If you like that show, here's another good one.
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/worlds-toughest-fixes
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/series/worlds-toughest-fixes
Mike Rowe Ford commercial
- Thread starter oilboy123
- Start date
- Status
My favorite Ford commercial was back with the new F-150 first came out. They came up with some interesting ads. One state that the F-150 was the most powerful truck in it's class. Knowing that it's illegal for the to lie and also that I had just driven all of the different half ton trucks before I purchase my 2004 Tundra and the Ford was NOT the most powerful. I recorded the commercial and paused it to read the fine print. It say something like, "highest percentage of torque at 800 rpms." The reality is that the lower the peak torque the easier this number is to achieve. Even if the torque curve was perfectly flat, the area under the torque curve (the math behind the truth) for the other trucks would be significantly more.
Originally Posted By: blackdiamond
It say something like, "highest percentage of torque at 800 rpms." The reality is that the lower the peak torque the easier this number is to achieve. Even if the torque curve was perfectly flat, the area under the torque curve (the math behind the truth) for the other trucks would be significantly more.
2004 F150 5.4 - 365 lb-ft @ 3750 rpm
2004 Tundra 4.7 - 315 lb-ft @ 3400 rpm
2004 Ram 5.7 - 375 lb-ft @ 4200 rpm
2004 Silverado 5.3 - 330 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm
2004 Titan 5.6 - 379 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm
If the Ford is making the most torque at lower rpms, it's a pretty decent tuning feat for Ford powertrain. Historically, Ford has tuned its engines for low rpm torque as opposed to peak HP and TQ bragging rights. That trend goes back to the 302/351/460 too.
It say something like, "highest percentage of torque at 800 rpms." The reality is that the lower the peak torque the easier this number is to achieve. Even if the torque curve was perfectly flat, the area under the torque curve (the math behind the truth) for the other trucks would be significantly more.
2004 F150 5.4 - 365 lb-ft @ 3750 rpm
2004 Tundra 4.7 - 315 lb-ft @ 3400 rpm
2004 Ram 5.7 - 375 lb-ft @ 4200 rpm
2004 Silverado 5.3 - 330 lb-ft @ 4000 rpm
2004 Titan 5.6 - 379 lb-ft @ 3600 rpm
If the Ford is making the most torque at lower rpms, it's a pretty decent tuning feat for Ford powertrain. Historically, Ford has tuned its engines for low rpm torque as opposed to peak HP and TQ bragging rights. That trend goes back to the 302/351/460 too.
It's possible that I managed to test drive a truck with highway gears, but the one I drove was a "dog." My personal opinion is that any rating at 800 rpms is useless since that is essentially idle.
I think the marketing claim was actually that the 5.4 3V made over 80% of it's peak torque by 1000 rpm.
http://www.ford-trucks.com/specs/2004/2004_f150_2.html
The 5.4 3V is slow because the OEM drive by wire calibration (doesn't allow WOT until 3rd, IIRC) and the fact that shift points are too low for the 4R75s gearing, allowing it to fall out of the meat of its powerband on gear changes. They aren't quick by any stretch, but they really wake up with a tune.
Stock for stock, the 260 HP 5.4 2V always felt like it would rape the 5.4 3V to me.
http://www.ford-trucks.com/specs/2004/2004_f150_2.html
The 5.4 3V is slow because the OEM drive by wire calibration (doesn't allow WOT until 3rd, IIRC) and the fact that shift points are too low for the 4R75s gearing, allowing it to fall out of the meat of its powerband on gear changes. They aren't quick by any stretch, but they really wake up with a tune.
Stock for stock, the 260 HP 5.4 2V always felt like it would rape the 5.4 3V to me.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: Ben99GT
I think the marketing claim was actually that the 5.4 3V made over 80% of it's peak torque by 1000 rpm.
http://www.ford-trucks.com/specs/2004/2004_f150_2.html
The 5.4 3V is slow because the OEM drive by wire calibration (doesn't allow WOT until 3rd, IIRC) and the fact that shift points are too low for the 4R75s gearing, allowing it to fall out of the meat of its powerband on gear changes. They aren't quick by any stretch, but they really wake up with a tune.
Stock for stock, the 260 HP 5.4 2V always felt like it would rape the 5.4 3V to me.
Especially with the 4R100 behind it. I absolutely love how the Expedition shifts with the unlock-shift-lock-shift/unlock-lock-shift/unlock pattern it does through all the gears, it really is a great setup and I am puzzled as to why Ford changed it.... Other than the 4R100 is obviously rated for much more TQ and full-power upshifts.....
I find it very similar to the 5R100 in slammds15's '05 Duty, which seems to just keep that diesel in the same RPM range through all the gears, and it pulls like a freight train.
I think the marketing claim was actually that the 5.4 3V made over 80% of it's peak torque by 1000 rpm.
http://www.ford-trucks.com/specs/2004/2004_f150_2.html
The 5.4 3V is slow because the OEM drive by wire calibration (doesn't allow WOT until 3rd, IIRC) and the fact that shift points are too low for the 4R75s gearing, allowing it to fall out of the meat of its powerband on gear changes. They aren't quick by any stretch, but they really wake up with a tune.
Stock for stock, the 260 HP 5.4 2V always felt like it would rape the 5.4 3V to me.
Especially with the 4R100 behind it. I absolutely love how the Expedition shifts with the unlock-shift-lock-shift/unlock-lock-shift/unlock pattern it does through all the gears, it really is a great setup and I am puzzled as to why Ford changed it.... Other than the 4R100 is obviously rated for much more TQ and full-power upshifts.....
I find it very similar to the 5R100 in slammds15's '05 Duty, which seems to just keep that diesel in the same RPM range through all the gears, and it pulls like a freight train.
- Status
Similar threads
