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.
firemann32
Well-Known Member
I'd take either the
5.4L v8 supercharged 380hp 450 lb-ft 13/17mpg
or the
4.4L Diesel 330 hp 520 lb-ft ~16/22mpg
I'm actually doing research on supercharging my 5.4 after I rebuild it!
5.4L v8 supercharged 380hp 450 lb-ft 13/17mpg
or the
4.4L Diesel 330 hp 520 lb-ft ~16/22mpg
I'm actually doing research on supercharging my 5.4 after I rebuild it!
wmrodie
Member
I have driven the Eco boost V6 F150. I think for an everyday use and for the weekend light towing and such the 3.7 would be fine. Plus, the turbos on these could be tweaked to squeeze out a few more ponies.
Gary-Kq6rt
New Member
Tough call. I picked the 6.2, but the diesel would probably be the best all around choice.
ecqm8000
Active Member
Rudolph's child. I really with we Americans would build a mid size turbo Diesel. I've got the 7.3 the in the 4 door long bed. The Excursion in not much smaller. THAT is the reason I bought the "small" Expedition.
paintkilz
New Member
im not sure how you came up with the MPG ratings but i think a twin turbo v6 and the diesel would both do far better, at least on the highway mileage.
The Cayenne Turbo S is a 4.8L V8 and does 12/19mpg. so i think it would be safe to say a twin turbo 3.7l v6 SHOULD be able to do like 18-22 mpg city. especially if tuned properly.
HOWEVER i would take ANY mpg had it came with the a twin turbo 6. Ford is supposedly releasing an ecoboost model for every car they sale by 2012...so itd be cool to see them do it to the truck/suv.
should ammend the options for a Twin Turbo V6 tuned for Bio Fuel(E85).
tuners are tuning forced induced cars with E85 because states are banning race fuel for global warming reasons....cali especially. however e85 is super cheap compared to 91 and higher octane plus the e85 has better cooling properties allowing tuners to use more advanced timings and more boost without encountering detonation.
edit:
just realized ford does have an ecoboost f150. now that i think about it, i think its ridiculous that ford just threw the sho motor into a truck. they should have retuned it for the application...that being said, ive always been a turbo guy. only with a turbo can you use a purge valve as a diy boost controller and instantly double your boost...of course fuel needs to be added appropriately, but 450hp shouldnt be hard to extract from the 3.7liter. more efficient exhaust, intake, and a intercooler(not sure if has one equipped) with a boost controller always is good for an additional 100ponies on most turbo vehicles....
The Cayenne Turbo S is a 4.8L V8 and does 12/19mpg. so i think it would be safe to say a twin turbo 3.7l v6 SHOULD be able to do like 18-22 mpg city. especially if tuned properly.
HOWEVER i would take ANY mpg had it came with the a twin turbo 6. Ford is supposedly releasing an ecoboost model for every car they sale by 2012...so itd be cool to see them do it to the truck/suv.
should ammend the options for a Twin Turbo V6 tuned for Bio Fuel(E85).
tuners are tuning forced induced cars with E85 because states are banning race fuel for global warming reasons....cali especially. however e85 is super cheap compared to 91 and higher octane plus the e85 has better cooling properties allowing tuners to use more advanced timings and more boost without encountering detonation.
edit:
just realized ford does have an ecoboost f150. now that i think about it, i think its ridiculous that ford just threw the sho motor into a truck. they should have retuned it for the application...that being said, ive always been a turbo guy. only with a turbo can you use a purge valve as a diy boost controller and instantly double your boost...of course fuel needs to be added appropriately, but 450hp shouldnt be hard to extract from the 3.7liter. more efficient exhaust, intake, and a intercooler(not sure if has one equipped) with a boost controller always is good for an additional 100ponies on most turbo vehicles....
Last edited:
While I love the idea of the diesel, I've had an interest in the 2003-04 Mustang Cobras and Lightnings with the supercharged engines. I'd love to hear the whine of an Eaton or Whipple supercharger from under the hood of my Expedition!!
sgtowing
Supporting Members
I'd take the diesel all day long. I would have bought an excursion people want outragous money for an 05 excursion 4x4 diesel. 25k to more than 30k. Horsepower don't do you any good without torque to get you going. especially when you are talking about a vehicle that weighs 5,000#'s plus.
diesel is the best choice but less people would buy it due to the $7000 it would add to the price of the vehichle. the epa has ruined diesels by putting limits on emissions equipment and even the fuel itself
Diablo 3 Items
Diablo 3 Items
Last edited:
Last edited:
5.4L V8 Supercharged 450hp 520 lb-ft 12/19mpg.
Modified lightning motor with better flowing heads. More efficient intake, blower and exhaust. Mild cam. This will be my initial set up anyways.
Add whipple blower in the future and shoot for up to 21#'s of boost and it will be making serious hp and torque. Est. 800+ hp. With twin turbos..1000+ hp. These are proven combos. Just visit some of the lightning forums.... they exist.
Modified lightning motor with better flowing heads. More efficient intake, blower and exhaust. Mild cam.
This will be my initial set up anyways. Add whipple blower in the future and shoot for up to 21#'s of boost and it will be making serious hp and torque. Est. 800+ hp. With twin turbos..1000+ hp. These are proven combos. Just visit some of the lightning forums.... they exist.
smo0othride
Full Access Members
Anyone do this?
pdqcarrera
Active Member
turbocharged to win!
I'm not embarrassed to drive a turbocharged 6 cylinder... LOL
Even better, a direct injected turbocharged diesel would be awesome in an Expedition.
I'm not embarrassed to drive a turbocharged 6 cylinder... LOL
Even better, a direct injected turbocharged diesel would be awesome in an Expedition.
smo0othride
Full Access Members
LameSuburbanDad
Full Access Members
5.4 supercharged
I would choose the supercharged engine over the 6.2 (which is the only other fitting gas engine choice for anyone who would ever see snow, or heavy/constant towing.) then of course everyone loves diesel, but all of those engines would have a niche market.
I would have the 5.4L V8 Supercharged 380hp 450 lb-ft 13/17 mpg because of the base torque numbers, an AWD E.B. sporting 450 lb-ft is a bad beast.
I wouldn't be so worried about the H.P. being at 380 either. The current aftermarket would be able to fill that gap that the 6.2L holds at 31 more H.P. than my choice. and probably way surpass it, + power add-ons are always fun projects (usually)
You just can't beat the sound of a supercharger.
The 5.4L family of engines has been around a good long while that gives me solace in knowing those engines are EVERYWHERE. That means ease of tech. support and replacement parts. (which with a supercharger you will need.)
I'm not sure what the Transmissions for them would be, but my 99 Expedition has the 4r100 trans which is overkill for the triton 5.4 but it can be upgraded to be much stronger pretty easily (I pulled a semi uphill in snow this last winter, he helped too, but C'MON!) so longevity played a role in my choice.
For those reasons I really think the supercharged 5.4 expedition is the one for me. but only if I also get to keep the AWD/4X4, and the good trans. if it would be 2WD then screw a bunch of that, gimme the 6.2. Daddy likes to play and work hard
Ha it just occured to me, an SVT Lightning Expedition?? how ridiculously wonderful, pitty they never did it to the ranger.
I would choose the supercharged engine over the 6.2 (which is the only other fitting gas engine choice for anyone who would ever see snow, or heavy/constant towing.) then of course everyone loves diesel, but all of those engines would have a niche market.
I would have the 5.4L V8 Supercharged 380hp 450 lb-ft 13/17 mpg because of the base torque numbers, an AWD E.B. sporting 450 lb-ft is a bad beast.
I wouldn't be so worried about the H.P. being at 380 either. The current aftermarket would be able to fill that gap that the 6.2L holds at 31 more H.P. than my choice. and probably way surpass it, + power add-ons are always fun projects (usually)
You just can't beat the sound of a supercharger.
The 5.4L family of engines has been around a good long while that gives me solace in knowing those engines are EVERYWHERE. That means ease of tech. support and replacement parts. (which with a supercharger you will need.)
I'm not sure what the Transmissions for them would be, but my 99 Expedition has the 4r100 trans which is overkill for the triton 5.4 but it can be upgraded to be much stronger pretty easily (I pulled a semi uphill in snow this last winter, he helped too, but C'MON!) so longevity played a role in my choice.
For those reasons I really think the supercharged 5.4 expedition is the one for me. but only if I also get to keep the AWD/4X4, and the good trans. if it would be 2WD then screw a bunch of that, gimme the 6.2. Daddy likes to play and work hard
Ha it just occured to me, an SVT Lightning Expedition?? how ridiculously wonderful, pitty they never did it to the ranger.
Last edited:
The Sod Father
Member
Ideally, the Ecoboost, but if that is not an option, then the diesel. I tow an 8,000 lb camper and would love the added torque over the 5.4. And for Pete's sake Ford, PLEASE give us some decent tow mirrors!
smo0othride
Full Access Members
I would buy an SVT expedition real quick. Not sure if you knew but the last year the ranger will be sold is 2012.
Edit: Actually I think 2011 is the last year, and starting 2012 it will no longer be available
Last edited:
LameSuburbanDad
Full Access Members
that will be a sad day to see the last Ranger. It will be a better day though to see what monster they replace it with.
but in all the years of production for that truck (83-current) (and the Mazda B series)
they never offered anything "stupid" for it.
That really bums me out, the Contour got an SVT package, the F-150, and the mustang... but why not the beloved and forever driving ranger? lots of power in a small light truck...seems like it would have been a hit. we all know a 4.6 will fit in a ranger. (it doesn't have to like it, it just has to fit. lol
but in all the years of production for that truck (83-current) (and the Mazda B series)
they never offered anything "stupid" for it.
That really bums me out, the Contour got an SVT package, the F-150, and the mustang... but why not the beloved and forever driving ranger? lots of power in a small light truck...seems like it would have been a hit. we all know a 4.6 will fit in a ranger. (it doesn't have to like it, it just has to fit. lol
smo0othride
Full Access Members
Last edited:
