Car Forum / Ford / Ford Trucks / January 2007
Anyone pulling any significant weight with a 5.4?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
Steve Barker LT - 01 Jan 2007 17:24 GMT I want to purchase a truck to pull our fifth wheel trailer with, and diesel is about 99% out of the question. the V-10's are so rare, I'm wondering if the 5.4 will actually do the job. I just don't want to be disappointed in any hills I might encounter. I won't be doing Colorado or mountains, just Missouri Ozarks, and from kc to Nashville, things like that. I'm not wanting 4x4, just 2wd, supercab, and pull about 1600 miles once a year, and 120 miles several times a summer.
thanks for your input.
 Signature Steve Barker
Mark Jones - 01 Jan 2007 18:05 GMT > I want to purchase a truck to pull our fifth wheel trailer with, and > diesel is about 99% out of the question. the V-10's are so rare, I'm [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > thanks for your input. I tow a pop-up that weighs about 3500 pounds with my 2004 F-150 4x4 5.4L Triton and there is no way that I would even consider towing a fifth wheel trailer with it.
I have considered getting a lightweight travel trailer, but even that has considerable frontal area that would require me to slow down. A fifth wheel is even taller.
SnoMan - 01 Jan 2007 18:21 GMT >I want to purchase a truck to pull our fifth wheel trailer with, and diesel >is about 99% out of the question. the V-10's are so rare, I'm wondering if [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >thanks for your input. It is not the engine but rather how it is geared. A 3.73 is a joke towing a 5th with regardless of factory rating and a 4.10 is marginal at best. If you want to install some after market 4.56 gears it will not a pretty credible job most of the time. Deeper gears is like using a longer prybar to move something. A 6.8 V10 is a serious tower with a factory 4.30 axle and a 5.4 would do a lot better with 4.56 or deeper with a serious load behind it. They do not offer them from factory because it would make higher dollar options less attractive. THe was a time when real P/U would come with 4.56's and even 5.13's and they could move some serious weighteven with a smaller motor but not any more because they want to sell the hi profit models instead. Nice thing about a ford is if you change gear it has a toner ring in rear axle to sense road speed so no speedo recalibration is needed. You might read link below
http://forum.snoman.com/viewtopic.php?t=43 ----------------- TheSnoMan.com
Tom J - 01 Jan 2007 18:23 GMT > I want to purchase a truck to pull our fifth wheel trailer with, and diesel > is about 99% out of the question. the V-10's are so rare, I'm wondering if > the 5.4 will actually do the job. There are a lot of F-250 & F-350 V-10 trucks out there and if you are not going with a diesel that's what I'd be looking for. A 5th wheel has a lot of frontal area to pull through the air, so it does take something with a little muscle. I tow all over North America with a V-10 and find it does a great job.
Tom J
Steve Barker LT - 01 Jan 2007 23:23 GMT That's the problem. There are NOT a lot of v-10's out there. Right now there are only 2 in the entire carmax system. and I didn't find ANY on beepbeepdotcom.
 Signature Steve Barker
>> I want to purchase a truck to pull our fifth wheel trailer with, and >> diesel is about 99% out of the question. the V-10's are so rare, I'm [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Tom J Matt Macchiarolo - 02 Jan 2007 01:36 GMT Here's one, but you'd have to take the hard tonneau off for a fifth-wheel...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2002-Ford-F250-Superduty-XLT-Crew-Cab-SB-w-Extras _W0QQitemZ270069721063
Truth be told, it's mine. :-)
> That's the problem. There are NOT a lot of v-10's out there. Right now > there are only 2 in the entire carmax system. and I didn't find ANY on [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >> >> Tom J Steve Barker LT - 02 Jan 2007 01:48 GMT thanks matt, but I'm looking for a 2wd, supercab.
