Denaro and Adam ???

what's your take on this ...........

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/11/chevy-vs-ford-in-heavy-duty-rumble-in-the-rockies.html

Hmmmmmmmmmm! I see one big difference between the two, Ford built theirs with their own money, Chevy did it with the taxpayers dollar.

Damn, that was some good reading right their. I love stuff like this because I know the people that are in charge of the super duty program will come back like "Return of the Jedi" The 6R140 did it's job and I have my hand print all over that sucker!!!!! I will let Adam speak about the diesel as i know nothing about that.

I can tell you guys this "Not one of their 1500 trucks will beat the F-150 in an magazine test this year"

Surprises me after all the hype about the new engine program Like Big D said.Ford will just have too build it stronger.

I would like to see the true rear wheel HP of both of these trucks to see which one is actually close to the advertised numbers.
I also wonder if they picked this particular course, knowing that the turbo system on the Ford wouldn't perform at high altitude? I would like to see this done at more realistic altitudes and see what happens then.
It seems by this test the exhaust brake on the Ford needs some major work.

Well how were each of the drivers? The Ford driver could have been crappy, not only that. Ford might not have gotten there first BUT as they said, Ford made the interior all nice and they have way more power. Well, the price...both are within a hundred of each other and Ford is proven to be able to haul more and the engine's emissions and fuel economy is outstanding. So, ummmm, Ford is a MUCH better choice. All the GM guys hear is "that's right GM beat the Ford" but of course they don't look at WHY GM won, its a lot more than power. Its ratio's change it all too. Ford didn't build its truck for drag racing, it built it for hauling as much load as possible.

And it says "Photos courtesy of Diesel Power, General Motors" so obviously GM had to do with setting this thing up. The test could have been "rigged" or place in a bad area for the Fore as AZFairlane said.

And read this sentence, that means that a GM guy was driving the Ford.

"We agreed with a few conditions: Chevrolet had to use test trucks purchased off the lot from Chevy and Ford dealers and the Super Duty had to have the 400/800 power ratings."

And what about the weight placement?

my question is why you would choose 3.73 gear ratio for a 1 ton dually truck. I'd like to see the same test done with 4.10 equipped trucks.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




DEARBORN, Mich., Nov. 19, 2010 /PRNewswire via COMTEX/ -- 2011 Ford F-150 EcoBoost(TM) "hero engine" runs for 24 hours at Homestead-Miami Speedway as another demonstration of the durability of the new 3.5-liter EcoBoost(TM) truck engine arriving in early 2011

2011 Ford F-150 EcoBoost pulls a trailer with two NASCAR Sprint Cup Ford Fusions weighing 11,300 pounds at full throttle around the site of NASCAR's Ford 400 season finale, Homestead-Miami Speedway's 1.5-mile oval

Top speeds of nearly 100 mph were attained, with the 2011 Ford F-150 EcoBoost pounding out average speeds above 80 mph with the fully loaded trailer

Go to http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/f150/2011/experiencef150 to see more on the test as well as videos on how the EcoBoost truck engine endured the equivalent of 150,000 miles of harsh customer use in the dyno lab and worked at a logging camp before the NASCAR test

Up next is a towing challenge where the 2011 Ford F-150 EcoBoost takes on the best the competition has to offer. Finally, the same EcoBoost truck engine will be raced at the Tecate SCORE Baja 1000

The 2011 Ford F-150 EcoBoost recently took a roundabout way to demonstrate durability and best-in-class towing capability.

The new truck/engine combination racked up 1,606 miles towing a best-in-class 11,300 pounds while circling the 1.5-mile Homestead-Miami Speedway oval at an average speed of 82 mph. It's the latest test in a series of web-based documentaries to demonstrate the durability of the new 3.5-liter EcoBoost truck engine available in early 2011.

EcoBoost is fundamental to Ford's strategy to provide technologically advanced, high-output, smaller-displacement powertrains that deliver uncompromised performance and fuel economy. EcoBoost engines deliver fuel economy gains of up to 20 percent and reduction of CO2 emissions of up to 15 percent, compared with larger, less-efficient engines.

In addition to turbocharging with direct injection, Ford engineers have enhanced EcoBoost's technology capabilities by adding variable valve timing and precisely controlling all aspects of the engine. Ford has at least 125 patents on its EcoBoost technology.

The high-speed maximum towing test is the current phase of a testing program that started when this randomly selected EcoBoost engine endured the equivalent of 150,000 miles or 10 years' use on the dynamometer, replicating the duty cycle of the harshest-use customer.

After the "Dyno Stress" torture testing, the engine was installed into a new 2011 Ford F-150 to work as a log skidder in Oregon, dragging logs weighing up to nearly five tons.

Go to http://www.fordvehicles.com/trucks/f150/2011/experiencef150 to see firsthand how the EcoBoost truck engine performs.

