200X SVT Lightning Mule Pic?

[old_fairmont_wagon]

I think the Adrenalin is actually Ford's best bet for a performance truck. Due to the F-150's weight, it will take considerable power to just get back to where they were at with the previous Lightning. Plus, the 2 seater scheme isn't for everyone. Until Ford has a more efficient means to extract better mileage with large V8 or V10, they should stick with a smaller truck. I'd also bet that they could charge less for the Sport Trac Adrenalin than a F-150 Lightning.

 

I dunno, I think that they could have charged MORE for the adrenalin. After all, it would have more seating, get better gas mileage, and would have offered more power than the last gen lightning did (if that engine was really in cobra trim or better). Plus, due to its smaller size, it would have likely been a better performer.

[Traveler]

Valid points, but the Lightning concept's powertrain/drivetrain (or even the Shelby GT-500s) would seem to come at a hefty premium. Producing the Adrenalin with the blown 4.6L, along with an appropriate automatic would make it more for the masses than a standard cab Lightning. The Lightning would also be the vehicle between the two most likely for dealers to price gouged, which could ultimately hurt the existance of it. I'd like to see the Lightning return at some point, but I think its best left on hiatus for awhile and explore a different direction.

[wescoent]

Ironic, considering how the SRT-10 Ram appeared just as the Lightning disappeared, and now the Lightning will be back just in time to see the end of the SRT-10 Ram.

 

From what I've heard, Ford was basically done developing the Lightning, but simply could not find a suitable automatic transmission to match with the supercharged 5.4L engine. So, if that's the case, we might as well make the Lightning, and not throw away all that development money.

 

Other options would be to build the Sport-Trac Adrenaline, build a twin-turbo 3.5L Ford Ranger Thunderbolt with the motor out of the new Lincoln MKS, or spend the money now on an SVT Fusion, and wait for the next-gen F-150. I would suggest an SVT Focus, but they might as well wait a year for the Focus MKIII to get here before doing anything with the older current platform.

[Traveler]

From my understanding there are possibly two directions for the SRT Ram. I've read of rumors suggesting a move to a SRT-8 Ram and its a fact that Dodge is planning on a production of Viper "Diamondbacks" that will boost horsepower north of 600 horsepower. You have there two options, but I honestly believe Dodge will elect to move the Ram to 6.1L V8 as it does not have a legacy that the Viper has had since its induction. Vipers will continue to sell because their obviously limited production and Chevy is giving it to Dodge with both barrels with a better performing, lower priced Z06 and soon with their big gun, the supercharged 7.0L

 

Its funny how in the midst of the worst Middle East instablity in a quarter century and oil prices reaching new records, we're still talking about 400+ horsepower engines burning premium gasoline like its $2.00 gallon. Something has got to give. I wouldn't be surprised to start seeing a lot of these projects getting shelved with only exceptions being for those capable of buying Vipers and factory blown Corvettes.

I think given gas prices like they are, we need to concentrate on maintaining the power in the vehicles we have today and instead of escalating into a battle of horsepower, vehicles should keep what they have with improving gas mileage. Both of my vehicles are solid performers for everyday usage. Consider that a 4.6L Crown Vic accelerates much better than 351W Crown Vic police cars did just 20 years ago and gets much better average mileage. Just a few years ago you had a 5.9 Magnum in the Dodge that only made 250 horsepower and the 5.7 makes 100 horsepower more with slightly better mileage. In think for most average Americans, the realization has started setting in that play toy automobiles are becoming less practical and the need for a good balance is more important. Consider that a new Sport Trac for considerably less money already performs great with a near 300 horsepower from its V8. Few can argue with that and suddenly you need heavy justification to spend an extra $12,000 on a extra 100 horsepower so as to spend more per gallon both as a result of premium gasoline needs and increased fuel consumption. Maybe that's my age talking. I'm getting older...maybe a tad wiser too.

Edited July 18, 2006 by Traveler

[silvrsvt]

Its funny how in the midst of the worst Middle East instablity in a quarter century and oil prices reaching new records, we're still talking about 400+ horsepower engines burning premium gasoline like its $2.00 gallon. Something has got to give. I wouldn't be surprised to start seeing a lot of these projects getting shelved with only exceptions being for those capable of buying Vipers and factory blown Corvettes.

 

 

There will always be a market for a performance type vechicle and people will pay the preium for them.

[CanadaSVT]

I still believe Ford will slap the Shelby name on the next SVT truck.

Christ I hope not. Shelby is a wasted name nowadays. The GT500 would have been great without his name attached to it. Anyone remember the Dodge Shelby in the 80's? That man has no loyalty, only to $$$$.

[chkchka]

GT500 rims, large side exit exhaust on pass. side.

 

Lightning?

 

 

 

They scrapped SVT because of the way forward plan and cost cutting. I'm sure it will be back eventually when/if Ford ever gets back on its feet.

