HOME  DISCUSSIONS  PHOTOS  REVIEWS  CLASSIFIEDS  DEALERS  STORE
 

Go Back   TractorByNet.com > General Forums > Trailers & Transportation
Show Recent Threads:
24 Hours
Since My Last Visit

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-03-2009, 07:18 PM   #1 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
dgl24087's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Va/WV
Posts: 1,134
Default Ford 6.2L V8

From Autoblog.com and Blue Oval News: The 2010 Ford F-150 SVT Raptor, with an available all-new 6.2-liter V-8 engine, produces 411 horsepower and 434 ft.-lb. of torque.

Wonder if the SD version will have the same specs? It will also be offered on a limited basis in other F150 models.
dgl24087 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2009, 07:22 PM   #2 (permalink)
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Shingle Springs California
Posts: 4,338
Default Re: Ford 6.2L V8

So 372 cubic inches?
__________________
RobertN in Shingle Springs Calif
RobertN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2009, 08:23 PM   #3 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Dmace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Wakefield, NH
Posts: 1,597
Default Re: Ford 6.2L V8

Technically, 6200cc is 378 cu. in. (1.08 hp per cu.in.)

No one can make the HP per cu. in. that the HEMI makes (1.13 hp per cu. in.) but it is nice to see Ford finally make a truck worthy V8 versus the 5.4l V8 and fuel thirsty V10. Anything over 1 hp per cu. in. is impressive and I am sure it will be a good engine. Hopefully they put it in the non-SVT F-150 and not just the Super Duty's. I wonder what the real-world fuel mileage will be...

Hopefully now Dodge will put the 6.1l V8 (425hp/420 lb.ft., 1.14 hp per cu. in.) engine in the RAM.
__________________
Derek
Kioti CK20HST
KL120 FEL // KB2365 BH // 60" JRW 3ph snowblower // 48" HD Boxblade
Sims-Cab Depot heated cab
Pics
Dmace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2009, 02:58 AM   #4 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Greene Co, Arkansas
Posts: 1,555
Default Re: Ford 6.2L V8

It is said the 6.2 will replace the 5.4 and the 6.8 v10 at least in the pickups.
There was a 5.8 version planned as well but have read nothing about it lately.

No mustang plans as of yet but it is said there is room for it in the new ones.

Some of the testing of the 6.2 was drag strip time in a 7 literish version.
I await this engine with baited breath... That raptor F150 looks a beast.
__________________
Scott
ScottAR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2009, 12:34 PM   #5 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
dgl24087's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Va/WV
Posts: 1,134
Default Re: Ford 6.2L V8

I've never read anything about a 5.8L. 2011 is to bring a 5.0L that will replace the 4.6 and 5.4, as well as the 3.5L Ecoboost V6 as the base engine in the 2wd 150. The 6.2L is rumored to be the replacement for the V10 in the 250 and 350 but will remain in the 450 and 550. The Mustang will also receive the 5.0L.
dgl24087 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2009, 03:09 PM   #6 (permalink)
Veteran Member
 
dgl24087's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Va/WV
Posts: 1,134
Default Re: Ford 6.2L V8

Mopar 6.1L Hemi goes away, replaced by 6.4L Hemi rumored to be around 450 HP.
dgl24087 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2009, 09:30 PM   #7 (permalink)
Elite Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Shingle Springs California
Posts: 4,338
Default Re: Ford 6.2L V8

Why not a 300ci hemi, maybe even V6 hemi, 250hp.

Or... a inline 6 Hemi like the Aussie Chargers used...

Trade some HP for 30-35mpg...

Quote:
Originally Posted by dgl24087 View Post
Mopar 6.1L Hemi goes away, replaced by 6.4L Hemi rumored to be around 450 HP.
__________________
RobertN in Shingle Springs Calif
RobertN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2009, 10:48 PM   #8 (permalink)
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 120
Default Re: Ford 6.2L V8

Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertN View Post
Why not a 300ci hemi, maybe even V6 hemi, 250hp.

Or... a inline 6 Hemi like the Aussie Chargers used...

Trade some HP for 30-35mpg...
Because you dont get 30-35 mpg by reducing the engine size,if it was worth that much they would have done it already.In fact highway economy can improve with a larger engine,as you can gear it taller,it doent need to rev in lower gears to pull hills or with headwinds,and it will hold OD longer.You get 30-35 mpg by going to diesel power,but keeping the truck light,by reducing weight,drag ,parasitic hp loss,and frontal area...bascially a 1/2 ton diesel,that cant tow very much would be the only way to get 30 35 mpg from a full size truck.
__________________
Cat 246 SS,Homemade 35T log splitter,
Raw Dodge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-04-2009, 11:05 PM   #9 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Winston-Salem, NC
Posts: 40
Default Re: Ford 6.2L V8

I'll take 16 mpg in my hemi. I average 13 mpg...
roamerr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-05-2009, 08:09 PM   #10 (permalink)
Silver Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 120
Default Re: Ford 6.2L V8

Quote:
Originally Posted by roamerr View Post
I'll take 16 mpg in my hemi. I average 13 mpg...
I can almost get that with my 8.1 liter,crew cab 2500HD 4x4.I can get 14 highway,even at 80 mph,but only 10-12 city....
__________________
Cat 246 SS,Homemade 35T log splitter,
Raw Dodge is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:29 AM.


HOME DISCUSSIONS PHOTOS REVIEWS CLASSIFIEDS DEALERS STORE
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Advertise | © 2009 TractorByNet.com
 

Safety Warning: TractorByNet.com does not review discussion forum posts for accuracy or safety. Please refer to manufacturer operator and safety manuals before operating tractors or equipment. Additionally, use caution and common sense when applying any advice you receive on TractorByNet.com, and seek professional advice before attempting professional tasks.
Page generated in 0.22372 seconds with 8 queries