[threefidee]

Tom, thought I would ad this. I just got back from the MCACN show up in Chicago over the weekend. A friend of mine who owns The Custom Shop just did some customization for Ford. It was on a 2011 F150 with the Ecoboost engine. He did the truck, was shipped out for SEMA and then he drove it back pulling his enclosed car hauler and Camaro that he showed there also. He will be showing and using this truck for the next 18 months hauling vehicles all over the country. He has 2,000 miles on it. He is towing about 9,500 pounds and is getting an average of 11.5 and he says it has a ton of power. Not pulling he is getting 25 mpg ! Toyota has been using him the past few years and this is his first Ford. He loves it.

Jody

[Tom Vaught]

Here is some new info on the F-150 Eco-Boost Truck

http://www.ford.com/trucks/f150/experiencef150/

I also received this letter today:

"THE POLICE CAR LEADER FOR 15 YEARS, FORD'S ALL-NEW POLICE INTERCEPTORS
DELIVER AT PUBLIC TESTING

LOS ANGELES, Nov. 18, 2010 - Ford, the maker of the most popular police
vehicle in America, continued its leadership position this week,
recording the fastest lap time of any police car with its all-new Police
Interceptor sedan in testing by the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department.
The results achieved by the next-generation Police Interceptors are
proof points that Ford has engineered purpose-built and durable vehicles
for the law enforcement community.

Ford's Police Interceptor AWD sedan, equipped with the 3.5-liter V6
EcoBoost engine, delivered an impressive 0-60 mph test of 5.8 seconds
and the fastest lap time - trumping all V8 competition from Chevrolet
and Dodge. Ford's 3.5-liter EcoBoost V6 is a twin-turbocharged,
direct-injection engine that will deliver at least 365 horsepower and
350 lb.-ft. of torque across a broad rpm range.

"These are purpose-built vehicles that we have developed with the
support of police agencies across the U.S. and Canada," said Kevin
Koswick, director of Ford's North American Fleet Operations. "As the
leader in police vehicles 15 years running, Ford is committed to
remaining the nation's largest provider of police vehicles. We're
offering law enforcement officials a portfolio of products that are
purpose-built and deliver on our commitment of providing the safety,
technology, durability and performance they need to excel at their
jobs."

Equally impressive, Ford's base 3.5-liter V6 Ti-VCT Police Interceptor
sedan with AWD showcased stellar handling and performance, beating all
V6 competitors in braking, acceleration and lap times. The combination
of 280 horsepower with twin-injected variable cam timing technology,
six-speed transmission and unique pursuit suspension tuning and
calibration delivered the goods.

For the first time ever, Ford has a Police Interceptor utility vehicle
equipped with a 3.7-liter V6 Ti-VCT engine and all-wheel-drive
technology. When tested with a 400-pound loaded cargo box, the Police
Interceptor utility posted the fastest lap time, beating the Chevrolet
Tahoe by more than two seconds. These results achieved Ford's target of
delivering a pursuit-rated utility that matches the performance and
handling of the V6 Police Interceptor sedan.

Ford's new portfolio of Police Interceptors provides departments the
ability to select the vehicle that best meets their needs. Agencies can
now select from a combination of two bodystyles, AWD or FWD, and
multiple powertrains delivering at least 20 percent more fuel efficiency
than the 4.6-liter single-overhead-cam (SOHC) V8 offered in the current
Crown Victoria Police Interceptor. Both Ford Police Interceptors debut
after production of the Crown Victoria Police Interceptor ends at the
end of 2011."

Glad your friend liked the truck! (:>)

Tom Vaught

[455Grandville]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

We are demonstrating that there is a lot of life left in the engine even at 150K miles.

Yep, we like to know within ONE RPM what the engine is doing. It really helps identify combustion stability issues during PROTOTYPE development work.

Tom Vaught

ps Ford Stock went over $16 per share yesterday (:>)

Tom, it's a nice engine. But, there's plenty engines already that will do 150K plus without even needing the valve cover removed; including Fords 3.0 "Vulcan" V6 and the old 300 six holer. I know of a fleet of 300 powered service trucks that have surpassed 300K + miles of hard, abusive use.

[Tom Vaught]

Brad, the 4.9L (300 cid) Ford engine had the highest durability/ lowest warranty/ lowest tech design for many years and people truly did run 300K with the engines. Package and
safety (crash) concerns killed that engine. (The long engine gets hit in the front, minimal crush zone, engine moves rearward, dash and interior take a beating).

Sometimes it is better to move to a design that is safer for the driver/ passenger vs have a 300K+ engine design. We have massive crush zones on our new vehicles (lots of safety).