 Signature Steve Barker
> Here's one, but you'd have to take the hard tonneau off for a > fifth-wheel... > > http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2002-Ford-F250-Superduty-XLT-Crew-Cab-SB-w-Extras _W0QQitemZ270069721063 > > Truth be told, it's mine. :-) My Name Is Nobody - 01 Jan 2007 20:22 GMT >I want to purchase a truck to pull our fifth wheel trailer with, and >diesel is about 99% out of the question. the V-10's are so rare, I'm [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > thanks for your input. Yes you could tow a big 5th wheel trailer with the 5.4, if you want to keep up with the traffic flow, you're not likely to do that with the 5.4. If you don't mind not being able to hold the speed limit or keeping up with traffic, it will work fine for you. You could put a supercharger kit on it and have the best of both worlds, though. Although that is another $6,000, if you do the work. $6,000 would get you a brand spanking new Power Stroke Diesel.
Do yourself a BIG favor and drive the new Power Stroke Diesel before you count it out. I LOVE my '05 6 liter Diesel. If Ford offered their 4.5L Power Stroke V6 Turbo Diesel (that is currently in their LCF) in the half ton pickups I would buy one today.
Steve Barker LT - 01 Jan 2007 23:24 GMT I can't justify the $6000 option, and my wife breaks out around diesel exhaust. My son has an '03 ps 6 liter. You don't have to convince me of the power. <G> That thing is awesome!
 Signature Steve Barker
> Yes you could tow a big 5th wheel trailer with the 5.4, if you want to > keep up with the traffic flow, you're not likely to do that with the 5.4. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Power Stroke V6 Turbo Diesel (that is currently in their LCF) in the half > ton pickups I would buy one today. Joe - 02 Jan 2007 04:58 GMT >I want to purchase a truck to pull our fifth wheel trailer with, and >diesel is about 99% out of the question. the V-10's are so rare, I'm [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > thanks for your input. Most I've pulled is about 6000 lb. It does fine with that. 250 or 300 hp is still a lot of power. The first Cummins Dodge had 180, and that was enough to totally revolutionize that market.
CJB - 02 Jan 2007 07:11 GMT >>I want to purchase a truck to pull our fifth wheel trailer with, and >>diesel is about 99% out of the question. the V-10's are so rare, I'm [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > is still a lot of power. The first Cummins Dodge had 180, and that was > enough to totally revolutionize that market. HP and Torque are totally different beasts...
CJB
Whitelightning - 02 Jan 2007 15:37 GMT > HP and Torque are totally different beasts... > > CJB Yup no argument there. Torque is what it can do, and HP is how fast it can do it. Everyone has a speed hang-up, I wanna pull top heavy fifth wheel camper 80 mph down the road.
Whitelightning
SnoMan - 02 Jan 2007 16:40 GMT >Torque is what it can do, and HP is how fast it can >do it. No it is not. Torue is the amount od effort applied to load and the RPM of that effort determines HP. 300 ft lbs at 4000 RPM can do just as much work as 450 ftls at 3000 RPM and 600 ft lbs at 2000. They are all deleivering the same HP to load period! It is whether or not you choose to properly gear that power to load that makes it happen. TO put a different spin on this, a 5.4 peaks HP in drive at 115 MPH and if you gearing a PS to peak its HP at 115 MPH is drive not OD (to equal the gas engines power curve vs speed) you would need a 2.7 axle ratio behind PS and it would suck towing with that ratio just like a gas motor does when its power curve is not matched to load. Some never seem to get this point though and think they need to run their small gas motors at low RPMs all the time for best MPG and life which is another misconception too. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com
David M - 03 Jan 2007 01:44 GMT >>Torque is what it can do, and HP is how fast it can >>do it. > > No it is not. Yes it is.
