No more V8 in F150?

[Snobdds]

How would you load the weight...? Behind the wheels, over the wheels, in front of the wheels, or throughout? Weight put on the rear directly takes weight off the front suspension, thus loosing needed traction up front. These things are all about torque management and not having wheel spin which results in breaking traction..not weight.

 

[joefromga]

Really? Try loading up that VW with a ton of concrete block and see if GAWR plays no part of anything.

Actually when it towed the 747 jet they ballasted it with 15,498 lb of ballast and it towed it in low range, second gear. Stopping it without stock brakes (probably just came to a stop but it did use brakes)

The jet weighed 155 tons.

 

[Copperhead]

Well, they said 4.3 tons ballast, that is 8600 lb. And it was bottomed out and they had to double the air pressures in the tires though Michelin told them that above 20 mph they would probably blow. So, GAWR does indeed mean something.

 

[houstonscott]

I agree with you fully ! ......had a reliable Subaru in 80's and now that it is just me and the wife, our next car will be Subaru......longevity of the engine being the key , and value for the buck, and excellent AWD.

I see you live in Canada, like I said a cheap throw away snow car... You make my case. HS

 

[Green Power]

I see you live in Canada, like I said a cheap throw away snow car... You make my case. HS

Subarus are not cheaply made as ive said, Most would also agree that they have the best AWD system on the market. What makes a vehicle suddenly good when you attach a $100,000 price tag to it? With subarus you can get 80-90% of the electronic gizmos that youre Benz has, for 40% of the price, and Repairs (which are rarely needed with subies are much cheaper). Mercedes are expensive throw away cars...

 

[crazyal]

Toyota aimed their trucks at the grocery getter/soccer mom crowd, Obviously Toyota saw the light and went the chain route. If you want to compete with trucks, lose the weak link and build it like a truck.

And my heavy equipment point is valid, belts are not used for a specific reason, they can slip under heavy compression whereas a chain won't. They exact reason for their short replacement interval.

Sorry but you have no idea what you are talking about. I have a 2000 Tundra with that "weak link" timing belt that has had the snot beat out of it. I've put thousands of miles of towing a 28' enclosed race car trailer that weighted over 10k and with almost 200k on it I still haven't had to change the transmission oil (one of the benefits of having a good friend who owns an oil analysis business). One two occasions I've had the trailer harness disconnect while towing and had to stop it with just the truck brakes. Both times it did it, I felt it and I wouldn't want to do it again, but it did it. When I got out of racing and built my house I used it to haul supplies as my house is on top of a hill and getting deliveries is always a challenge. I've had the rear springs loaded flat with sheetrock and it took it without missing a beat. To this day the engine will start without puffing a bit of smoke and runs great. Would a Ford or Chevy have done it too? Most likely. However the last Chevy I had (04 Trailblazer had a tranny in it that was good for 70k miles before it needed replacing and it never towed a thing). Toyota had commercials for the Tundra stating their transmission had a 100k change interval. You may not like Toyotas or the Tundra, I'm fine with that as i felt like it before I got my Tundra but as for durability and longevity Toyota has sold me on their brand.

 

[crazyal]

I'd rather get a Subaru all day everyday instead of the Honda Ridgeline.

Hondas in general are good cars, but they are cars made for people who hates cars, if you know what I mean.

I use to think that too but then I bought a '10 Impreza. The car would go anywhere but it was poor build quality. The manual gear box was terrible to shift. With the added hill start feature you would find yourself stuck at a green light when it kicked in unless you shifted into 1st before stopping and waited at the light with the clutch pushed in. The seats were way too low. The rear brake pads wore out before 40k and by 50k the front rotors were warped even though I was the only one changing wheels and made sure to torque them down correctly. The sheet metal was paper thin as just about anything that touched it would dent it. The door speakers sounded like a can of bees. The orange dash lights were a little odd. At night the temperature dial was almost impossible to read as it had a tiny red bar on one end and a blue bar on the other with a long while line in the middle. That white line would turn read when the dash lights came on and the blue bar would all but disappear. I had such high hope for the car but once the rotors were warped I got rid of it.

 

[crazyal]

Yeah I'm completely turned off by Ram and GM because of the cylinder deactivation. Had a '14 and sold it, too many recalls (it was up to 7 when I sold it, they've had more since) and the cylinder deactivation was still a problem. Ram doesn't seem to have the problems GM has had but I haven't really followed them closely. My next truck will have to be a 3/4 ton truck just so I can get a gas engine without all that mess on it, I also will be shopping 5.0 F150's. They've managed to scare me off most gas engines like they have Diesel engines with all this fancy mess they're putting on them. It's why I'm driving a 10 year old truck currently.

Cylinder deactivation will come into it's own once they perfect camless valves. When the computer can open the valve when it wants and as far as it wants then it can shut off the gas and open the valve on the compression and power strokes it will mean a lot less resistance. The computer will also not have to wait for all 4 strokes before reactivating the cylinder. Until then the benefits really don't outweigh the added issues.

 

[crazyal]

At the end of the day when you make the same HP out of a smaller engine you are putting more stress on numerous parts in the engine. Sure they can handle it but the V8 can easily handle having mods done to it to increase it's HP while the ecoboost engines are pretty much topped out unless you are willing to reduce engine life. A modern engine should make 200k miles without needing any serious work. A 5.0 V8 should be able to be boosted to 500hp and still make that. I'm not so sure you could get 500hp out of a 3.5 V6 and expect it to make 200k doing everything a truck may do, like towing. Just my opinion. Of course I'm not sure if where engines are now is really needed.

 

[dieselcrawler]

I started following this thread early on... now, not so much, it has gotten baddly off track and turn into nothing more than a grade school style p!$$!ng match of who's junk is better.

C'mon...