Tom Vaught

[455Grandville]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

COMPETITIVE trucks towing 9,000 lbs. on steep grades at Davis Dam, Nevada."

Sounds to me, Mr. GTO, that Ford will be running "head-to-head" with the Chebby and the GMC boys "towing 9,000 lbs" gasoline powered trucks at some point in future videos.

Tom Vaught

There's a reason the ford F seies has been a best seller since '77

One of Fords best commercials : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Msd5ltrMd3Y

Originally Posted by Mr_GTO

Filed under: Truck, Marketing/Advertising, Work, Chevrolet, Ford, GM, Diesel



Numbers like maximum horsepower, torque and tow ratings are the heart and soul of the full-size heavy duty pickup truck segment. No shocker there. But how much reliance can consumers actually put on figures provided by the manufacturer? And, keeping in mind that the average test drive doesn't include hooking up a ten-ton trailer, how might we all get a proper frame of reference when judging one massive diesel beast with another?

Such questions may soon get an answer... other than this one, decided upon just a few weeks back. It seems that General Motors has issued a pretty straightforward challenge to Ford: a towing duel up mountain grades, followed by a comparison of factory-issued exhaust brakes on the way back down. (Sorry, Ram... guess you're not invited out to play.) Seems simple enough, no?

Here are some relevant statistics: Ford's (reflashed) 6.7-liter Power Stroke diesel V8 engine punishes the tarmac with an even 400 horsepower and 800 pound-feet of torque. That's class-leading, as GM's 6.6-liter Duramax pumps out 397 horses and 765 pound-feet. Looking at those numbers, Ford wins... right?

Not so fast, says Chevrolet Silverado Marketing Manager Tony Truelove, "Numbers on paper are fine," he said. "Let's go work these trucks in the mountains, and may the best truck win." To which Ford Trucks spokeswoman Anne Marie Gattari replied, "We challenge our trucks against the competition in grueling prove-out tests continually, and the customer gives us the results - sales leadership year after year."

That's right, The Blue Oval plainly and unsurprisingly declined Chevrolet's invitation. But the show must go on, and our friends at Pickuptrucks.com promise to be on hand in their very best black-and-white-striped shirts to serve as referees for the main event. Let's get ready to rumble!


Gallery: PickupTrucks.com Heavy-Duty shootout 2010

http://bar-and-grill.com/forums/show...29&postcount=1

First, Ford does not have all the chassis rust issues GM does. Some dealers are well aware of the chassis on even 4 yr old GM pickups being rusted to hell.
Ive used my F series as damn near medium duty trucks and Ford has always had a much more sturdy chassis when the going gets tough.
Pretty pathetic that my cousins '06 Chebby is so bad in the frame area (rust) he didnt feel safe putting a load on it; but instead relied on a beat to hell 1985 Ford F350 with over 400K miles on it. Even more ate up he just got the damn thing paid off and now its useless and possibly dangerous after a mere 4 years of use.

[455Grandville]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

Brad, the 4.9L (300 cid) Ford engine had the highest durability/ lowest warranty/ lowest tech design for many years and people truly did run 300K with the engines. Package and
safety (crash) concerns killed that engine. (The long engine gets hit in the front, minimal crush zone, engine moves rearward, dash and interior take a beating).

Sometimes it is better to move to a design that is safer for the driver/ passenger vs have a 300K+ engine design. We have massive crush zones on our new vehicles (lots of safety).

Tom Vaught

Tom, even people I know who hate Fords will admit the 300 was one of the toughest, long lasting rugged engines ever made. Many people I know have a "Ford 300 story" Ive seen them used to power saw mills where they were almost never shut off and even in log splitters. They are not quick, nor do they do much for fuel economy, but they will pull a load and lug like they dont give a d**n like a true truck engine should. Some were even used in those UPS trucks, FYI.
Out at the shop the trucks we have work for a living; they do not have an easy life.
What you'll see parked in the back is old Fords that earn their keep.

[68gtoMN]

And that is just one of the many reasons why I will purchase a Ford Flex Ecoboost very soon! Tom, this is worthy of the history channel's Modern Marvels episodes!

[Half-Inch Stud]

""""""It is a GASOLINE fueled Direct Injection Turbocharged Variable Camshaft Timing Engine.""""""

Sounds like the pinnicle of Gasoline SI Piston/rod/crank engine development.
Does the new engine share any heritage what-so-ever from the 4.6L OHC engine?
===========================
As for my opinion, Lincoln/Ford is the "GM of old" in terms of design&build of nice cars & drivelines.