Torque = radial force. Work = force applied over a distance- in this case, work = force applied over engine revolution (distance) Power = work applied over time.
t= torque r = radius f = force d = distance p = power
t = f * r f = t/r w = f * d p = w/time = (f*d) / time
Linear distance is d = 2*pi*r distance per revolution
p = f * d / time p = (t/r) * (revolutions * 2*pi*r) / time)
= t * 2*pi * revolutions / time = torque * 2*pi * (rotational velocity)
plugging in conversion units;
1 HP = 33,000 ft-lb/min
HP = torque * 2 * pi * RPM / 33,000
which equates to the familiar:
HP = torque * RPM / 5252
 Signature David M (dmacchiarolo) http://home.triad.rr.com/redsled T/S 53 sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 23 days 20:56
SnoMan - 03 Jan 2007 13:32 GMT >Yes it is. No it is not. HP is a measurement of work done not torque. I guess you flunked physics. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com
Matt Macchiarolo - 03 Jan 2007 20:21 GMT You probably don't remember your physics, 'cause you forgot the last half. Horsepower is a measurement of work *applied over time.*
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/horsepower.htm
BTW don't mess with my bro, his knowledge of physics goes beyond that of mere mortals....
>>Yes it is. > > No it is not. HP is a measurement of work done not torque. I guess you > flunked physics. > ----------------- > TheSnoMan.com David M - 04 Jan 2007 01:51 GMT > You probably don't remember your physics, 'cause you forgot the last half. > Horsepower is a measurement of work *applied over time.* [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > BTW don't mess with my bro, his knowledge of physics goes beyond that of > mere mortals.... Thanks :-)
Snowblower just proved (again) that: 1. he is an idiot 2. anyone who takes his stupid advice is, well, you get the idea.
He reminds me of the guy that puts his fingers in his ears and says "La La La La I can't hear you La La La La" whenever someone proves him wrong.
>>>Yes it is. >> >> No it is not. HP is a measurement of work done not torque. I guess you >> flunked physics. >> ----------------- >> TheSnoMan.com
 Signature David M (dmacchiarolo) http://home.triad.rr.com/redsled T/S 53 sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 24 days 21:50
Matt Macchiarolo - 04 Jan 2007 11:41 GMT There's a guy like that over in rec.autos.makers.jeep+willys, Bill H. He's pretty knowledgable but if he is wrong about something he's loathe to admit it. I have him killfiled right now because he started a little flame battle with someone in another group that spilled over into ramj+w, and he can't help himself but to respond to every little insult.
>> You probably don't remember your physics, 'cause you forgot the last >> half. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >>> ----------------- >>> TheSnoMan.com David M - 04 Jan 2007 12:05 GMT > There's a guy like that over in rec.autos.makers.jeep+willys, Bill H. He's > pretty knowledgable but if he is wrong about something he's loathe to admit > it. I have him killfiled right now because he started a little flame battle > with someone in another group that spilled over into ramj+w, and he can't > help himself but to respond to every little insult. Yes, he is a well-known troll in alt.hi-po.big-block.ford-mercury.
Over there, we call him Lou Ellen, among other things. He is usually intimately associated with goats.
David M (dmacchiarolo) http://home.triad.rr.com/redsled T/S 53 sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 25 days 8:05
Matt Macchiarolo - 04 Jan 2007 23:47 GMT I see that thread was crossposted a lot!
>> There's a guy like that over in rec.autos.makers.jeep+willys, Bill H. >> He's [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > T/S 53 > sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 25 days 8:05 David M - 04 Jan 2007 01:33 GMT >>Yes it is. > > No it is not. HP is a measurement of work done not torque. I guess you > flunked physics. > ----------------- > TheSnoMan.com Wrong again, Snowblower.
Power = work / time
 Signature David M (dmacchiarolo) http://home.triad.rr.com/redsled T/S 53 sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 24 days 21:34
SnoMan - 02 Jan 2007 16:31 GMT >> Most I've pulled is about 6000 lb. It does fine with that. 250 or 300 hp >> is still a lot of power. The first Cummins Dodge had 180, and that was >> enough to totally revolutionize that market. At what RPM it make that power and how it is geared makes it happen not the 300HP rating at 5000 plus RPM
>HP and Torque are totally different beasts... Yes and no. HP is torque x RPM / 5252. It is how the engines power curve is geared to the load that makes it all happen but many fail to realize this. Why diesle tow well sometime is not becuase the HP is any more magic but because they are better geared to match power curve to load (they have to be because they have a very limted PM range) Most gas truck today are poorly matched to load with factory gearing and towing suffers. Unless you have a 460, a 454, 8.0 dodge V10 or GM 8.1 you are going to need more than a 4.10 for good towing performance with a heavy load (big displacement motors make more HP and torque at lower RPM's) People today though look at the HP rated and think a 4.10 in a 6 or 7K truck with 31 or 32 inch tires with a small block is a great towing combo when it is not unles you have low standards. The piont of all this is that you do not need a iol burner to have a stump puller towing but you do need more than a 3.73 or 4.10 gear behind a 5.4 if you do not want to spend a lot of time in second gear on even mild grades. Consider this, a 300 HP 5.4 does not "make" 300 HP until 45 MPH in first and about 73 in second and at 115! in 3rd even with 4.10 axles so you really do not have 300 HP to work with and it is easy to see why it would suck with a big fifth wheel TT. Adding a 4.56 would bring power peaks to 40 in first, about 65 in second and 105 in 3rd. Still not great but better. A 4.88 would make power peaks at about 37 in first, 61 in second and 97 in third. Deepr ratio scare some because they are worried about MPG but then there is OD which makes even a 4.88 look like a 3.5 to 1 or so in OD which is a good cruise gear atio for a heavy truck with a small block motor. In the diesel vs gas tow wars the reason diesels usually win is because the gas motors are not geared correctly not because their actual is not the same. Detriot is pretty vague about this fact though in there ratings. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com
CJB - 02 Jan 2007 19:00 GMT >>> Most I've pulled is about 6000 lb. It does fine with that. 250 or 300 >>> hp [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Yes and no. Well, the point I was trying to make was he was improperly comparing the 180HP peak out of that diesel cummins with the 300HP peak of the Triton in question. You pointed out in your explanation why my statement is true. Good explanation, by the way.
One thing I'd mention is that you're going to find few people who will want to rev a gas engine to 4, 5 or 6 ticks every time they take off at a stoplight. I'm all for proper gearing, but to think that people will want to have a cruising rpm of 3.5 or 4k rpm is naive. Is it appropriate for load? Yes. Is it desirable for asthetics? No. Another potential problem of running such high rpms all the time is that the transmission management is not set up for it. Wouldn't the trans be shifing at high pressures on every shift?
CJB
SnoMan - 03 Jan 2007 13:18 GMT >>>> Most I've pulled is about 6000 lb. It does fine with that. 250 or 300 >>>> hp [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > >CJB Your points are well noted. Back 25 to 30 years ago and more we did not have the benifit of OD in SUV's so when you had a 4.10 or deeper for towing power you had engine cranking going down the road on highway even when unloaded but today OD changes that and you can have a 4.56 with a 2100 to 2300 RPM cruise in OD at 65 MPH depending on tire size in a big SUV. ANother part of the problem is detriot is making impressive HP rating on smaller engines at the expense of low and mid range power. It is no big trick to get a high HP rating out of a small engine. You simply move the torque peak to a higher RPM and since HP is bascially torque times RPM you get more HP. But, there is no free lunch because when doing this you loose lower RPM towing power where you need it most. Idealy for a good gas tow motoer you want a torque peak by about 3000 RPM or sooner for a few reasons. One is