[68gtoMN]

Originally Posted by The Champ

The most fuel efficient Ford full size truck is the 3.7L 6, which is rated 17 City, 23 Hwy, with a combined rating of 19. You cheated Ford out of 1 MPG. [Yep, I should have included that one there, but that is not cheating Lendon]

However, you failed to compare the Ford to the most fuel efficient full size Chevrolet. That truck is EPA rated at 20 City, 23 Hwy and a combined rating of 21. You cheated GM out of 5 MPG in the City, 1 MPG on the Hwy and 3 MPG overall.

That's a 6.0L GM engine getting better fuel economy than a 3.7L Ford engine. [The biggest misdirection of all. The 6.0 liter engine alone did not get that mileage as the truck is also motivated by an electric motor to make this happen...forgot to mention that there didn't you??? Would that be, in your words, "cheating"? ]

More power [Not True again - 43 more HP for 3.5 Ford and 53 more lb/ft TQ for 3.5 Ford] and better fuel economy from the "longest lasting, most dependable truck manufacturer" - despite all the whining from the Ford apologists.

Your claim that Ford is the "most durable/dependable truck on the market by working vehicles with over 200,000 miles on them" has already been discredited because there is no way to document that claim - even if it was true.

Now that I've been forced to correct you again, will you stop with all the BS name calling, trash talking, etc... [Calling you by your name is certainly name-calling...you got me there. Trash talking? I posted no smear toward Chevy but you posted a FORD aspersion via your picture. Hmmmm...need a mirror much?]

You are sooooo easy to wind up...

I checked to see what the numbers were and discovered that you forgot to mention that this is a HYBRID truck 6.0 as your mileage champion. You are, nonetheless, correct that it gets greater mileage. I concede my error....

However...

Look at the price premium one pays for the hybrid truck and look at the extreme drop in usability for its purpose as a truck. From Chevy Silverado website:

Silverado Hybrid also delivers the kind of legendary performance you expect from a Chevy truck: 332 horsepower, 367 lb.-ft. of torque, up to 6,100 lbs. of towing capacity (2WD)6, and up to 1,527 lbs. of payload capacity (2WD)7.

From the F150 Ecoboost website:

It also offers best-in-class conventional towing of 11,300 pounds and best-in-class payload of 3,060 pounds

Let's do some math, shall we?
Ford's little 3.5 more than DOUBLES the payload capacity of the Chevy Hybrid AND almost doubles the towing capacity while still being able to return 22 MPG on the highway.

Ford's ecoboost provides plenty of mileage under normal driving and plenty of power when needed (easily more than the 6.0 listed) and a truck strong enough to do a truck's work (nearly double Chevy's hybrid truck towing/payload) and still it's only a 3.5 V6.

Boo Hooo Lendon... Do as you wish - I make no calumnious aspersions toward you or your truck. Like your truck - I support you. But that's not what you want or "need". You have an inherent need to argue brand superiority and diminish any competitor who has a valid product because it is the wrong brand.

I will mark this thread and bring it back up when GM introduces its own boosted V6 engines in pickup trucks in the near future. What then, Lendon? What then Hammertime? What will the argument then be? Will chevy then have engines for girls?

LOL

[big hammer]

ford fanbois are so pathetic. they always like to brag about how the "little 3.5" holds it's own against chev v8's but they can't seem to grasp the fact that IT HAS TWO TURBOS.

you want to play boost against boost the 6.2 makes 638 hp.

[big hammer]

many real world mileage numbers have people reporting 18-19 mpg out of their ecoboosts, and it cuts in half when towing 3000 pounds. hardly phenomonal.

[dennis kirban]

Truth be told in any given year any of the 3 truck manufacturers can produce a truck that is superior than the competition.......either in performance, gas economy or styling.

Over the years I had mostly GM trucks...almost always used.

In the real world the numbers seem to suggest Ford F-150 is the biggest seller.

[email protected]

[Bob Hall]

Originally Posted by sleepy

I think I would want to talk to the guy who traded it in after 3 months and 1600 miles as to WHY he would take that kind of hit on that truck.
Or was it a demo/owner of the dealership used it a few days?

Didn't talk to the previous owner but I was shown an email he sent to the salesman saying he wanted a truck with a larger engine since he felt it was underpowered with all the mountains in the area and a different color as the white was too hard to keep clean. He ended up buying a different color 2012 Chevy with the larger V-8 Rather than the 5.3L that is in the GMC.

Seemed to be the best deal for us. Especially since we didn't have a way home tonight.

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by 68gtoMN

You are sooooo easy to wind up...

Funny, it seems that you're the one that is wound to tight...

I checked to see what the numbers were and discovered that you forgot to mention that this is a HYBRID truck 6.0 as your mileage champion.