[bigunde]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

Tom, even people I know who hate Fords will admit the 300 was one of the toughest, long lasting rugged engines ever made. Many people I know have a "Ford 300 story" Ive seen them used to power saw mills where they were almost never shut off and even in log splitters. They are not quick, nor do they do much for fuel economy, but they will pull a load and lug like they dont give a d**n like a true truck engine should. Some were even used in those UPS trucks, FYI.
Out at the shop the trucks we have work for a living; they do not have an easy life.
What you'll see parked in the back is old Fords that earn their keep.

Agreed, My company bought F-150's from 93-95 and all had the 300 with the A4OD transmission. Terrible gas mileage and the trannies had issues between 80-100k BUT you couldnt kill those engines. We actually had employess who bought them after 200k miles and are still driving them. A little noisy on start up but play makes horsepower right?? LOL . Im a GM man but that thing would run all over a 250 Chevy. Thank goodness for the 4.3. LOL

[Tom Vaught]

Originally Posted by Half-Inch Stud

Does the new engine share any heritage what-so-ever from the 4.6L OHC engine?
As for my opinion, Lincoln/Ford is the "GM of old" in terms of design&build of nice cars & drivelines.

Both are Ford Engines, HIS.

Differences:

* 3.5L vs 4.6L
* NA (4.6L) vs Twin Turbocharged (3.5L)
* PFI Port Fuel Injection (4.6L) vs Direct Injection (3.5L)
* The 3.5L Eco-Boost engine will kick the larger 4.6ls butt in F.E., Power, Torque, Emissions, Driveability, NVH, and durability.

Tom Vaught

[fiedlerh]

We had a few 300's in our fleet in the late 80's and couldn't kill them, even when they overheated. I remember Gonella bread used them in their delivery trucks. Only problems were related to the TFI ignition and rare problems with noisy alternator brushes driving the EECIV computer crazy. They weren't known for good gas mileage and the intake manifold looked like it was designed in 1945 (outer cylinders would run lean) but they were good overall. Ford eventually put EFI on them and one comment from the Ford Training Center in Melrose Park, IL was "it was like putting lipstick on a pig".

[Half-Inch Stud]

Working Direct injection is like finding the Holy Grail.

[goatwgn]

I hope that these things will have some accessable items such as water pumps and alternators. Work in a repair facility and it gets old real quick taking cv axles out of vehicles (had to do that a few times on Ford Escapes and Mazda Tributes to remove the alternator).Nonsense like this seems like something engineers seem to overlook when designing accessory locations. Almost all new cars and trucks seem to have 10 lbs of crap put into a 5 lb bag under the hood. Whatever space is left is covered with some stupid looking plastic cover. And whats with installing engines halfway under the firewall? I think a lot of this is the government's influence. They need to stay away from trying to influence car design. Do any of you know anything the government gets involved with that turns out for the better? Sorry to rant about this folks, I've been doing this for 30 years and the more they fool around with things, the sillier they seem to get on a daily basis.

[The Champ]

Just to get the facts straight...

Posted - 11-06-2010, 09:52 PM

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

Yes, I think the 6.7L Diesel engine is a great engine.

A guy named "Harold" was the Turbo Engineer on that diesel program.

We tested those engines for a couple of years in Research, "Harold" works in Research too.

The Volvo Guys were part of our normal turbo meetings right up until we sold Volvo.
The Volvo guys brought a lot of vehicle knowledge to the plate, I will miss meetings with them. We ran the "Volvo Turbo" you are referring to on an engine with very good results, as we "benchmark" a lot of different turbos as part of my job.

Tom Vaught

I think the videos were more entertaining vs watching a couple of fat boys pull a bush out of a yard.

Mr. GTO post made his post at: 11-08-2010 09:19 AM

And then, what does the Tom post at: 11-08-2010 05:14 PM

And how does this Diesel Challenge fit into a topic that is about the Durability of a GASOLINE powered V-6 Turbocharged Truck Engine, Mr GTO?

Tom - once again - after you have posted on a subject - you complain about someone changing the topic. You're the one that said the 6.7L is a great engine.

Why complain now when the facts show it's not so great?

Because Tom V. can never respond appropriately to the truth?

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

There's a reason the ford F seies has been a best seller since '77.

Has it?

Compare it to GM's C/K series and see what the actual results are.

