Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Ford / Ford Trucks / September 2003

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

How to disable speed limiter on F250 SD 2003

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Guido - 20 Sep 2003 06:49 GMT
Is there a method of disabling the speed limiter on a 2003 f250 superduty
5.4 triton?? Without using a hyperchip??

please post or e-mail

donn1@shaw.ca

Thanks for any help
Falcoon - 20 Sep 2003 11:50 GMT
the easyist way is to blow by a cop, cutting him off almost sending him into
the guardrail. he will bust you ,rip up your liscence, and then you will not
have to worry about the truck being speed governed
PC PODD - 20 Sep 2003 14:01 GMT
Interesting ...

> the easyist way is to blow by a cop, cutting him off almost sending him into
> the guardrail. he will bust you ,rip up your liscence, and then you will not
> have to worry about the truck being speed governed
EJGroth - 20 Sep 2003 22:14 GMT
>Subject: Re: How to disable speed limiter on F250 SD 2003
>From: falcoon@aol.com  (Falcoon)
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>the guardrail. he will bust you ,rip up your liscence, and then you will not
>have to worry about the truck being speed governed

I'll take that as a "I don't know".
Falcoon - 20 Sep 2003 22:42 GMT
no, actually i do know how, but also feel anyone that feels they have to go
faster than their vehicle is governed at does not deserve the privelage of a
drivers liscence,and should have at least 5 cops up their a.ses any time they
get behind the wheel
IdaSpode - 22 Sep 2003 21:51 GMT
>no, actually i do know how, but also feel anyone that feels they have to go
>faster than their vehicle is governed at does not deserve the privelage of a
>drivers liscence,and should have at least 5 cops up their a.ses any time they
>get behind the wheel.

Hmmm, as far as I know, the highest posted speed limit in the US is 75
mph. Have you ever driven a vehicle faster than that?

How about if the manufacturer of *your* vehicle decided you didn't
need to drive at any speed which would exceed the max 75 mph legal
limit? Would you accept it? If you wanted to make your vehicle capable
of going faster than that would you also qualify for:

"...does not deserve the privilege of a drivers license, and should
have at least 5 cops up your a.s any time you get behind the wheel."

I can't believe all the dumbass replies this poor fellow is getting...

David Jones
djones<at>LSidaho.com
gw - 22 Sep 2003 22:04 GMT
Are we going to start the "Big Brother" argument again?

The speed limiter is not set to 75MPH, it is set just below the maximum
speed rating of the cheap sh!t OEM tires.

Explorer. Underinflation. High Speed. BOOM. Rollovers. Lawsuits. Death of a
tire company (seen any Firestones lately?). Thank the lawyers and generous
juries for your speed limiters, then fork out the $200 for a chip, and about
$600 for high-speed tires.

The manufacturer decided what the maximum safe operating speed of the
vehicle is as a design package. It is not some cabal to curb speeding.

> >no, actually i do know how, but also feel anyone that feels they have to go
> >faster than their vehicle is governed at does not deserve the privelage of a
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> David Jones
> djones<at>LSidaho.com
Falcoon - 22 Sep 2003 23:39 GMT
first off i have no need to excede the speed limit. second ,in my years with
the police and fire departments,i have seen way to many dead people that had
the rite to excede the speed limit, including 2 teenagers that had the rite to
die sat morning when they tried to take a 25mph turn at 95.
David M - 23 Sep 2003 05:36 GMT
> first off i have no need to excede the speed limit. second ,in my years
> with the police and fire departments,i have seen way to many dead people
> that had the rite to excede the speed limit, including 2 teenagers that
> had the rite to die sat morning when they tried to take a 25mph turn at
> 95.

Try using the spell checker next time.  
akvaska@sbcglobal.net - 23 Sep 2003 11:05 GMT
Maybe he wants to know for educational purposes only??
Can't we give him the benefit of the doubt?