 

I would bet this pic is not a prototype. Nobody has mentioned that the box side is a 6' style side, not a 5' flareside. If anything it would be the smallest bed possible that being a 5' style or flare. Also I have read that they engineered this truck with racing in mind so the Lightning would've been feasible on this model. If you think it's too heavy then should look at the Dodge Viper truck as its main competition in regaining its fastest production truck title.

 

I also was ready to buy the Adrenaline. That was a bad mofo and I'm sure would sell. Ford doesn't realize there is a market for the SVT if they make the right vehicle. I imagine that's why Ford is in so much trouble now because of all the years of being out of touch with certain consumers.

[Blue II]

The next lightening may be on the F-100 platform with the MKS TT V-6. Since this engine is being tested in a mule F-150 as we speak it would make more sense to build an F-100 based Lightening.

[silvrsvt]

The next lightening may be on the F-100 platform with the MKS TT V-6. Since this engine is being tested in a mule F-150 as we speak it would make more sense to build an F-100 based Lightening.

 

 

So this F-100 you speak of is the Ranger replacement based on the Explorer platform?

[igor]

Silvrsvt .. yes

 

and BlueII .. .could this by any chance be THE TTV6 mule? after all it is AWD and F150....

 

Igor

[NickF1011]

They scrapped SVT because of the way forward plan and cost cutting. I'm sure it will be back eventually when/if Ford ever gets back on its feet.

 

Umm..SVT hasn't been scrapped as an organization...just more or less as a marketing entity. The GT500 is an SVT-led project, even if it's not badged as an SVT vehicle directly. There will be more from them on the way.

[wescoent]

It would make a lot more sense to have the performance truck be the smallest, lightest truck Ford makes. Assuming there is a 4.0L truck version of the motor on the way, I'd say apply the twin turbo plumbing and such to the 4.0L in the F100, throw on a powerdome hood, lower it, put on the GT500 rims, tighten the hell out of the suspension, put in a pair of racy bucket seats, and you're good to go.

[Bluecon]

One reason they are not building the Lightning is they have had no V8 assembly line capable of building the 5.4l supercharged engines in the quantity required.

Previously they were built on the LVL line at Windsor and then the new V8 line at Essex.

The Essex line was shut down and the LVL converted to V10.

They cannot build the supercharged engine on the high volume line at Windsor.

They either have or will be building V8s on the Windsor LVL and should then have the capability to build the Lightning motors.

[silvrsvt]

One reason they are not building the Lightning is they have had no V8 assembly line capable of building the 5.4l supercharged engines in the quantity required.

Previously they were built on the LVL line at Windsor and then the new V8 line at Essex.

The Essex line was shut down and the LVL converted to V10.

They cannot build the supercharged engine on the high volume line at Windsor.

They either have or will be building V8s on the Windsor LVL and should then have the capability to build the Lightning motors.

 

 

lets see...where is Ford getting the GT500 engines from? More or less the same engine as what would be found in the Lightning...with similar production numbers

[Blue II]

So this F-100 you speak of is the Ranger replacement based on the Explorer platform?

 

This is what some are saying. It is the Ranger replacement. Time will tell.

 

Silvrsvt .. yes

 

and BlueII .. .could this by any chance be THE TTV6 mule? after all it is AWD and F150....

 

Igor

 

It is a Mule for the MKS application. The RWD block will be a different configuration and probably 3.7 liters for a std F-150 to replace the 4.2 SEFI.

[mrjones944]

Remember the SVT Lightning Bolt Ranger prototype? That was an awsome little piece that should have made production.

Good lord that would have been an awesome truck. The concept stomped all over the lighting in every way possible too. But maybe one could hope that FMC will do something like that with the next Ranger...if they ever make another Ranger.

[NickF1011]

Good lord that would have been an awesome truck. The concept stomped all over the lighting in every way possible too. But maybe one could hope that FMC will do something like that with the next Ranger...if they ever make another Ranger.

 

The concept also wore some ridiculous non-feasible-for-production 335-width rear tires if I recall just to keep its butt end planted. Even then, all of the tests I saw on the Lightningbolt concept weren't very impressive considering its power-to-weight ratio.

[Sizzler]

The current bodystyle is just too blocky IMHO to make for a good-looking sport truck. The headlights, front end, bed rail height...just not a sporty profile. That's what I like about Dodge. The curvaceousness of the sides of the truck make it look good for work or play. Likewise, the variation in the sheetmetal makes the last Lightning look good too. The previous HD while a bit more slab-sided than the Lightning or Ram, looked a lot sharper than the current Harley F-150.

 

Aside from the 4x4 Lariats with the chrome trim, I really don't care for the current F-150s that much.

 

 

Time to take the 500, chop off the back, and make a new Ranchero, short bed.