better lower RPM response and power and the other is better efficeny. A gas motro uses the least amount of fuel per HP hour produced while working hard when it is at or very near its torque peak (as its peak VE or Volumetric Efficency) If you engine peaks its torque at 3700 RPM or more and you are towing at 2500 RPM and pulling hard performance and MPG is going to lack a lot and when you hit a hill and RPM drops it will loose more torque as RPM drops. With a diesel it reaches peak VE as a much lower RPM (typically 1500 to 2000 RPM) so it you tow at say 2200 RPM and hit a hill as RPM try to drop you are also gain a bit of torque rather than loosing it. A big block gas motor has more displacement and peaks its torque and HP usually at about 1000 RPM less so it has more usealble power to tow with even if it has a lower HP rating (example, a 300 HP GM 8.1 will waste a 310 HP 5.3 towing badly or the old discontinued Dodge truck V10 will likewise waste a higher rated Hemi and same with a old 460 vs a 5.4). Since these engine as eithe now gone or soon to be gone the next best optiion is to regears trucks to make better use of availible power. A 5.4 with a 5.4 and a 4.56 or 4.88 and a OD would be a impressive tower and get reasonable MPG too (better than a V10 likely) and for a lot less total cost than a PS too. Not to mention the surprized looks you will get when someone finds that you are towing so well with a smaller motor too! Example, if you had say a 4.88 with a 5.4 on a hard pul on a hill in drive at 65 MPH you would be truning about 3500 RPM which is close to torque peak and it will put up a good fight plus tranny will be a in a 1 to1 transfer mode and to be passing power through with lowest possible internal power loss because no redution units are active. Then when pull is over you select OD and cruise at 2400 to 2500 RPM which is nothing for a 5.4. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com
CJB - 03 Jan 2007 19:31 GMT >>>>> Most I've pulled is about 6000 lb. It does fine with that. 250 or >>>>> 300 [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > where you need it most. Idealy for a good gas tow motoer you want a > torque peak by about 3000 RPM or sooner for a few reasons. This is precicely the reason that the old Ford 4.9 was a stump puller. The motor was not a high revver at all, but it did grunt where you wanted it to. Some manufacturers years back even put inline 6's in school busses. It wasn't because they were big H.O. engines, but that their peak power production was at a usable rpm. One other interesting change that occurred over time is that people now want to cruise at 70mph. It wasn't that long ago that 55 was the nat'l speed limit. I used to drive a 66 passenger bus with a sb chebby 350 2bbl under the hood. How can a puny motor like that handle such a beast? Easy, it was geared really high, and actually redlighted the overspeed indicator at 52mph...
I'm not saying that we need to go back to those days, but I'm just pointing out that people's expectations have changed.
CJB
My Name Is Nobody - 03 Jan 2007 20:16 GMT > over time is that people now want to cruise at 70mph. It wasn't that long > ago that 55 was the nat'l speed limit. I used to drive a 66 passenger bus > with a sb chebby 350 2bbl under the hood. How can a puny motor like that > handle such a beast? Easy, it was geared really high, and actually > redlighted the overspeed indicator at 52mph... FYI: It seems to be quite confusing to some, but; It was actually geared really LOW, Higher numbers equal Lower gear ratios. 4.88/1 is a lower gear ratio, 2.75/1 is a higher gear ratio. Just as in a transmission, where 1st gear is a low gear ratio/higher number and 4th gear is a high gear ratio/lower number
By The Way, For a few decades before the '70 gas crunch and the silly national 55 mph speed limit, the normal highway speed limits & cursing speeds in the US were 70-75 miles per hour plus (in much less speed worthy vehicles). Three quarters of the states have such vast areas that a 55 mile per hour speed limit is absolutely ridiculous.
> I'm not saying that we need to go back to those days, but I'm just > pointing out that people's expectations have changed. > > CJB CJB - 03 Jan 2007 23:11 GMT >> over time is that people now want to cruise at 70mph. It wasn't that >> long ago that 55 was the nat'l speed limit. I used to drive a 66 [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] >> >> CJB I actually knew both of those things; sorry for the transposing of high for low...
CJB
SnoMan - 04 Jan 2007 12:32 GMT >This is precicely the reason that the old Ford 4.9 was a stump puller. The >motor was not a high revver at all, but it did grunt where you wanted it to. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >I'm not saying that we need to go back to those days, but I'm just pointing >out that people's expectations have changed. Good points. I used to drive a few differnet dump trucks in 70's while going to college for extra income and one was a C60 single axle and the other was a C70 triaxle with a 427 and a 20 speed. THat 427 hauled 20 tons of cargo well and never had trouble getting rolling even in soft ground. There was this retire 70 yr old man that used to help us on big job with hauling (some job they would high independant contractor to keep materail flowing) and he had this cherry 57 C60 dump with a 261 6 cyl and a 8 speed (4 x 2) and he used to haul 8 tons with it all the time with little effort and truck was stock and quiet too. I could have bought that truck for 900 bucks in 76 but money was scarce going college. I wish I had though and stored it. ----------------- TheSnoMan.com
djdave - 03 Jan 2007 00:29 GMT I tow a 10k trailer with my 98 f250 4x4 5.7
This is the first year I had to take it out of my county. It was a little scary, thought the transmission was going to start smoking when I had to climb a mountain, and top speed was 40mph goin up. I donno what my gear ratio is, but the truck was special order with towing package. I would not tow anything heavier with it.
>I want to purchase a truck to pull our fifth wheel trailer with, and diesel >is about 99% out of the question. the V-10's are so rare, I'm wondering if [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > >thanks for your input. Steve Barker LT - 03 Jan 2007 01:16 GMT 5.7?
 Signature Steve Barker
>I tow a 10k trailer with my 98 f250 4x4 5.7 > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> >>thanks for your input. David M - 03 Jan 2007 03:24 GMT > 5.7? I think he meant 5.8, aka 351W
David M (dmacchiarolo) http://home.triad.rr.com/redsled T/S 53 sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 23 days 23:23
Steve Barker LT - 03 Jan 2007 03:32 GMT not in '98
 Signature Steve Barker
>> 5.7? > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > T/S 53 > sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 23 days 23:23 David M - 03 Jan 2007 06:05 GMT > not in '98 Sure. It was available in the F250HD.
 Signature David M (dmacchiarolo) http://home.triad.rr.com/redsled T/S 53 sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 24 days 2:04
David M - 03 Jan 2007 06:29 GMT >> not in '98 > > Sure. It was available in the F250HD.. .. at least part of the year...
 Signature David M (dmacchiarolo) http://home.triad.rr.com/redsled T/S 53 sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 24 days 2:30
djdave - 03 Jan 2007 14:58 GMT Im pretty sure this is a SD
>> not in '98 > >Sure. It was available in the F250HD. djdave - 03 Jan 2007 14:57 GMT It's an oddball . Manufacturer date is 11/97 and every time I order something for it (like the air filter) it is wrong. The original sticker is still on the valvecover.
>not in '98 djdave - 03 Jan 2007 14:54 GMT ya, what he said.
>> 5.7? > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >T/S 53 >sled351 Linux 2.4.18-14 has been up 23 days 23:23 djdave - 03 Jan 2007 14:53 GMT oops I have a 5.7, this is about a 5.4
My Name Is Nobody - 03 Jan 2007 01:17 GMT Ford never sold a 5.7?
FYI he pushrod 351 Windsor was a 5.8 liter and the newer "big" Ford V-8 is a 5.4 liter...
>I tow a 10k trailer with my 98 f250 4x4 5.7 > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> >>thanks for your input. Ford Tech - 07 Jan 2007 10:31 GMT >I want to purchase a truck to pull our fifth wheel trailer with, and >diesel is about 99% out of the question. the V-10's are so rare, I'm [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > thanks for your input. My Granparents pulled a 33ft 5th wheel with their 2WD, 99 F-250 Supercab and a 5.4L engine. They would pull the trailer to Yuma, AZ and back every year. They were pleased with it, and did it very easily. You want to verify that you get atleast a 4.10 gear in the rearend, but it will do it fine.
Ford Tech
|
|
|