2007 Expedition Stock Dyno Run

[JExpedition07]

Ever wondered what the stock 5.4 Triton lays down to the wheels in the 3rd generation Expedition? The only dyno results I have seen thru tuners for the 5.4 3V are older 4R75 F-150 trucks. Found this video of a 2007 Expy with the 6R75, results are......just as expected for standard driveline losses. 250 RWHP which translates to 17% driveline losses from the stock 300-310 horsepower rating at the crank. Better results than the 11th gen F-150 dyno pulls I’ve seen...Yes I’m bored. Now let’s add a Whipple .

 

[762mm]

Funny how we scoff at these numbers today, but just 20 years ago this would be considered in the "heavily modded" truck category...

When I bought my 99 Explorer with the stock 210hp V6, it was one of the most performant SUVs on the market, with almost as much hp as the 5.0L V8. The V8 has 215hp at the time...

Today this rating is easily surpassed by rinky dink Korean and other offshore SUVs in base models, not to even mention domestic products (which always had a lot of hp).

 

[JExpedition07]

My first automotive was a 2002 Explorer with the 4.0 SOHC engine, it wasn’t a bad gig but the 5 speed sucked. The Expedition is just plain better...the 5.4L is more powerful and the cargo space is cavernous. For towing my boat, occasional off-road and camping use, and the cargo space the full size is a good fit. I believe the old 5.0 Explorers were the Firestone tire “Exploders” which gave the model that nickname.

 

[jeff kushner]

I dunno....250 at the wheel? Sounds pretty bad ass to me.....my "whimpy" supercharged and overboosted to 11psi but still only 250 crank hp 230SLK, goes 142mph. It weighs 3,050lbs so add 1500-2000 pounds and it's still pretty capable, right? You also have over 300lbs of torque I think too.....that's a lot of grunt!

I loved my '99 5.4. It was powerful, could pull down an oak tree or a bus. I liked it. My '03 was not. Yes it ran okay but it was not "powerful", it ran, nothing more. I had little interest in soaking a bunch of time into it if it ran so I ignored it till I had an excuse to replace it. It ran like it had 250 at the CRANK<LOL>!

Time machine; My Chevette, yes I bought one new in 1980....it MAY have had 75hp at the wheel......and honestly, I loved that car! It was like a modern Bug, no weight, no power, small.....looking back now, it was probably like driving a coffin around the DC beltway with Tractor-trailers come to think about it!

Yes, the 99 or 2000 Explorers had the Firestone's(762's or 500's? they were both a disaster). My boss back then bought me a brand new company Explorer EB loaded with the 5.4....it was my first SUV. When I left there, I bought my 1st Expy.


jeff

Being bored isn't bad, otherwise waking in the middle of the night, my house would be spotless.....

 

[JExpedition07]

Well Jeff you wouldn’t be far off in your estimation of the crank power on the 2003, those 2V 5.4s were rated at 260 crank horsepower. In 2005 when the 5.4 3V came it got bumped up to 300 crank horsepower and later 310....yes lots of grunt with 365 lb ft. My guess is the 99 had a better final drive ratio maybe 3.73 where your 03 likely had cruising gears. These 3rd generation 5.4 expys are better packages all around with the 6 speed transmissions and improved ECM setup. The previous 4R70 variants didn’t really let the power come on.

 

[rjdelp7]

Torque is what really counts. HP is usually the highest with engine revving past 3000rpm. Most drivers never see that range, for more than a short burst. Most of 'normal' driving is between 1400 and 2200 rpm. The reason the EcoBoost is liked, is because people like the power on the low end. That's where most of the city, stop and go driving is. A diesel also has more pulling power, but revs much lower. A engine may be rated at 300hp at 4200rpm, but puts out only 160hp at 1600rpm. So if 90% driving is city or with the cruise on at 65mph, you are driving an under powered slug.

 

[chuck s]

a brand new company Explorer EB loaded with the 5.4

Some sort of special order I assume?

-- Chuck

 

[ExplorerTom]

Some sort of special order I assume?

-- Chuck

Probably meant the 4.6. As you elude, the 5.4 was never offered in the Explorer. I do know of someone who swapped a 5.4 into a 3rd or 4th gen Explorer.

 

[jeff kushner]

I think you guys are right, it must have been a 5.0, not the 5.4.

His comment before buying it was that the v6 and v8 got the same gas mileage.....I wanted the V8

jeff

 

[Shantheman73]

Torque is what really counts. HP is usually the highest with engine revving past 3000rpm. Most drivers never see that range, for more than a short burst. Most of 'normal' driving is between 1400 and 2200 rpm. The reason the EcoBoost is liked, is because people like the power on the low end. That's where most of the city, stop and go driving is. A diesel also has more pulling power, but revs much lower. A engine may be rated at 300hp at 4200rpm, but puts out only 160hp at 1600rpm. So if 90% driving is city or with the cruise on at 65mph, you are driving an under powered slug.

It’s not an ‘underpowered slug’ just because it’s not making peak power at 1600rpm. It would be ‘underpowered’ if it ONLY made 160hp at any point in the powerband.
The 5.4 has a fairly linear powerband which is what makes it ideal for a truck...esp for towing.


2007 Ford Expedition Limited
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk