FX4 is a pretty decent deal (at least on the Ranger).
Locking axle, Trail Control, Trail Modes, Skid plates, front bash plate, upgraded shocks, nifty sticker.
I do wish they had thrown an extra inch of travel, but hey....its not like I'm going to do more than mild trails myself anyway most likely.
Anyone know why my 09 Flex LTD has intermittent starting problems. Had to have it towed yesterday and it was -25... no fun. Once on the tow truck platform it started but reverse lights were on in park! Plus couldn’t move the stick shift out of park. Any ideas?
You know tunes can be changed, right? The same Dodge 8.0 V10 powered trucks and Vipers.
Same with the mods, the 460 and so on.
A block is a block. Moving the 7.3 to a Mustang would obviously have new heads, camshafts, timing, intake/exhaust etc. No truck engine would go in a car as-is.
As we've discussed before, the Ranger crew cab has about the same amount of rear leg room as the F150 Supercab, the Ranger Supercab rear leg room is probably too tight for most people's tastes...well, that's the perception in other markets anway..
Supercab is probably there as an entry product across trim levels for people prepared to trade off some rear leg room for a slightly bigger tray.
First thank you for clarification regarding which link. Now regardless of what's said recently, we know theoldwizzard was there during development of Hurricane / Boss and if he says it wasn't considered back then then I'm deferring to smoeone who was actually there and discussing the program with engineers first hand. It is possible that Ford considered DI for later applications but they have shown zero interest in changing the sewer pipe 2V head and the twin spark plug set up that would seem to block any favorable positioning of the direct injector.
(I think you misunderstood my post I'm agreeing with what you're saying, nowhere did I mention anything about non-truck HP versions. )
Which is exactly what I said ( 450 HP and 500 lb ft) that was based on the Ford engineer on the TFL video who said that the 7.3 would give a good incremental increase over the two current engines, the 6.2 and 6.8 ....he also said that the 7.3 would have a similar operating range as the current F Series engines - the 6.2 an 4.5 have peak power at 5750 and 4750 respectively,
The later 6.8 v10 3V puts out 369 HP @ 4750, not the 2V's 320 HP. The current 6.2 puts out 385 HP at 5750 thanks to its VCT giving it more top end. The glory of the 6.8 V10 3v is that it has 400 lb ft at 1600, rising to 457 lb ft at 3250 and even at its lowish 4750 peak power, it still has 400 lb ft. which then leads me to your next piece.
OK, following on from discussion the 6.8 V10 3V torque curve above, it is my belief that the 7.3 will deliver 50 lb ft more everywhere than the 6.8 V10, and spelling that out.....450 lb ft @ 1600 rpm, rising to 500 lb ft at 3250 or 3500 and then trailing off to 450 lb ft at 5200 (our 450 HP point)
Totally agree, I think that the priority was getting the biggest, broadest torque curve possible and let the peak HP fall wherever but in saying that probably enough to beat GM 6.6. I hope this clarifys my opinons with the new 7.3 as i believe we're basically saying the same thing. All anyone has to do is look at the engine cutaway and see just how long the valve stems and springs are compared to the rockers just above them...that's an MD engine.