Confab

[CHKNFKR]

Thats right,im starting a confab. A single thread to spitball and toss around random ideas. Discuss ideas and theories and why they will or won't work. I started it here in general discussion to try to keep it truck oriented at the very least.

I'll start with a few points to ponder:

I am a very firm believer that there is no replacement for displacement, if i could get my hands on a ford gaa or a detroit 16v92 id likely give my first born child for it. However i cannot deny the performance breakthroughs of the last decade that have enabled small v6 engines to produce the same power big block v8 engines once struggled to attain. Now to the point, imagine all the tech in say the ecoboost and the new 5.0 (direct injection, ti-vct, etc...) applied to a big inch motor like the 429/460 (lets hold off on the gaa for now)

While we're on the subject of the ecoboost, i have another point to ponder. Why is it that a production car or truck needs to have as powerful an engine as an 18 wheeler? I've spent a lot of time working on some old junk am general, kaiser, and ccc heavy trucks that were once kings on and off road, the most powerful, go anywhere trucks ever made. Some rated at more than 100,000 lbs towing capacity and none of them produced more than 300 hp or 500 lbs/ft. Dont get me wrong i want power but it seems strange that modern grocery getters are more powerful than prime movers of the past.

Well its bed time for me, in fact i'm about two hours late. Have fun!

 

[James86]

I don't disagree. The classic jeep won WWII with somewhere around 60 HP if I recall. It's all gearing and weight. The issue is, the original jeep would never come close to meeting current safety requirements such as roll over protection, ABS, side impact beams, crumple zones, etc. So part of the reason vehicles need more power these days is they need to be able ot move the weight they've picked up over the years.

Off topic, why don't they offer the newer Duratec Rangers in 4WD? The power output of the DOHC 2.3 is comparable to a Vulcan, and undoubtably uses the same bellhousing. I think a Duratech with an MTX, manual T-case, and manual hubs woudl be an efficient little truck with plenty of power and be pretty reliable.

 

[exbass94]

Off topic, why don't they offer the newer Duratec Rangers in 4WD? The power output of the DOHC 2.3 is comparable to a Vulcan, and undoubtably uses the same bellhousing. I think a Duratech with an MTX, manual T-case, and manual hubs woudl be an efficient little truck with plenty of power and be pretty reliable.

Similar power output yes, same bellhousing definitely NO.

Also, what's a confab?

 

[RatDog8o8]

Also, what's a confab?

con·fab (knfb) Informal
n.
A casual talk; confabulation.
intr.v. (kn-fb, knfb) con·fabbed, con·fab·bing, con·fabs
To engage in casual talk.

 

[hoosier1104]

Ratdog for the vocab lesson. Internet high five!

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Now to the point, imagine all the tech in say the ecoboost and the new 5.0 (direct injection, ti-vct, etc...) applied to a big inch motor like the 429/460 (lets hold off on the gaa for now)

The new 5.0 is still direct injected, my guess is to keep an ace in the hole for when they need to squeeze more milage and power out of it.

BTW I have heard they have been working on Ecoboost 5.0's and 6.2's (the 6.2 is a 379ci big block).

 

[James86]

The manager at the local shop did a 5.0 swap in his 99 3.0 FFV and apparently picked up about 4-5mpg. Anyone else notice a significant gain in mileage with a 5.0 swap? I'd assume it's because it loafs around in OD all the time in that small of a pickup.

 

[rangerluver]

Some rated at more than 100,000 lbs towing capacity and none of them produced more than 300 hp or 500 lbs/ft. Dont get me wrong i want power but it seems strange that modern grocery getters are more powerful than prime movers of the past.

Well its bed time for me, in fact i'm about two hours late. Have fun!

I think someone eluded to it above but did not expound on it very much.

