochure. Even at peak torque, the Ford has very little noticeable advantage. Where torque is desparately needed on the highway when going up grades and passing, the Ford does not have as much as the 5.3l.
Let us not also forget transmission gearing and drive axle gearing. The transmission gearing on the 5.3l more than makes up for any lack of torque in comparison to the Ford 5.4l. The Ford transmissions just don't cut it, which again, is why neither my 4.5l or a buddy of mines 5.4l could tow my 4000 lb bass boat worth a damn. My 5.3l pulls it up the same grades and passes on the highway like its not even behind me. The seat of the pants feel and real world towing experience sais it all, regardless of whatever tests or marketing specs Ford throws out.
I remember my deal. These guy's just need to be 100% about the specs they throw out, not just the ones that benefit their point.
I really don't hate Ford trucks. I just know that if at all, the torque and hp is not as advantagous as Ford owners like to make claim to and it is not in areas most useful to tow with.
It seems to be the only focal point a Ford owner makes to claim superiority over GM. Its just not true.
Ditto. Take care.
"It seems to be the only focal point a Ford owner makes to claim superiority over GM" --Huh??
Most of the Ford owners here are only defending their engines since Chevy guys only make that the single issue between trucks. The major gripe around here is between the 5.4 and the 5.3 motors in torque figures. Read the posts in this topic. Hell, usually it's some Chevy fan talking about how Ford loses everywhere hands down! Let's face it-these motors are almost identical.
Seriusly---what's up with the duel identities?
see ya.
TheDeerHunter as mentioned above was non other than the dreaded ZBAD71. You all are still despising the same person! ha ha!
I don't think the 5.4l is terrible. I just know that from towing with both, the 5.3l tows much better than the 5.4l. That is just honest truth. I can admit if an engine or truck make is better at towing or some other function than my preference. I know from towing with both, the 5.4l has no advantage over the 5.3l, regardless of the tests or marketing specs. You can tell the difference just by driving and towing with both.
I would say the same thing even if I owned the Ford 5.4l. The 5.3l just tows better. The engine is smoother. The transmission shifts crisper and more responsively (no sloppy upshifts or upshift delays). The Z71 package has less squat from tongue weight than the Ford offroad package. I don't even know what the tests show, but I feel that the Silverado brakes quicker and smoother. I will admit that I have questioned the Silverado's ABS system a couple of times. The technology in the engine cooling system, oil system, chassis, wiring, the whole truck is just so much more technically advanced.
Lvstang, I know the last sentence of your post was a slam, but if you read any posts I have made about my truck, I have not had "many" problems. I have had two problems and they have both been rectified. Both were extremely minor. 1. an engine ping that was resolved by a computer code upgrade and better 87 octane gas (Texaco). 2. A windshield noise from a loose windshield molding that was resolved by a little bit of silicone sealant under the molding. I admit my dealer has not been very helpful, but I can name MANY Ford dealers that have been even worse, not to mention the useless Ford Zone Reps. The Ford Zone Reps only help the dealers that won't help you!
I have gone to a second dealer who treats me like a million bucks. They go well above the expected. Although I have not had my truck given this treatment yet, this service department even washes the trucks they service in their own wash bay after servicing. I don't know of any Ford dealerships that do that. Your slam was a nice try, but is not relevant to me at all.
My wimpy 99 V-10 drops down out of OD when passing someone doing 50 and quickly accelerates through 70mph before I complete the pass and duck back into my lane in front of the slower traffic on winding two lane hwys. Of course, that is with my slide-in camper in the bed, so my total rig weighs close to 12,000 pounds when I'm making that pass. A lack of passing power when carrying a load is not a weakness of the V-10. I can only imagine how the higher powered 2000 V-10 performs the same function.
For the record, I've got the 4.30 axle ratio and am turning about 2400 rpms at 70mph in OD.
One comment about dealerships: They're like people--some suck and some don't. I've dealt with many dealers of different brands over the years buying trucks and they ALL VARY. I've had great Ford dealers and crappy Chevy ones--vice versa.
My Silverado also has a 3:73 gear diff. I am not talking about the V10 in this debate. I know well enough that the V10 is no sloucher. I never said it was a bad truck either. The only reason I don't respect it any more than I do is because the 6.0l V8 can at the very least "keep up" with the Ford V10 and do it with less fuel. I have not driven a V10 extensively enough to make a truly experienced decision. My dad's wife drives one. I am not sure what the gear ratio on it is, but my 1 ton with 454 seems to pull a loaded trailer much better and it has 226,XXX miles on it! Now, granted, it does not do it with better fuel economy, but still an almost ready for replacement 454 still out-tows a new Ford V10. I don't have much respect for it. All the tests show the 6.0l to out-perform it. Now, I will be the first to say that I don't hold much respect for the magazine tests as they are usually paid off some way or another or persuaded by bias or brand loyalty, but com'on most ALL the tests are showing it.
Again, its just my opinion and my preference. I may be a Ford owner again someday. I don't buy from loyalty alone. I buy the best product for what it will be used for. I think I did that buying the Silverado over the F150 hands down.
like brutus said, even a large engine will downshift when pulling a load uphill or passing. yes, the ford has 5-10% more torque at low rpms, but you only notice this if you are pulling up slight grades. under extreme conditions, ALL engines will downshift, except for diesels. and when they downshift, they will be in the 3000-4000 rpm range, where it is nice to have 95%-100% of the peak torque. thats what makes the GM motors tow great, drive one and you will see. the fords aren't 'bad' at all, they just don't have that 'passing power' when they downshift like the GMs do.
Overhead cams have nothing to do with the torque output at rpm ranges. don't know who made that up, but its mechanically not true. the ford is a very capable motor, the it really matches well against the GM counterpart, but not the 6.0. i don't know why people compare the 6.0 to the v10, the v10 has substantially more low and high end torque. the 6.0 is a powerful light duty puller, but for loads over 8000#s, you really need the torque of the v10.
the ford 5.4 pulls great at low rpms, lower speeds. the GM pulls great at higher rpms, when accelerating or passing at higher speeds. start both of them from a stop, and they'll reach the same point at about the same time, just in different ways. so which would you like? C&D website used to have a pulling comparison between the two, and the zero-60 acceleration under full load was very close: 17.0 sec for the Chevy, 17.1 sec for the Ford. for me personally, i like the GMs because of the simpler design, and better mileage. but many many folks like to see that tachometer stay lower, and don't care about the mpg diff. Ford for them.
The bigger surprise to me was that Ford is planning to introduce its 2nd generation Powerstroke around the same time to replace the 7.3L Powerstroke. The new diesel will be a 6.0L and is expected to get a little higher mpg. The engine will be 200 pounds lighter than the current 7.3L and will have 305hp and 550 ft-lbs of torque.
I found the info at the following link:
http://www.blueovalnews.com/engine_page.htm
This has been the point I have tried to make and may not have done a very good job at it. Thank you for saying so precisely my point. I don't think the Ford trucks are terrible trucks. I drove them for 15 years. However, I don't like the new model with ohc. I am not a mechanical expert so all I can associate with what changed is ohc design. I apologize if this is not what has brought on the undesireable change in the Ford powertrain. I just know that the 5.3l in my Silverado tows better for the type of towing I use my truck for - relatively light towing (4k lbs + gear) at highway speeds and up inclines and passing slower traffic. My driving experience tells me the 5.3l does it much better for me.
As far as the V10, yeah, maybe I do compare the V10 to the 6.0l too much. They really are not in the same class of engine. Like you said, the 6.0l has a lot of power for light duty towing. However, when going up against the heavy duty use that the V10 is used for, it has still proven "capable". Now, I would not want to use a 6.0l engine to tow heavy loads over 8k lbs frequently. My only point is that it CAN do it and has out-performed the V10 in many tests. Thats not to say that I feel the 6.0l can "replace" the V10's capability, but that the 6.0l is just an extraordinarily robust V8 and not the target of ridicule that the Ford owner likes to portray.
My only other arguement is that the V10 does not provide a benefit that, to me, is worth buying it. If that V10 provided a "significant" difference in power, even with it being a gas hog, I would be more impressed. However, the V10 is not really a "class of it's own engine". It does not stand out in the crowd of gas truck engines, in my opinion. In my opinion, it should be a real power monger having the extra displacement and two extra cylinders. More like a competitor to the Powerstroke. A gas engine that is comparitively capable to a diesel. That is what I would picture the V10 to provide. I just have not seen anything that impressive from it. I would buy the Powerstroke over the V10, even as a daily driver. Again, not saying its not a capable engine, but the 6.0l is just as capable. I just wouldn't want to subject the 6.0l to that kind of work on a daily basis. That is the only benefit that I feel the V10 has over it. It can do the work a little easier than the 6.0l does.
Again, just my opinion. It has only taken one 1/2 Silverado to change the opinion of a 15 year Ford owner. That's saying "something".
Diesels are higher maintenance and cost, i.e. more expesive oil changes and regular upkeep, are a pain in the tail during the cold climates, etc.
They last longer than gas engines and have some other benefits but overall are not a good alternative to the light duty truck owner like myself.
Kick it up a few notches Ford....its 2000
Have any of you guys ever really checked you gas mileage by how many miles you actually drove divided by how much fuel you burned? NOT what your odometer read. You know, according to mileage markers or something. Because it is a fact that Chevy has had a very bad reputation of the speedometer being off by 10%-15%. This has two effects. First, it makes you think your truck really runs better. Second, it makes you think you are getting 2-3 miles per gallon better mileage. Just thought I'd ask. A buddy of mine in his 6 cylinder Chevy with a five speed, got 20-21 flat out on Kansas highways. I get that in my 5.4 auto (with my foot in it).
Oh yeah Zbad,
About this totaly awesome frame under the Chevy, everything I have heard claims it is the strongest frame ever put under a Chevy. We both know that's not saying much. Those Z-Frame's would bend if you hit a speed bump too fast. Seriously, how do they match up with frames from other companies, not just compared to themselves? I am asking here. I really don't know.
Thanks.
As far as the frame of the new Silverado, it is the strongest put under ANY 1/2 ton truck yet to date. I don't have a clue where you pull your data about the Chevy having a weak frame. If you go to a reputable body shop, they will tell you that very few Chevy trucks are "totalled" after a serious accident that bends the frame, because the GM trucks frames are the only ones rigid enough to straighten and hold up afterwards. Also, the easiest to make almost 100% "true" again. If a Ford gets hit and it bends the frame, its history for two reasons #1. Its frame is not as rigid and usually can't be made "true" again to a reliable point. #2. The Ford's don't hold their value near as well and usually it costs more to fix it than to just total it out. That is a fact. Check it out if you like.
Check it out!
The comparable Chevy engine is the 454. At this point, Chevy has been able to make enough changes to the engine throughout the years to get more efficiency out of the engine, so they have no need to develop a V-10. If they ever reach limitations with the V-8 design, they may eventually develop a V-10, but they're not at that point yet. The Ford V-10 is not some monster engine designed to blow away the 454. It's just the newest competitor by Ford.
As far as the V-10 being a gas hog, people are averaging 14 on the hwy at 70ish with the 3.73 axle ratio. My 92 with the 351 and 3.55 axle ratio only got 14-15 on the hwy, and it didn't have near the power or towing ability as the V-10. That's progress. Even if the 454 gets better mpg, I would find it pretty hard to believe that it gets much better than 14-15 on the hwy at 70 with the same axle ratio.
Most of the truth behind the strongest frame can be found in the GVWR, tow rating, and GCWR. I don't have the figures for the 1/2 tons in front of me, but I will guess that those figures are almost identical for similarly equiped Silverado and F-150 trucks. A good comparison would be to compare a 5.3L Extended Cab Silverado with a 3.73 axle ratio to a 5.4L Extended Cab F-150 with a 3.73 axle ratio. If those numbers turn out to be equal (or very close), there is not any real significance in the differences between the frames since they can do the same job.
I have the CD/Cassette stereo in my Ford and it plays louder than I need it to play it without distorting, and I do occasionally like to hear my music at a pretty decent volume. However, I lost the desire to make sure the surrounding cars at a stop light knew my musical tastes (and bass and treble preferences) when I sold my 70 GTO back when I was 19....many moons ago.
See ya.
brutus,
i don't think you can look at tow and GC ratings to determine absolute frame strength. there's too, too many other factors that are limiting those numbers: tranny, rear end, springs, tires. i would say that out of those four + frame, frame would be the strongest link on any vehicle.
Just so you know I'm not GM bashing... I sure do like my new black 2000 GMC Extended Cab Stepside Z71...
That is a fact. I used to be a licensed insurance salesman when I was going to college. I talked to appraisers/adjusters daily. Any reputable insurance company will tell you this is true.
Off this subject somewhat, I thought it was very interesting what I got from the news last night.
They had police report statistics of what vehicles get stolen the most often. I don't recall the whole list, but GM trucks were #3, Ford trucks were #7. I am a little embarrassed for all big three trucks to report that the number 1 vehicle stolen was the Honda Accord, 2nd most stolen, the Toyota Camry.
I sure love my Silverado.
In Southern CA and Dallas, I found the Club to be an adequate deterrent. The way around a Club is to take a hacksaw to the steering wheel, bu if your Silverado or F-150 has a Club, the thief is more likely to just move to the next truck that doesn't have one. As for alarms, they went off so regularly that people often ignored them.
I was not reaching about the FACT that Chevy's have speedo's that are off by 10-15%. You did NOT answer my question. Have you or any other Chevy guys checked your fuel mileage by a map or mileage markers, etc?
Frames:
You mention you don't know where I get my information, yet I offered no info, I was asking a question about the new frames. The old, and I mean pre "Z-Frame" Chevy's, I'm sure were very tough, but when they redesigned in, what was it, '88, that new "Z-Frame was very weak, especially at the point between the cab and box, Cdean mentioned it. I don't know what body shops you are talking to, but I've had personal experience with many a bent frame. Yes Ford frames will bend, especially at the front, in front of the cross member. It is designed to bend to give a longer moment during impact. Many cars are designed with this in mind. Of course the four corners are the easiest to bend, they are also the easiest to fix. I have never seen, although it can and does happen, a Ford with a bent frame under the cab or under the box. From what I have seen it would take a horrendous crash to cause this.
Mileage:
I have a F-150, short wide, auto, with towing package, 3.55 gears. It will get 20 miles to the gallon on the highway every time. I took a trip to West Virginia, close to 20 hours from here, it got 20, almost on the nose, every time. That's going 70-80 mph. Now around town, with my foot in it, I admit it only gets 14-16.
One more thing:
Have you had any personal experience with a new, I mean, '99-'00, Ford 5.4? It seems you always compare your old 4.6 vs. the new Chevy 5.3. A comparison between the '97-'98 5.4 vs. '99-'00 5.4 is not even close. The new heads make these totally different engines. It might surprise you.
