If the Expedition had the following engine options, which would you choose?

[redneckfordf250]

well the engine I would love in the expedition is the 6.8L moudular V10. I love that engine. Would be neat to have a V10 in a 1/2 ton expedition.
Trav

 

[TactialMonkey]

Resurrect the 7.3L diesel and then put the manual 6 speed behind it and you will have a tank

 

[Lightnig]

I would very much prefer a diesel, but considering that it costs 10-20 cents a litre more than regular gas around here, I'll pass.

Make mine a 6.2 please

...

What's next, a 4 door Mustang? lol.

Yeah, I know, right?


That would almost be as bad as a 4 door Porsche, Ferrari, or Aston Martin sports car...








Oh. no, wait....

 

[andrew_s]

Diesel or either 5.4 variant. The 5.4 just feels perfect in the truck and what it was designed to do. A supercharged version would be nice for an svt expedition, diesel for the tow/work truck crowd and standard 5.4 for the base. I'll be upset if they drop the 5.4 in in this truck as it definitely beats the 5.0 in everything but 0 to 60 (who buys an expedition for this?) and isnt effected by the elements like the eco boost.

 

[thatguy]

I want an ecoboost v6 option. I am so over diesel.

 

[BIGRED03]

Diesel may cost more at the pump but it is a whole lot cheaper to operate in the long run. Would you pay an extra 20 cents per gallon at the pump for 50 percent better mileage?
Diesel engines also have fewer moving parts.

 

[ZombieSoldier]

fewer moving parts????? um definitely not.

 

[toms89]

fewer moving parts????? um definitely not.

No spark plugs but then they don't move.

2 stroke maybe ?!

 

[ZombieSoldier]

every diesel i have ever torn apart from cats to detroits to cummins to navistar has just as many "moving pieces". think about what moving parts engines have. camshaft, crank, pistons, connecting rods, pushrods, rockers, oil pump, etc. did you know most diesels have a high pressure and a low pressure oil pump? yeah. less moving parts my ass

 

[andrew_s]

Diesels have 2 oil systems the low pressure (engine standard system) and high pressure (injectors). Id say its about even if not more "moving parts" in a diesel. Ease of use, longevity, cleaner for environment, torque, and MPG all go to the diesel but youll certainly pay for it.

 

[daoud el-massri]

If it were me I still will go with the 5.4 reson being the price of diesel it is out rages 4.00 a gallon here in ct my expedition I pay almost 4.00 a gallon now 93 octane with a supercharger tunes by J@M motor sport here in manchester ct 5.4 4/wr 100 4X4 truck has 48, 000 miles112 eaton 3 inch exhaust from cat back putts out 440 hp at rear wheels 390 torque rear wheels I call it my supper expo I did to pull my 25ft gradywhite center console boat .the truck is a blast to drive . Dont know how much hp at motor nor torque at the motor. Just love this truck.

 

[IMINYOURCHAIR]

I'll be in the minority here and go with the v6. why? my current one only has 200hp (if it hasn't lost any) which isn't good for a v8 considering I've seen much higher out of smaller engines. the deciding factor for me would be serviceability or running costs. sure, it gets better fuel mileage but if one of those turbos goes out it'll negate the savings from being more efficient.

 

[ExpeditionAndy]

I'd choose the V6 because I love everything about my Expedition but the mileage and I'd give up 20 HP and 25 ft/lbs because I wouldn't miss them. I've driven V6s for the last 30 years and have gotten good service from them. On the other hand if the turbocharged engine required high octane gas, then I'd probably just stick with the 5.4 because the extra miles wouldn't offset the extra expense of the high octane gas.

 

[IMINYOURCHAIR]

I'd choose the V6 because I love everything about my Expedition but the mileage and I'd give up 20 HP and 25 ft/lbs because I wouldn't miss them. I've driven V6s for the last 30 years and have gotten good service from them. On the other hand if the turbocharged engine required high octane gas, then I'd probably just stick with the 5.4 because the extra miles wouldn't offset the extra expense of the high octane gas.

With all the extra and improved current sensors it's possible to run a turbo engine on 87 octane. running higher just improves ignition reliability. if you could update the ecu and add the sensors it'd go over well

 

[Mangina]

I'm definitely in the minority since it's not on the poll, but I'd take the 5.0. A little more power, a little more torque, and a little better mpg.

 

[toms89]

With all the extra and improved current sensors it's possible to run a turbo engine on 87 octane. running higher just improves ignition reliability. if you could update the ecu and add the sensors it'd go over well

Running high compression with boost and low octane fuel, as with the ecoboost, has everything to do with the direct cylinder fuel injection. The timing and how fuel is injected into the cylinder gives it the ability to control or eliminate detonation. It also has a much stronger effect in cooling combustion temps.

High compression, boost and low octane simply cannot be done with port fuel injection with out use of some sort of additional chemical intercooler, octane booster, or simply higher octane fuel.

 

[toms89]

Being 5 years old this poll needs re-done.

HP and torque numbers are now inaccurate and available motors have since changed.

Ecoboost puts out significantly more power than shown and is 3.5L.

No 5.0 coyote on the list.

And what about the shelby 5.7 supercharged engine?? )

 

[Paul2003]

I think it really needs a diesel. I have a friend with a Mercedes GL that is averaging 21-23 mpg US gallons. My Expedition gets 12-15 mpg. Considering his is faster and tows almost as much ( and diesel averages the same price as regular in Canada) it's by far the best choice for a large SUV.

 

[2005Expedition]

Lsx >> ford engine anyday of the week
Ford made the best exterior and interior over cheap GM any day of the week.

 

[BIG GREEN FORD]

I'll love to have the raptor 6.2 engine