smo0othride
Full Access Members
They aren't going to replace it, they get no sales for that size of truck due to japanese manufactures taking over in that market. Fords smallest truck after 2012 will be the f150.
If the Expedition had the following engine options, which would you choose?
- Thread starter smo0othride
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
They aren't going to replace it, they get no sales for that size of truck due to japanese manufactures taking over in that market. Fords smallest truck after 2012 will be the f150.
walnuts4x4
Full Access Members
that sucks the "new" ranger a midsize.... guess like a dakota would be awesome...
smo0othride
Full Access Members
Does anyone else find it funny that the (only) engine the expedition actually comes with is the least desirable according to this poll?
panda24619
Full Access Members
i think that is funny! haha but still. its the work horse for now. soon they will switch to the coyote. and maybe an up grade to the 6.2.
brockncole
Full Access Members
Eco Boost!! They are crazy!! If they made a small V8 it would be insane!!!
alaskanexpy
Full Access Members
i said a 6.2L v8 but i would really like a 3V V10...i love my V10 in my excursion. dont care about mpg's.
CARO'S98EB
Full Access Members
I have seen some tests and the ecoboost v6 is actually as fast as the 6.2. It actually makes more tq inthe 1200-2500 rpm range. I have driven the f150s with all the engines and the ecoboost is a beast. that being said the 6.2 would be the choice if mileage in no concern [they are actually a big block motor and can go out to at least 4.25" bore over 7L]. for mileage and tq it would be hard to beat the rover deisel.
paul_smith_347
Active Member
I know it hasn't beed an option in an F-150, BUT..... if I had my choice, I would have a 7.3......yeah I know that some of you are thinking "You have got to be kidding me!" But look at it this way...... nearly unlimited towing, easy HP gains for far less than an E-force charger or Lightning swap. Just my preferance. Plus throw in the fact that its a million mile engine and all is see is an easy winner!
One Mean Green
Full Access Members
Wasn't a poll choice but I want a Cummins 4bt diesel with a 5 or 6 speed standard transmission.
splintrcel
Full Access Members
I would def want to give an expedition a try with the Twin Turbo V-6 they are putting in the new f-150s. I would imagine the change over for ford to add it to the expedition power plant line up wouldn't be too hard since the F-150 is so similar. Of course a V-8 Twin Turbo would be sick as hell but i like what i have now (5.4 v-8). Its got plenty enough for me.
Maverick1701
Full Access Members
I would bludgeon a rabbi with a pork-chop to have a 4.4 diesel in an Expedition.....I feel the same way about a diesel motor in a Jeep Wrangler too
Why no real mention of the 5.0? I have both to compare with now. The 5.4 6 speed is actually not a bad combo. But, the 5.0 seems to make more power everywhere. We took it to the beach this summer (just got the expy) and the 5.0 in a crew cab FX4 config with 3.73's topped my buddies Yukon 5.3 with cylinder deactivation on fuel mileage. We went from Myrtle Beach to Winstom Salem (he had to fill up to make sure he could get home-right after the derecho and gas stations further north had no power). When we pulled in for gas my trip meter was showing 22.9 mpg and his was at 19.9. I absolutely love my 5.0. But, I must say, the ecoboost and 3.31 gears in an expy would be tantalizing.
This poll was created in December of 2009. The coyote DOHC 5.0 was not available yet. Think it would definately deserve to be on the list today.
darmahsd
Full Access Members
Because trucks are about torque, and I tow with my Expy, I'd go with the 4.4 diesel V8.
And IMHO, once you have that, they react much better to chips and custom tunes than gasoline engines, so even at a premium option, if available, between the better mileage, longevity, torque and power potential from a tune, more bang for the buck.
What's not on the original list, and really shocked me, would be the new Ecoboost V6 that's in the F150. For me, nothing comes close to the feeling of a V8. But if you check this out, Ford F-150 EcoBoost Torture Test: Logging In Oregon - YouTube, this thing makes 425 FT LBS of torque right out of the box!
Now I would have to spend $7000 for the Whipple supercharger to get 450 FT LBS. I'll bet it won't get the mileage of the V6. At the risk of loosing that V8 rumble, that new Ecoboost might be a worthy option
and cheaper than the 4.4 diesel if they would ever offer that.
And IMHO, once you have that, they react much better to chips and custom tunes than gasoline engines, so even at a premium option, if available, between the better mileage, longevity, torque and power potential from a tune, more bang for the buck.
What's not on the original list, and really shocked me, would be the new Ecoboost V6 that's in the F150. For me, nothing comes close to the feeling of a V8. But if you check this out, Ford F-150 EcoBoost Torture Test: Logging In Oregon - YouTube, this thing makes 425 FT LBS of torque right out of the box!
Now I would have to spend $7000 for the Whipple supercharger to get 450 FT LBS. I'll bet it won't get the mileage of the V6. At the risk of loosing that V8 rumble, that new Ecoboost might be a worthy option
and cheaper than the 4.4 diesel if they would ever offer that.
donalds
Full Access Members
i've had 2 lightnings
1 stock
1 with a kenne bell swap
that sound is the best sound in the world!
1 stock
1 with a kenne bell swap
that sound is the best sound in the world!
donalds
Full Access Members
i forgot my 2003 mercury marauder
it had the trilogy supercharger
i miss that car
it had the trilogy supercharger
i miss that car
CR_Magruder
Member
Diesel is my first choice. Seemed like such a good idea that I went out and bought an Expedition with high miles and a good body to swap out the 5.4L for something more to my liking. Works for me!
I don't know why Ford does not take the hint and put a small diesel in the Expedition and F-150. If any of the big three did this they would OWN the 1/2 ton market.
Others have commented that the EPA has a lot to do with our choices in engines. This could be true, since the costs of development and added smog equipment adds a lot of cost to the customer. My swap would not meet modern emission requirements, even though it is more efficient than the gasoline engine.
Sad, because Ford sells diesel rangers and larger pickups in other parts of the world with turbodiesels. We the people have elected our government to represent us; if you are not happy with it (I'm not) send your senators and congressmen/women a note and let them know how you feel.
CR
I don't know why Ford does not take the hint and put a small diesel in the Expedition and F-150. If any of the big three did this they would OWN the 1/2 ton market.
Others have commented that the EPA has a lot to do with our choices in engines. This could be true, since the costs of development and added smog equipment adds a lot of cost to the customer. My swap would not meet modern emission requirements, even though it is more efficient than the gasoline engine.
Sad, because Ford sells diesel rangers and larger pickups in other parts of the world with turbodiesels. We the people have elected our government to represent us; if you are not happy with it (I'm not) send your senators and congressmen/women a note and let them know how you feel.
CR
ZombieSoldier
Full Access Members
No doubt diesel. It's not hard to get big numbers from an oil burner.