What was the question again? Oh yeah, the most fuel efficient full size truck.

[Not True again - 43 more HP for 3.5 Ford and 53 more lb/ft TQ for 3.5 Ford]

You need to be able to follow the statements and respond to them.

I posted the 6.0 GM got better fuel mileage than the Ford 3.7L. In the next sentence I then commented on how the 6.0L had more power (than the 3.7L). The discussion was about the most fuel efficient full size truck - which the ecoboost isn't even the most fuel efficient Ford.

Ford is years late to the fuel economy game in full size pickups. Their commercials on TV talk endlessly about fuel mileage - yet their most fuel efficient truck is #2 in that game and grossly underpowered compared to the true leader.

Calling you by your name is certainly name-calling...you got me there. Trash talking?

You called me by name? Not by any name that I was given to me at birth or that I have put forth on this board for folks to use.

Trash talking?

What is this?

did you forget to take your meds again

Trash talking and name calling is what you do. The fact that you can't admit it says alot about you. And it ain't good.

Ford apologists all seem to have a problem with dealing with reality. It appears that the frustation of being #2 (or 3, or 4) is taking it's toll...

Ford wants the title of being the best selling truck in America (and in fact, they have sold more than Chevy over the past 35 years, but in most years less than GM), but then has a problem admitting that more of their trucks are not on the road.

The fact that even though being outsold by significant numbers (Chevy only), that there are more Chevy's built in the last 30 years on the road than Ford's during the same period speaks volumes.

Ford tries to use some hypothetical (and unverifiable) mileage number to muddy the waters, and their apologists repeat the prattle. But the fact remains that Chevy is the "longest lasting, most dependable" truck.

[455Grandville]

Originally Posted by big hammer

ford fanbois are so pathetic. they always like to brag about how the "little 3.5" holds it's own against chev v8's but they can't seem to grasp the fact that IT HAS TWO TURBOS.

you want to play boost against boost the 6.2 makes 638 hp.

Of course it does; you're comparing a 3.5 liter engine to a 6.2 liter engine.
The new Shelby is kicking out 650 horses on 5.8 liters to 638 on 6.2 if that makes you happy. And they did it without a welfare check from us taxpayers.

Originally Posted by big hammer

many real world mileage numbers have people reporting 18-19 mpg out of their ecoboosts, and it cuts in half when towing 3000 pounds. hardly phenomonal.

I would ask you for a link to back your statement (which is incorrect) but that would be a waste of time. Plenty of us are getting 22 - 23 if we keep our foot out of it. And I towed 7,000 lbs on very steep grades and did 15. You don't own one, so you can't say.

You Champ, and Yak have nothing to ad but insults. Typical liberals.

It would be interesting watching you three tear down an engine, measure it, turn the crank, resize the rods , etc, etc and then compare what is so poorly done about Fords vs GMs from the factory. You guys say Ford sucks, but when asked what specifically, it's more 3rd grade insults. None of you are engine builders, that's for sure.

I don't think in a engine shop either of you three are qualified to push around someones roller -

[455Grandville]

Originally Posted by sleepy

I think I would want to talk to the guy who traded it in after 3 months and 1600 miles as to WHY he would take that kind of hit on that truck.
Or was it a demo/owner of the dealership used it a few days?

I don't understand that either; it happens with all makes.

When gas hit $4 + / per gal. local dealer was taking in 6 month old trucks (all makes , decked out) for as little as 50 % of the bluebook. The buyer ended up carrying the loss on the loan for their new economy car.
Don't know why instead of losing $10-15k they wouldn't finance a $3,000 Focus, Neon, or whatever.
The dealer made out like a bandit when gas went back down as they had stocked up.

[big hammer]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

and you are always more than content to compare a twin turbo engine to an n\a one. and also the new shelby will be the first factory 650 hp car to bust into the 12's stock!

you're getting better mileage towing then most guys do pulling nothing! something is wrong here...

yeah we're liberals. that's why you bull**** so much about how "superior" the ecgayboost is.

It would be interesting watching you three tear down an engine, measure it, turn the crank, resize the rods , etc, etc and then compare what is so poorly done about Fords vs GMs from the factory. You guys say Ford sucks, but when asked what specifically, it's more 3rd grade insults. None of you are engine builders, that's for sure.

I don't think in a engine shop either of you three are qualified to push around someones roller -

ford engines are junk to work on and maintain. the only thing the egayboost offers is much increased complexity with "v8 like performance" with piss poor resale off warranty because nobody in their right mind would own one without warranty.

turns out all you have to offer is 3rd grade insults with no facts to back anything up

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

You Champ, and Yak have nothing to ad but insults. Typical liberals.

Interesting words from the resident insult king...

And calling me a liberal is like calling the General George Patton a "wussy"...

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

The new Shelby is kicking out 650 horses on 5.8 liters to 638 on 6.2 if that makes you happy.

Will Ford finally accept GM's challenge to take the Shelby to the Nurburgring and make a couple laps?

Doubt it, because even if it can do 200MPH as they claim, it can't turn.

[big hammer]

Originally Posted by The Champ

Will Ford finally accept GM's challenge to take the Shelby to the Nurburgring and make a couple laps?

Doubt it, because even if it can do 200MPH as they claim, it can't turn.

never happen. we seen what the zl1 did to the boss around laguna seca, and it wasn't pretty.

[The Champ]

Originally Posted by big hammer

never happen. we seen what the zl1 did to the boss around laguna seca, and it wasn't pretty.

And more power won't fix the problem, despite our resident engine builder who thinks that his abilities with motors can fix any problem...

[big hammer]

Originally Posted by The Champ

And more power won't fix the problem, despite our resident engine builder who thinks that his abilities with motors can fix any problem...

more power will make it worse. the zl1 was faster in the straights AND in the corners.

[455Grandville]

Originally Posted by big hammer

ford engines are junk to work on and maintain. the only thing the egayboost offers is much increased complexity with "v8 like performance" with piss poor resale off warranty because nobody in their right mind would own one without warranty.

turns out all you have to offer is 3rd grade insults with no facts to back anything up

There we go again with the gay obsession. You just say junk, but that's all you have. No data. Do you and Champ even get your hands dirty or do you guys take your cars to Jiffy Lube for an oil change ?

FACT : Chebby uses weaker grade bolts then anyone. Main bolts are pretty bad especially.

FACT : Chebby almost always need they mains dusted in a rebuild, while Fords do not.

FACT : Chebby heads are very crack prone. Why ? Thin castings and siamesed exhaust = more heat.

FACT : Chebby engine assemblies usually tend to be the most unbalanced. Their rods usually show the greatest variance in weight.

FACT : Ive seen Chevvy factory engines with several sized main and rod bearings. Although if the tolerances are correct, it does not hurt the longevity but it does show sloppy workmanship.

FACT : Chebby blocks are usually way out of square; Ive seen as much as .080 difference from height to the crank centerline. Now that's sloppy.

FACT : Ford blocks usually have much thicker cylinder walls. Try boring a 350 Chebby .125 over and then do it to a 351 W -

FACT : You can offset a Ford 460 crank .300 ; what Chebby engine would live under that ?

Put a hardness tester on Ford parts then compare 'em to a Chebbys guts.

Back anything up ? Ive built/machined plenty of engines in 22 years : this 442 cid FE Ford was built from parts laying around. Started with a 390, bored it .080 & offset a 428 crank to 4.125' using Ford 240 rods.

Shame you're too far away, I'd enjoy running your 6.2 V8 with the 442 FE I built out of a pile of parts laying around. The truck did shut down/outhaul my cousins 6.0 -

While you're complaining about Turbos, why don't you tell me how I could have improved the setup I made of my IDI IH powered Ford ? It worked well, but it was first with a few flaws.

Im not even in the same league as plenty of Pontiac engine builders on here, but unlike you I can build an engine. If I arrive at a conclusion it's from experience. Built a few Hemis, also -

[Bob Hall]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

I don't understand that either; it happens with all makes.

When gas hit $4 + / per gal. local dealer was taking in 6 month old trucks (all makes , decked out) for as little as 50 % of the bluebook. The buyer ended up carrying the loss on the loan for their new economy car.
Don't know why instead of losing $10-15k they wouldn't finance a $3,000 Focus, Neon, or whatever.
The dealer made out like a bandit when gas went back down as they had stocked up.

Like I typed earlier, he wanted a larger engine. Driving from the Raystown Lake area to Gettysburg I averaged 18.5 mpg. I thought that was pretty good considering I had 5 mountains to cross on the way home. The active fuel management system on the 5.3 I think will work out well for me. I did look at the ecoboosts a few weeks ago at the auto show in Harrisburg. Wasn't impressed with the price marked on them. My neighbor has one and he says he isn't getting any better than 16 on the highway. To be fair, I think he likes hard acceleration.

For the situation and price I paid, I think (hope) I made the best choice yesterday.

[sleepy]

I wouldn't classify that Hybrid 6.2 a full size truck when it has HALF the towing capacity of the little 6 banger ford.
I'd be asking GM why twice the engine will only pull half as much.

[68gtoMN]

Here's the deal, Champ - lighten up. Seriously - your skin is way too thin. Here are a couple thoughts for you

1. On forums like this there will be some Sh*t talking and mostly it is done in fun. In my case, I have fun with screen names - all in fun. No nasty names, no foul language...
2. I do not instigate with caustic language, I react to the posts of others. Because of your invective, I pushed you a bit. It's funny to me because you react so strongly (see first comment).
3. Also, please notice that I have supported your choice to drive/like a chevy all along. They make fine trucks. I merely argued points with you for the sake of true argument (discussion) as I believe Ford has moved the bar with this engine tech and created a great vehicle. You, however, don't seem to be able to allow for the fact that Ford makes a good product also. If someone disagrees with you, you get revved near redline. You need to breathe.
4. Lastly, I believe one should embrace enhancements in technology as it will drive the competitors to improve their wares also. In this case, Ford raised the bar and I think it is great. a 3.5 Liter engine produces mileage near the top and power near the top in a smaller/lighter package. The false argument here is that the 3.5L is always supposed to get better mileage than the larger engines. The 3.5 allows for a smaller/lighter package, increased handling/braking, equal or better mileage in everyday driving and class leading power (with equal or better mileage) when needed. This is pure win!
5. Redirecting the argument to the ZL1 vs Shelby GT500 was a classic tactic used by those who can't compete on the argument at hand. These two cars use different means to an end. When the final configuration/tuning is set on the Shelby, you can rest assured that they will run it on the Nurburgring. We'll have to way to see what that brings. Either way you look at it, the consumer wins. The base 5.0 outperforms the 6.2 Camaro SS and Ford had the Shelby on top. Ford produced the Boss 302 for a track car and Chevy responded with the ZL1. It's impressive. Now, Ford has upgraded their offering in the Shelby GT500. Pure win!!

Have fun in the meadow

[big hammer]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

There we go again with the gay obsession. You just say junk, but that's all you have. No data. Do you and Champ even get your hands dirty or do you guys take your cars to Jiffy Lube for an oil change ?

FACT : Chebby uses weaker grade bolts then anyone. Main bolts are pretty bad especially.

FACT : Chebby almost always need they mains dusted in a rebuild, while Fords do not.

FACT : Chebby heads are very crack prone. Why ? Thin castings and siamesed exhaust = more heat.

FACT : Chebby engine assemblies usually tend to be the most unbalanced. Their rods usually show the greatest variance in weight.

FACT : Ive seen Chevvy factory engines with several sized main and rod bearings. Although if the tolerances are correct, it does not hurt the longevity but it does show sloppy workmanship.

FACT : Chebby blocks are usually way out of square; Ive seen as much as .080 difference from height to the crank centerline. Now that's sloppy.

FACT : Ford blocks usually have much thicker cylinder walls. Try boring a 350 Chebby .125 over and then do it to a 351 W -

FACT : You can offset a Ford 460 crank .300 ; what Chebby engine would live under that ?

Put a hardness tester on Ford parts then compare 'em to a Chebbys guts.

Back anything up ? Ive built/machined plenty of engines in 22 years : this 442 cid FE Ford was built from parts laying around. Started with a 390, bored it .080 & offset a 428 crank to 4.125' using Ford 240 rods.

Shame you're too far away, I'd enjoy running your 6.2 V8 with the 442 FE I built out of a pile of parts laying around. The truck did shut down/outhaul my cousins 6.0 -

While you're complaining about Turbos, why don't you tell me how I could have improved the setup I made of my IDI IH powered Ford ? It worked well, but it was first with a few flaws.

Im not even in the same league as plenty of Pontiac engine builders on here, but unlike you I can build an engine. If I arrive at a conclusion it's from experience. Built a few Hemis, also -

man are you ever living in the past. stock LS bottom ends have been pushed past 4 hp\ci without machenical failure. 5.3's can be bored out to 5.7 with room to spare.

ls engines are cheap, economical hp with fantastic modability. how often do you hear that about ford modulars? never.

ford couldn't even figure out how design cylinder heads for their 5.4's without spark plug issues.

ford engines have always had HORRIBLE compatability with any of their other lines. they are more pricey to build with usually less output. there's a reason that gm engines have always been WAY more popular in the hotrodding community.

if you had trouble beating a 6.0 you wouldn't come close to a 6.2. there is a mile of difference between the two engines.

you can bore an old 283 into a 350 bore. pretty sweet hey?

why are you crossing your fingers and hoping i'm gay? that's weird.

why do you assume i can't build an engine? given your love for fords you don't know very much.

[big hammer]

for ford guys who keep bragging about the 3.5's output compared chevy's v8, but discount the fact that it has twin turbos, you automatically fail. give it up. gm's 6.2 VASTLY outperforms the n\a 3.5, so it's clearly superior, right