I think it has a lot to do with gearing and therefore speed. These other vehicles that you mentioned could probably pull a barn up Mt Everest, but not over 35mph. Now, you can take a car from a vehicle showroom and enter it into any number of racing venues with mods only for safety; think Subaru, Mitsubishi, the new Ford Mustang, Mazda and numerous other manufacturers. Essentially, they are engineering and building performance vehicles and selling them from the showroom floor.

The only thing is, try to pull a stump out w/one of them.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

The manager at the local shop did a 5.0 swap in his 99 3.0 FFV and apparently picked up about 4-5mpg. Anyone else notice a significant gain in mileage with a 5.0 swap? I'd assume it's because it loafs around in OD all the time in that small of a pickup.

I put a '87 pushrod 5.0 in my Ranger and picked up 2mpg in the city... if I stay out of the 4bbl

It would be intersting to see what I would get on the highway 235/75-15's+3.73's+C5=less than spectacular milage at 3000k rpm. That thing just has to flinch and the truck is in motion around town though... very fun.

The new OHC would be interesting, in a vehicle that weighs about the same as a Ranger (Mustang) they pull 25mpg with performance gearing putting out about twice the whoopie that a pushrod 5.0 put out from the factory. A Mustang is much cleaner in the air though.

As far as old semis go, they didn't have 300/500 because it was enough... it was all they could get.

 

[straycat]

My buddy has a 2000 5.0 'stang that is turbocharged and it gets over 28 mpg at 80 mph on the highway and he is happy with that. It honks as well. I drove it a few times and I would like that motor in my Ranger!!!! But, I will never swap out my 4.0...I keep saying I will but it never has had any problems.

 

[rangerluver]

My buddy has a 2000 5.0 'stang that is turbocharged and it gets over 28 mpg at 80 mph on the highway and he is happy with that. It honks as well. I drove it a few times and I would like that motor in my Ranger!!!! But, I will never swap out my 4.0...I keep saying I will but it never has had any problems.

What is a 2000 5.0? Thought they still had 4.6s in them that year.

Just last night the wife drove the Mustang to Dallas from here and beat my fuel economy; I had gotten 26.3. She got 27.5 but that's not hard to believe. She doesn't like to like I like to.

So, they will do it.

 

[Dweano]

Well if it is just random talk...someone educate me on torque converters in auto trannys. I don't get them! They seem to almost be like another gear (when they lockup they drop the rpms?) also I heard that our trannys don't have locking torque converters which kills economy by 10%? I dunno...so how do they work and how do they affect economy? Also what is with different stall speeds and how does that effect things? I just don't understand the suckers!

 

[wrecking-crew]

Well if it is just random talk...someone educate me on torque converters in auto trannys. I don't get them! They seem to almost be like another gear (when they lockup they drop the rpms?) also I heard that our trannys don't have locking torque converters which kills economy by 10%? I dunno...so how do they work and how do they affect economy? Also what is with different stall speeds and how does that effect things? I just don't understand the suckers!

Well, I can give you a little summery from what I remember from school. The end. Other than that, it is like shifting a vehicle into overdrive. Now I need to go back and re-read my Auto trans notes.

The transmissions in the 80's and early 90's would sometimes lack a locking converter. I believe yours has a locking type though.

 

[wahlstrom1]

The torque converter is a fluid connection between the tranny and the engine, driving around with it unlocked is like slipping the clutch in a manual. Once the torque converter is locked, you have direct drive with no slippage, hence lower RPM. Auto's die because of heat, caused by slipping....

Stall speeds are where the converter engages, like a centrifugal setup on a sled/snow mobile. Compared to a manual, it's like revving the truck before releasing the clutch. Higher RPM's generally = more power, better launches etc, which is why drag cars usually have higher stall converters.

Long live manual tranny's!

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

What is a 2000 5.0? Thought they still had 4.6s in them that year.

Probably a 5.0 Cammer, I don't remember if it was a 4.6 that was bored or sroked or bored or both, but it was quite a deal back when they came out. Not available in a Mustang originally they were a crate engine.