Use the AWD components, stiffen things up, and stick a 3.5TT in there.

 

Light, (sorta) useful, easy mileage, nice interior. Heck with all these overweight truck behemoths pretending to be sporty for the even larger behemoths steering with their mouths full yacking on the phone.

 

But that's just me thinking...

[wescoent]

Time to take the 500, chop off the back, and make a new Ranchero, short bed.

Use the AWD components, stiffen things up, and stick a 3.5TT in there.

 

Light, (sorta) useful, easy mileage, nice interior. Heck with all these overweight truck behemoths pretending to be sporty for the even larger behemoths steering with their mouths full yacking on the phone.

 

But that's just me thinking...

 

Doesn't really make a whole lot of sense, especially from the cost perspective. All they need to do is use the 2009 Explorer platform for a new Ranger (which they're probably going to do anyway), and they have a perfectly satisfactory truck.

[Sizzler]

Doesn't really make a whole lot of sense, especially from the cost perspective. All they need to do is use the 2009 Explorer platform for a new Ranger (which they're probably going to do anyway), and they have a perfectly satisfactory truck.

 

Not talking about a truck. Talking about a Ranchero. Look it up in the dusty tomes of Ford history.

 

Never understood the desire to use a draft horse for the Preakness. A unit body chopped 500 would be a better performing platform to use than a Ranger and just as utilitarian. And with AWD, shaved weight from a missing back end, could be excellent. Better interior, Better ride.

 

Really, seriously, look up Ranchero and learn about marketing and market niches.

[wescoent]

Not talking about a truck. Talking about a Ranchero. Look it up in the dusty tomes of Ford history.

 

Never understood the desire to use a draft horse for the Preakness. A unit body chopped 500 would be a better performing platform to use than a Ranger and just as utilitarian. And with AWD, shaved weight from a missing back end, could be excellent. Better interior, Better ride.

 

Really, seriously, look up Ranchero and learn about marketing and market niches.

 

Oh, I remember the Ranchero AND El Camino, one of the worst vehicles Ford and GM ever made. Was horrible as a car because it only seated 3, and was horrible as a truck because it couldn't haul anything, and now roams the streets as the redneck ride of choice. A unit-body pickup truck based off the Five Hundred would have nightmarish chassis flex because it just lost half of its structural support, and the extra bracing needed to beef it up would make it weigh as much as an F-150 anyway.

 

Ford already showed the vehicle as the Freestyle FX concept a few years ago. With the utter market failure of the XUV of GM, I'm not sure why Ford would want to dive into the market.

[tommyturbo]

Christ I hope not. Shelby is a wasted name nowadays. The GT500 would have been great without his name attached to it. Anyone remember the Dodge Shelby in the 80's? That man has no loyalty, only to $$$$.

 

Actually any man who can take a dodge omin and make it perform like a vette is a fuckin genius. Thats what the man did with the glhs. And for what it's worth chryslers turbocharged fwd cars of the 80's were far more advanced in electronics, boost control and inovation than alot of domestics of the time

[Sizzler]

Oh, I remember the Ranchero AND El Camino, one of the worst vehicles Ford and GM ever made. Was horrible as a car because it only seated 3, and was horrible as a truck because it couldn't haul anything, and now roams the streets as the redneck ride of choice. A unit-body pickup truck based off the Five Hundred would have nightmarish chassis flex because it just lost half of its structural support, and the extra bracing needed to beef it up would make it weigh as much as an F-150 anyway.

 

Ford already showed the vehicle as the Freestyle FX concept a few years ago. With the utter market failure of the XUV of GM, I'm not sure why Ford would want to dive into the market.

 

The XUV was a SUV-based, thing.

 

Again, look up the history. The ranchero was based on the old Fairlane/Torino platforms...cars. NOT trucks or today's equivalents, SUV's. It was a CAR, with a bed instead of a trunk. The 500 is a CAR, not a truck.

Sort of where Lincoln was going with their luxo-barge-useless-truck recently. Except it wasn't a car-based truck now was it? It was, underneath it all, a truck.

 

Whatever. I'm not advocating a return of the Ranchero, unless Ford decides to produce a "performance" truck, which as an oxymoron is equal to goverment intelligience.

 

Flexing. If I remember right, the Fairlane/Torino platform the Ranchero was based on was unit-bodied. Amazing things the engineers accomplished back in the 60's that are just so much black magic to today's Ford engineers.

[prespoint]

I used to work for a company located adjacent to the Ford High Altitude Emissions Test Lab in Denver, CO at the time that they were testing the second generation Lightning. Both regular cab and extended cab versions of the truck were undergoing testing even though only the regular cab version eventually made it to market. It could very well be the same thing here. The extended cab trucks that I observed were not early program test mules cobbled together from various bin components but rather very finished, very complete including all the trim pieces and ground effects.