> > first off i have no need to excede the speed limit. second ,in my years
> > with the police and fire departments,i have seen way to many dead people
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> Try using the spell checker next time.
IdaSpode - 23 Sep 2003 16:51 GMT
>first off i have no need to excede the speed limit.

Shall we take that as an affirmation that indeed, it would not bother
you if your vehicle had a speed limiter that cut in at 75mph (or
whatever the maximum legal speed limit in your neck of the woods) with
like rated tires as stock equipment?

>second ,in my years with
>the police and fire departments,i have seen way to many dead people that had
>the rite to excede the speed limit, including 2 teenagers that had the rite to
>die sat morning when they tried to take a 25mph turn at 95.

No matter how hard people try, you can't outlaw stupidity. Would it
have made a difference if a limiter kicked in at 90?

Maybe we need to carry the "Onstar" concept a few steps further. I saw
a short story on the news last evening about how a stolen car can be
located with Onstar, and the horn and emergency flashing lights being
activated from afar. How about active elements imbedded in (or next
to) the road surface that communicate with your vehicle which will
prevent you from exceeding the posted speed limit? Good idea or bad?

David Jones
djones<at>LSidaho.com
frosty - 23 Sep 2003 17:53 GMT
[snip]
> Maybe we need to carry the "Onstar" concept a few steps further. I saw
> a short story on the news last evening about how a stolen car can be
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> David Jones
> djones<at>LSidaho.com

I'm guessing John Ashcroft would like that idea!  =`:^>

-- frosty
Dave Mundt - 23 Sep 2003 18:58 GMT
    Greetings and Salutations.

    *snip*

>Maybe we need to carry the "Onstar" concept a few steps further. I saw
>a short story on the news last evening about how a stolen car can be
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>David Jones
>djones<at>LSidaho.com

    I would say, overall, a "neutral" thing, that could be turned
to "evil" fairly easily, so, something that we should avoid.  It used
to be that the only folks under constant observation were high
security prisoners.  Now, more and more, ordinary citizens are
burdened with that same, intrusive presence.
    I saw a note on http://www.theregister.co.uk/ yesterday that
the folks in Great Britain are considering something like this, but,
but government is apparently planning to use it to track what roads
the citizens use, for toll billing purpose.  At the end of the month,
you would get a bill for the total amount you spent on the various
toll roads.  While it might SOUND attractive, I can only see
government using this as a tool of taxation as quickly as possible,
and, sucking MORE money out of our pockets.  A bad thing.
    Not only that, it is another step in the process of turning us
into mewling infants and removing personal responsibility from us.
How are we going to grow up if we are continually told that we are not
adult enough to take responsiblity for following the laws.   If we do
not mature enough to do this, then, we are not citizens, we are sheep,
being mindlessly herded from place to place from birth to slaughter.
Is that the promise and dream of America?   I think not.
    Finally, while electronics, etc, are wonderful things, there
is always the possibility of failure...and what happens then?
    Regards
    Dave Mundt
Falcoon - 23 Sep 2003 20:20 GMT
it would not bother me if the speed was governed at 65.  because i very rarely
excede 60, and the max speed in most of the country is 65, including here in
nj.
Jeepers - 23 Sep 2003 20:50 GMT
> it would not bother me if the speed was governed at 65.  because i very rarely
> excede 60, and the max speed in most of the country is 65, including here in
> nj.

75, here in parts of Texas. There are places where you can drive this
speed for HOURS on end.
rokkinhorse@webtv.net - 29 Sep 2003 04:25 GMT
Nevada is the same way; posted 75.
My first introduction to the speed limiter on my 94 Bronco was in
Montana in 1996.
The speed posted there was "safe and prudent". I think it's changed now
to a posted limit.
FWIW, mine cut out at very close to 120MPH, as near as I can figure.
The road system I was on (I-90) at the time was smooth, wide superslab,
with wide clear aprons and basically -straight-.
My Bronco was two years old and I had just had a set of BFG trail T/As
put on it.
The truck was capable of considerably more, the tires were NOT.

YMMV.

Randy
94 Bronco EB
95 Bronco XLT
96 XL (Son's)

alvinj@XX.com - 29 Sep 2003 05:01 GMT
> FWIW, mine cut out at very close to 120MPH, as near as I can figure.
> The truck was capable of considerably more, the tires were NOT.
> Randy
> 94 Bronco EB
> 95 Bronco XLT
> 96 XL (Son's)

Back in the 70's goodyear made "police special" tires.  They were
basically half worn out tires brand new for more money. :)  The
tread was shallow, brand new, like 1/2 or even 1/3 normal.  They
were rated at 120mph.  A guy told me not long ago that all car  
tires were rated at 120mph now.  Is that so? :/

Alvin in AZ ('75 F150 235/85-16's load-E)
Blair Baucom - 29 Sep 2003 05:29 GMT
There are lots of different ratings, should be a chart at most tire
websites. Off the top of my head:
S=112 mph
H=130 mph
V=149 mph
Z=149 + mph

See www.tirerack.com/tires/tiretech/general/speed.htm for more codes.

Blair
> > FWIW, mine cut out at very close to 120MPH, as near as I can figure.
> > The truck was capable of considerably more, the tires were NOT.
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> Alvin in AZ ('75 F150 235/85-16's load-E)
Plasyd - 29 Sep 2003 05:11 GMT
I can recall before the speed limit was "reasonable and prudent" it was a
$5.00 fine, payable in cash to the officer that pulled you over, did not
show up on your records, and was written for 'Wasting a Natural Resource'.

The joke used to be you put a $20.00 bill in your window when you crossed
the state line, and drove as fast as you felt like.

It's no longer that way. <sob>

Plasyd

> Nevada is the same way; posted 75.
> My first introduction to the speed limiter on my 94 Bronco was in
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> 95 Bronco XLT
> 96 XL (Son's)
Ralph E Lindberg - 29 Sep 2003 13:28 GMT
> Nevada is the same way; posted 75.
> My first introduction to the speed limiter on my 94 Bronco was in
> Montana in 1996.
> The speed posted there was "safe and prudent". I think it's changed now
> to a posted limit.

Yes it has ..

> FWIW, mine cut out at very close to 120MPH, as near as I can figure.
> The road system

..and the fine for that speed would curl your hair (ie they would call
it reckless driving)

Signature

--------------------------------------------------------
Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org
This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read
RV and Camping FAQ can be found at
http://kendaco.telebyte.com/rlindber/RV

Gromit - 28 Sep 2003 03:35 GMT
There was a time that the max speed was 55, deemed as the most fuel
efficient and safest.  Just because you don't go over 60 does not mean
the rest of us follow in your tracks.
Hell, my grandfather (before he died.  He slowed down considderably
afterward) rarely broke 50.  Far as he was concerned, nobody should be
allowed to run greater than 50.

>it would not bother me if the speed was governed at 65.  because i very rarely
>excede 60, and the max speed in most of the country is 65, including here in
>nj.
C-squared - 24 Sep 2003 04:38 GMT
>No matter how hard people try, you can't outlaw stupidity.

and that is (partially the reason) why the speed governors were
installed.

-----------------------------------------------------
http://atv.corpsie.com (Suzuki Z400 page)

If you're going to ridicule my post, please
do it publicly and stop privately e-mailing me.
Gromit - 28 Sep 2003 03:32 GMT
Please don't go drumming up the theatrics about your 'years with the
police and fire depts'.  I've logged 16 years with fire/rescue, quite
a few of 'em as a paramedic.  I now work in an ICU at a local
hospital.
Teenagers do stupid things.  So do adults.  People die in slow speed
crashes all the time, running stop signs.  Others have a heart attack
behind the wheel.  They all had the rite (lets spell it correctly:
RIGHT) to die.  Who made YOU the moral authority to safe-guard
everyone else?
You have no need to excede the speed limit?  Ok.  So you are the one
person in the whole country that never speeds?  Never tips the pedal a
few miles over the limit?  Never pumps the go-pedal to get around
someone who may be running a bit too slow?
Makes you the rare one.  Personally, I like knowing I have the power
if I so decide to employ it.
I don't like someone deciding they have the right to dictate what I
cannot have, just because they think they are safeguarding me.
If I want that, I'll go to some socialist country.

>first off i have no need to excede the speed limit. second ,in my years with
>the police and fire departments,i have seen way to many dead people that had
>the rite to excede the speed limit, including 2 teenagers that had the rite to
>die sat morning when they tried to take a 25mph turn at 95.
Exodus - 28 Sep 2003 03:56 GMT
You are already living in a socialist country.  You are just too damned
stupid to recognize it.  If there was no speed limiter on the vehicle,
you would be complaining that they didn't design it with a more powerful
engine that would allow you to go the speed of light.  Hey, some people
just like to find something to bitch about.  It appears that you are one
of those people.

> Please don't go drumming up the theatrics about your 'years with the
> police and fire depts'.  I've logged 16 years with fire/rescue, quite
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> >the rite to excede the speed limit, including 2 teenagers that had the rite to
> >die sat morning when they tried to take a 25mph turn at 95.
Gromit - 29 Sep 2003 03:24 GMT
Excuse me, but the bitching was done by YOU, my socialist friend.  YOU
were saying how nobody else should be allowed and should have cops on
their a.s and all that rot.
Besides, I don't bitch that they don't build enough power into the
engine.  I go to speed-shops and buy what I need to make my engines
what I want them.
No bitching.  Yes building.

BTW, you show your ignorance too clearly.  You want REAL socialism,
you need to look elsewhere.
Been there.
Liberals are fast pushing our country in that direction, but we still
have a long way to go.

>You are already living in a socialist country.  You are just too damned
>stupid to recognize it.  If there was no speed limiter on the vehicle,
[quoted text clipped - 29 lines]
>the rite to
>> >die sat morning when they tried to take a 25mph turn at 95.
Exodus - 29 Sep 2003 05:46 GMT
You have me confused with someone else.  I said nothing about cops on
your a.s.

> Excuse me, but the bitching was done by YOU, my socialist friend.  YOU
> were saying how nobody else should be allowed and should have cops on
[quoted text clipped - 43 lines]
> >the rite to
> >> >die sat morning when they tried to take a 25mph turn at 95.
Dave Mundt - 28 Sep 2003 05:44 GMT
    Greetings and Salutations...

>first off i have no need to excede the speed limit. second ,in my years with
>the police and fire departments,i have seen way to many dead people that had
>the rite to excede the speed limit, including 2 teenagers that had the rite to
>die sat morning when they tried to take a 25mph turn at 95.

    Although you have been taken to task by others for using
"rite" instead of "right", I prefer to think that you were using some
subtle humor and wisdom here.  From www.dictionary.com:
    P   Pronunciation Key  (rt)
n.
1) The prescribed or customary form for conducting a religious or
other solemn ceremony: the rite of baptism.
2) A ceremonial act or series of acts: fertility rites.

    For WAY too many folks in the world, their way of proving
how powerful and virile they are is to drive way over the speed
limit.  For SOME folks, the problem is that they are ignorant.  They
do not have a clue as to the forces involved in speed, and how easily
it can go out of control.  I hope that is why I was passed by SUVs
(some of which had the drivers chatting away on the phone) last
winter, as they blasted along at 60 MPH on the interstate, in spite
of several inches of snow, and, upwards of an inch of ice.
    Actually, I proposed, some time ago, that the states implement
Smart Card licenses, that would have an "upper speed limit" for the
driver, based on reflex and perception tests administered every
few years.   The vehicles could have slots that the license would
slip into.  The cops could set up with a radar gun that would
ping the vehicle, and, flag anyone that was driving "over the limit".
    needless to say, there are a lot of avenues for abuse here,
from the side of the drivers - with folks borrowing other folk's
licenses, to the authorities - setting up automated speed traps, to
the fact that this pretty well ignores "special conditions".
    Why DO we have speed limits anyway?  I suspect that the "main"
goal is to keep large numbers of citizens from killing themselves by
hitting a given stretch of road faster than is safe.   Now, the state
also makes a boatload of cash off folks that exceed the speed limit,
which is a negative.   I also suspect that, while in some cases,
the speed limit is an arbitrary number, in most cases is is the
maximum safe speed through an area, under bad conditions.   There
are a lot of curves and sections of road where the speed limit is
as fast as one wants to drive when it is foggy, or rainy, or there
is snow and ice on the road.   It is quite true, too, that one
can drive through the same section of road at anywhere from
10 MPH to 30 MPH faster than the posted speed limit when the
conditions are good (dry road, sunlight, etc).  Around here in
Knoxpatch, the posted speed limit on the Interstate through
construction zones tends to be 45 MPH.   To me this makes sense,
because there are large numbers of people working only a foot
or two from the traffic, and, lots of large pieces of machinery
moving heavy bits about.  It is an excellent chance for a slight
mishap to deposit a human, or a large chunk of rock/dirt right
in front of you.  Driving at 45 WAY increases the time one
might have to react, and, cuts the distance needed to stop by
a huge percentage too.  There is a good reason for that speed
limit, which makes it even more puzzling to me as to why folks
blast through the construction areas at 60 MPH.
    As for the other post about driving through Texas...
out in that area of the country, one can drive at 90 MPH
for hours and hardly see a change in the country.   I think
that the speed limit SHOULD be higher in those areas.
    In any case, sorry for rambling along, but,
I seem to be poking about this issue just now.
    Regards
    Dave Mundt
David M - 28 Sep 2003 16:16 GMT
>     Greetings and Salutations...
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> "rite" instead of "right", I prefer to think that you were using some
> subtle humor and wisdom here.  From www.dictionary.com:

Nah, he jost doesnt no how to speeel.
Plasyd - 28 Sep 2003 16:53 GMT
 <snip>
>I also suspect that, while in some cases,
> the speed limit is an arbitrary number, in most cases is is the
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> 10 MPH to 30 MPH faster than the posted speed limit when the
> conditions are good (dry road, sunlight, etc). <snip>

> Dave Mundt

A while back Montana had a "Reasonable and Prudent" upper speed limit.
Trucks and night driving was limited @ 65.

It's no longer that way. I had no problem driving on dry roads in excess of
3 digits in my Shelby with Z rated tires. The problem was the idiots driving
junkers with regular tires trying to run the same speeds.

This is why I would not only have the individual licensed for high speed
driving, but also the equipment. For instance, my high speed license would
only be valid in the Shelby, while in my Ranger, bone stock, it would not
apply.

That being said. I'm not so sure I'd want to get a full size pick-up going
much faster than 75. But this is only a reflection of my living in Montana
for a while, and seeing what happens when a high center of gravity vehicle
tries to make a sudden lane change at a high rate of speed.

Trucks and SUV's don't handle like Mustang SVT Cobra's, or for that matter,
a car in general. Frankly, if you need to go fast, get a vehicle that can
handle it.

Plasyd

--
Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of
the last priest.
-- Diderot
Gromit - 29 Sep 2003 03:32 GMT
Heartily agree with this.  When I was driving the rig, I had to have a
Class A CDL with special endorsements for the equipment I was driving
and product type I was hauling (was licensed to drive doubles,
tripples, tankers, as well as hazardous materials.
My equipment was, to say the least, designed to do what I was doing,
and I had proven I could perform these tasks at least to a minimal
ability.
High-speed driving SHOULD be performed in equipment made for such
purposes, and no, I wouldn't dream of running my F250 up in that
tripple-digit area (not that it would ever make that w/o some serious
mods anyway).

>  <snip>
>>I also suspect that, while in some cases,
[quoted text clipped - 31 lines]
>
>Plasyd
Gromit - 28 Sep 2003 03:23 GMT
Gotta love that 'big brother' mentality.

