Official 2011 Power Numbers
#1
Official 2011 Power Numbers
Best-in-class torque of 735 ft.-lb. (at 1,600 rpm) and best-in-class 390 horsepower (at 2,800 rpm)
http://media.ford.com/article_displa...ticle_id=32099
http://media.ford.com/article_displa...ticle_id=32099
#3
#5
First gear is a bit lower, but the 5 speed doesn't stay in first long with a heavy load, so that won't matter much. Also, 3rd gear is actually slightly higher in the new tranny.
#6
The new 6.2-liter V-8 has more horsepower than either of the old engines and just misses splitting the difference in torque between the 5.4-liter and 6.8-liter, with two fewer cylinders than the massive 6.8-liter.
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/02...g-numbers.html
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/02...g-numbers.html
#7
The new 6.2-liter V-8 has more horsepower than either of the old engines and just misses splitting the difference in torque between the 5.4-liter and 6.8-liter, with two fewer cylinders than the massive 6.8-liter.
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/02...g-numbers.html
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/02...g-numbers.html
Listening to the 6.2L scream away at 4500RPM while trying to climb a hill with a load will get old fast. There's no getting around the power being way higher in the rev range.
If the 6.2L was going to be a reasonable replacement for the V10, they wouldn't still be putting the V10 in the cab and chassis trucks.
Last edited by hwm3; 02-25-2010 at 07:03 PM.
Trending Topics
#8
#9
#10
fortunately i misread a post!
Last edited by Klitch; 02-26-2010 at 11:37 PM.
#11
I am sure the 6.2L will be a good gas motor - even a bit more punchy in acceleration, but there is a reason that the V10 is still availble in the more capable versions of the SD...
#13
Hmmm - I would think that capability trumps fuel economy when a person purchases a Super Duty. If the 6.2L has a 3:55 gear ratio and needs to rev higher/ work a bit harder I doubt the difference in MPG is going to be anything substantial when towing a load. Unloaded the MPG may be better...
I am sure the 6.2L will be a good gas motor - even a bit more punchy in acceleration, but there is a reason that the V10 is still availble in the more capable versions of the SD...
I am sure the 6.2L will be a good gas motor - even a bit more punchy in acceleration, but there is a reason that the V10 is still availble in the more capable versions of the SD...
#14
The 6.2L sounds like a nice engine and if the new 6-speed transmission is anything like the 5-speed TorqShift, it should be a great powertrain for people who don't want the $7-$8000 extra diesel engine. If I were buying a new Super Duty, there'd be no question in my mind which engine I'd choose- I'd go 6.2L + 4.30 gears.
Ford is telling us much better power than the 5.4L with the same or better fuel economy.
The only folks upset here are the V10 guys who loose what, 52lb-ft of torque, but gain 23hp with the new 6.2L V8. But, I guess I'm upset too because my beloved ZF6 manual transmission is also going the way of the V10 and dodo bird- extinct.
Ford is telling us much better power than the 5.4L with the same or better fuel economy.
The only folks upset here are the V10 guys who loose what, 52lb-ft of torque, but gain 23hp with the new 6.2L V8. But, I guess I'm upset too because my beloved ZF6 manual transmission is also going the way of the V10 and dodo bird- extinct.
#15
I would be willing to bet that the V10 coupled with the 6-speed transmission would be quite he setup. The fact that Ford will continue to put the V10 in the cab-chassis is an indication that they know that the 6.2L is not up to the task of the heavier vehicles. While the 6.2L is a good compromise, it obviously is no replacement for the V10. If it were, then they would not still be using the V10 in the heavier-duty applications.