[goatwgn]

Direct injection seems to have many advantages over "normal" port injection. Better emissions, more power, better fuel economy, better response. But there is one area that leads me to be a sceptic and expose one potential drawback. Of course this is of no concern to the manufacturers. What happens when this system malfunctions? Does it torch a hole in the piston like some diesel systems have been known to do with injector failure? What happens (say if someone keeps a car long after the warranty is gone), and a high pressure line comes off or springs a leak? With diesel injectors you usually end up with just a mess (I have seen this happen as well, but with gasoline, it may create a fireball.) I am bringing up a comparison to diesels because they have had direct injection for a few years now. I understand manufacturers getting excited when a new technology allows them to attain things they couldnt with old technology. But in the end, the person who purchases the vehicle always pays with higher repair costs. GM and Ford seem to be all excited about this technology to achieve these goals and to help suck up to our friends the federal govt. I hope it works out for them and the consumer.

[SRR]

Originally Posted by The Champ

Has it?

Compare it to GM's C/K series and see what the actual results are.

The Ford Ranger is the best selling truck of all time.
I do find it weird that here where cars and trucks last forever there is at least a 10 to 1 ratio of old Chevy/GMC trucks to Fords and Dodges aren't even close.

[Tom Vaught]

Originally Posted by sleepy

Don't argue with him Tom, He's still trying to wipe the GM poop off his night vision goggles.

Sleepy, I am not going to argue with him or the other poster who continues to say that I lie on the board. Keep it up and I go to Chris, Champ. Your post is a written communication that fits all of the criteria below:

"Collectively known as defamation, libel and slander are civil wrongs that harm a reputation; decrease respect, regard, or confidence; or induce disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against an individual or entity. The injury to one's good name or reputation is affected through written or spoken words or visual images. The laws governing these torts are identical.

To recover in a libel or slander suit, the plaintiff must show evidence of four elements: that the defendant conveyed a defamatory message; that the material was published, meaning that it was conveyed to someone other than the plaintiff; that the plaintiff could be identified as the person referred to in the defamatory material; and that the plaintiff suffered some injury to his or her reputation as a result of the communication.

To prove that the material was defamatory, the plaintiff must show that at least one other person who saw or heard it understood it as having defamatory meaning. It is necessary to show not that all who heard or read the statement understood it to be defamatory, but only that one person other than the plaintiff did so. Therefore, even if the defendant contends that the communication was a joke, if one person other than the plaintiff took it seriously, the communication is considered defamatory."

I am asking you to refrain from future comments like the one you posted which
were untrue

Tom Vaught

[yak]

i sure relate to the posts made by goatwgn. i've been a tech since 1996 when i graduated from high school. i then bought the shop that i worked at in 2002. guess what brand of vehicle myself and all my techs hate working on. ya it's fords. Well except for the alternators on the 4.6 and 5.4. they are pretty easy to get to.
I've never experienced such a **#* up on a vehicle until the 2005 and up ford 5.4 spark plug problem. letting a customer know that you might have to pull the heads on their new truck to get the spark plugs out. what a joke. on a chevy truck it takes half an hour to change the plugs. i have all the tools to pull the broken plugs out but there has been a few where those stupid things will not pull out of there. but i don't care. it's money in my pocket.

There is many times where i am sure some engineer and his buddies had a laugh designing something. They will be sitting there looking at what they have designed and built and then laugh, saying good luck to the retard that gets to fix that when it breaks...

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by Tom Vaught

Sleepy, I am not going to argue with him or the other poster who continues to say that I lie on the board. Keep it up and I go to Chris, Champ. Your post is a written communication that fits all of the criteria below:

"Collectively known as defamation, libel and slander are civil wrongs that harm a reputation; decrease respect, regard, or confidence; or induce disparaging, hostile, or disagreeable opinions or feelings against an individual or entity. The injury to one's good name or reputation is affected through written or spoken words or visual images. The laws governing these torts are identical.

To recover in a libel or slander suit, the plaintiff must show evidence of four elements: that the defendant conveyed a defamatory message; that the material was published, meaning that it was conveyed to someone other than the plaintiff; that the plaintiff could be identified as the person referred to in the defamatory material; and that the plaintiff suffered some injury to his or her reputation as a result of the communication.

To prove that the material was defamatory, the plaintiff must show that at least one other person who saw or heard it understood it as having defamatory meaning. It is necessary to show not that all who heard or read the statement understood it to be defamatory, but only that one person other than the plaintiff did so. Therefore, even if the defendant contends that the communication was a joke, if one person other than the plaintiff took it seriously, the communication is considered defamatory."

I am asking you to refrain from future comments like the one you posted which
were untrue

Tom Vaught

Tom....

I think your post could be an appropriate response for me to use for what you just did to me....

I posted that you have trouble responding appropriately to the truth (and posted your own words that documented it), and now you're calling me a liar.

Don't worry Tom, I won't cry to the mods about your constant attempts to defame me...