>no, actually i do know how, but also feel anyone that feels they have to go
>faster than their vehicle is governed at does not deserve the privelage of a
>drivers liscence,and should have at least 5 cops up their a.ses any time they
>get behind the wheel
Exodus - 28 Sep 2003 03:56 GMT
And, it is exactly you, and other morons with the same mentality as you,
that Ford needs to protect themselves and others from.  Hence the speed
limiting device.

> Gotta love that 'big brother' mentality.
>
> >no, actually i do know how, but also feel anyone that feels they have to go
> >faster than their vehicle is governed at does not deserve the privelage of a
> >drivers liscence,and should have at least 5 cops up their a.ses any time they
> >get behind the wheel
MOTO - 20 Sep 2003 14:45 GMT
You can do it with a Superchips Microtuner for around $269.

SMC

> Is there a method of disabling the speed limiter on a 2003 f250 superduty
> 5.4 triton?? Without using a hyperchip??
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Thanks for any help
C-squared - 20 Sep 2003 20:24 GMT
>Is there a method of disabling the speed limiter on a 2003 f250 superduty
>5.4 triton?? Without using a hyperchip??
>
>please post or e-mail

Are you going to get tires with the proper speed rating to handle the
higher speeds?

-----------------------------------------------------
http://atv.corpsie.com (Suzuki Z400 page)

If you're going to ridicule my post, please
do it publicly and stop privately e-mailing me.
Ralph E Lindberg - 22 Sep 2003 13:33 GMT
> Is there a method of disabling the speed limiter on a 2003 f250 superduty
> 5.4 triton?? Without using a hyperchip??
>
> please post or e-mail

 Why, when you didn't read the replies when you first posted this
question last week.

Signature

--------------------------------------------------------
Personal e-mail is the n7bsn but at amsat.org
This posting address is a spam-trap and seldom read
RV and Camping FAQ can be found at
http://kendaco.telebyte.com/rlindber/RV

frosty - 22 Sep 2003 18:08 GMT
I think it runs off a wire under the hood, somewhere.
Try cutting wires until it is disabled.  Good luck!  =`:^>

-- frosty

> Is there a method of disabling the speed limiter on a 2003 f250
> superduty 5.4 triton?? Without using a hyperchip??
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> Thanks for any help
Larry Durst - 27 Sep 2003 05:01 GMT
Well since some of you "people" approve of the speed limiter, how would you
feel if you bought a ferrari with a 65 speed limiter on it?  I think that's
stupidity right there.  Whether he wants to break the law is his problem, I
do it all the time and i'm fine and so is everybody else.  It's not
technically as bad as ya think.  So if I knew how to do it i'd help ya out
man but I dont know the first start of it.

Signature

You make fun of what you are really afraid of... and thats us......

2002 Dodge Viper Venom 1000 Twin Turbo by Hennessey Performance Engineering
( www.HennesseyPerformance.com )

Power Output:  900 - 1300 hp

Tested Acceleration:  0-60 in 1.85 sec., 1/4 mile in 8.93 sec. @ 150+ mph
(AND that's only with the optional auto transmission and drag tires).

rokkinhorse@webtv.net - 29 Sep 2003 04:10 GMT
IIRC, the fuel pump relay drops when the limiter engages.
If that's the case, a toggle switch paralleling the fuel pump relay
contacts would allow the fuel pump to continue to operate, defeating the
limiter.
NOTE: CONSULT YOUR WIRING DIAGRAM BEFORE ATTEMPTING THIS and find out
what else if anything is powered off that relay circuit. You MAY be
creating a potentially dangerous situation by over-riding this SAFETY
DEVICE.

Randy

Bob - 29 Sep 2003 05:06 GMT
> IIRC, the fuel pump relay drops when the limiter engages.
> If that's the case, a toggle switch paralleling the fuel pump relay
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> Randy

The rev limiter has nothing to do with the fuel pump relay. It randomly
kills fuel injectors
                                Bob
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.