Brutus,
I'm glad you mention extended cab, 4X4, with 3.73 comparisons, check out Truck Trend online. It pits the Dodge, Chevy, and Ford against each other. The Ford beats the Chevy in acceleration empty and loaded. The dyno numbers are interesting, especially since the show RWHP. Zbad likes to talk about how at higher RPM's the Chevy, with its wider flatter torque curve, has more hoss, but you can see that even at the point where the Chevy has its peak torque, the Ford is higher. The Ford torque also REMAINS higher throughout the test range of RPMS until 5000, even at 4500 the Ford has 24 ft.lbs. more. The Chevy's peak torque is around 221.7 and peak hp is around 182.8. Did I mention that was PEAK hp? Ford's 97-98 engines did die off significantly, but the new heads keep the powerband strong out a lot further. Oh yeah, the newest article in the October issue, with Toyota vs. Dodge vs. Ford vs. Chevy shows almost the same stats. I felt the most intersting was the fact that the Ford finished 3rd overall, even though it was the best at everything you get a truck for.
Have fun everyone.
-coming from an owner of both and never noticed ANY variation worth mentioning.....
We have been over this a million times and cdean said it best and so.... I will leave it at that.
As far as the frames, I apologize if I presumed fact about one makes frame being weak. Like Rocles said, I didn't know either makes frames had ever been "weak". I do know that the new Silverado hydroformed frame is the strongest in 1/2 ton history. What I meant to elaborate, is it was "fact" that for insurance purposes, Fords generally are totalled when the frames are bent. The cash value of the truck is less than it would cost to repair. I know this to be true from 3 years in the insurance business.
Hope I didn't start another war here. I will admit that I don't know any facts about weak frames, etc. I do know the insurance business. GM owners always hate to hear that the frame was bent because they know they will be stuck with a truck that was fixed rather than totalled. Ford owners usually get a check rather quickly, hoping the owner will just let it slide, take the money and run.
Later.
Do you ever read entire posts or are you trying to dodge questions? Have you checked your mileage? Simple question. I have, I get up to 20 on the highway depending on length of trip. I get 14-16 in town. Of course in town I have to use my odometer to check, so it may not be as accurate as interstate travel.
Have you driven a '99-'00 Ford 5.4? Simple question. Thanks for your answers.
I love it when everyone who disagrees with anyone else just says, oh, no way. I don't believe it. Never any evidence, no matter how weak or inconclusive, to support your opinions.
And no, I have not driven a 99-y2k Ford. Why should I? I already drive the best truck on the road today.
I am not dodging your questions. You just are posting the same stuff we have all debated over and over and over again. Its always a torque/hp debate with Ford owners. Torque and hp is important, but so very insignificant between the two at the peak, and Ford lack's it in the upper ranges. Torque and hp makes up for about 1/10 of 1% of importance to make the best truck. Ok. If it makes you happy and feel better and if you will give the same topic debated to death a final rest, I will say the Ford has a torque advantage.
Are you happy now?
In their personal stress tests they felt that the older frames were stronger than the newer design. I am not making this bs up. And by the way I do not think I was suppsed to see this document.
Give me a break. I'll admit that it's a combination of factors that make up the importance of the truck. Raw hp and torque figures don't mean much until you see how they are distributed. Is the torque there when you need it most? Obviously, having a tranny and drivetrain that can handle the torque are important as is the suspension.
All of these factors are important and each one individually makes up a lot more than 1/10 of 1% of the importance. Unless, of course, you are just getting a pickup for appearance and to do occasional towing, which alot of people do. I've got no beef with people buying pickups simply because they like pickups. That's actually why most people buy pickups. You can tow a 4,000 pound boat with a V-6 Chevy Astro if you want. I'd definitely prefer a pickup to an Astro even if I wasn't towing anything.
However, for that segment of the pickup market that really needs the muscle, torque and hp and how are they are distributed is a lot more important than 1/10 of 1%.
i think you ARE reaching on the odometer 15% error. I HAVE checked mine vs mileage markers and other vehicles' ododmeters. in fact, i almost always check odometer vs mileage markers whenever i get out on the road. every GM that my family has owned has had dead on accurate odometer. when compared to other vehicles, maybe a .5% diff, and thats probably because of tires.
if they couldn't engineer an accurate odometer, how the hell do they build the rest of the truck...