NASCAR Ford Fusions taken for a ride

In this latest demonstration, the 2011 F-150 EcoBoost towed a pair of NASCAR Sprint Cup Ford Fusions, each weighing 3,450 pounds, plus additional weight to reach maximum capacity. The truck and trailer ran for 24 hours, stopping only for fuel, driver changes, to check temperatures, inspect truck tires and replace trailer tires.

The EcoBoost powered the truck and fully loaded trailer to top speeds approaching 100 mph on the straightaways, with average lap speeds above 80 mph. The engine utilized its maximum horsepower of 365 and its maximum best-in-class torque of 420 lb.-ft. several times each lap - with regular 87 octane fuel.

Consider that last year's pole speed for the season-ending Ford 400 NASCAR Sprint Cup race at Homestead-Miami Speedway was about 174 mph. The 2011 F-150 EcoBoost pushed to near 100 mph with a truck and trailer combined weight that is more than three times heavier than a Sprint Cup car.

While at Homestead-Miami Speedway, the 2011 F-150 EcoBoost:

Turned 1,061 laps

Compiled 1,606 miles

Had a fast lap of 99 mph

Averaged 82 mph

"The engine and the truck performed flawlessly," said Eric Kuehn, chief engineer of the 2011 Ford F-150. "These demonstrations reinforce that every engine we put under the hood of a Ford F-Series has to pass all of our Built Ford Tough testing - and pass it readily."

Of particular importance to maximum towing customers is the performance of the stock turbochargers and cooling systems tested during this demonstration.

"The twin turbochargers were pushed to the absolute limit multiple times every single lap with no problems whatsoever," said Kuehn. "The stock cooling systems were outstanding as well. The engine coolant, transmission temperatures and oil temperatures ran at or below where we expected throughout the entire test."

Trailer sway control helps keep maximum load under control

In addition to demonstrating the performance of the 3.5-liter EcoBoost, the Homestead-Miami track also proved to be a showcase for standard trailer sway control. Even with strong wind gusts combined with variable banking of 18 to 20 degrees in the turns, trailer sway control helped keep the maximum load under control.

Trailer sway control works in conjunction with AdvanceTrac(R) with RSC(R) (Roll Stability Control(TM)) to determine if a trailer is swaying and takes immediate measures to help the driver bring the vehicle and trailer under control. The system is automated and requires no driver interaction.

"The 2011 F-150 EcoBoost tows the most and does it with a trailer sway control system unmatched by anyone else," said Kuehn. "Pulling an 11,300-pound trailer at 100 mph on steep banking in a strong wind is an extreme condition well beyond what a customer would experience, but the 2011 F-150 EcoBoost handled everything with ease."

The 2011 F-150 EcoBoost will be available in early 2011.

Ford truck leadership continues

Ford F-Series is the best-selling vehicle (for 28 years straight) and the best-selling and most-awarded pickup truck (for 33 years straight) in America.

l

That means Ford is more better!! I'd rather push a Ford than drive a Chevy


Boo Boo

stangr8cr wrote:That means Ford is more better!! I'd rather push a Ford than drive a Chevy


Boo Boo

You do do a lot of pushing I here

Diggindeeper wrote:my question is why you would choose 3.73 gear ratio for a 1 ton dually truck. I'd like to see the same test done with 4.10 equipped trucks.

When you have enough power you don't need 4.10's to pull 27,000 lbs or what ever it is. The higher gear then increase the fuel mileage. Dodge has been using 3.73's for years in their 1 tons and both my dads dodges pull their 35' 5th wheel just fine. My old 7.3 needs those lower gears because it makes a lot less power but fuel mileage isn't even close to what the Dodge gets.

Lem,

Good article thanks for sharing it with us.They had a 2011 F-150 Eco Boost test drive at the dealer where i bought my 2010 F-150 Supercab 4X4 yesterday.After reading the article you posted i wish i would of test drove one but i didn't go to it.I'm glad i didn't then i would probably want one i have the 4.6 3V in my truck with the 3.73 LS rear axle it runs pretty good for a 4.6.

Later Mark.

res0rli9 wrote:

stangr8cr wrote:That means Ford is more better!! I'd rather push a Ford than drive a Chevy


Boo Boo

You do do a lot of pushing I here

Boo Boo

I don't think it's such a big deal really. They are both very good and powerful trucks. It's good that the competition is tough,keeps everyone on their toes. Besides,either truck has more power than most of us will ever use pulling our trailers. I say hats off to both trucks.

jasonf wrote:

Diggindeeper wrote:my question is why you would choose 3.73 gear ratio for a 1 ton dually truck. I'd like to see the same test done with 4.10 equipped trucks.

When you have enough power you don't need 4.10's to pull 27,000 lbs or what ever it is. The higher gear then increase the fuel mileage. Dodge has been using 3.73's for years in their 1 tons and both my dads dodges pull their 35' 5th wheel just fine. My old 7.3 needs those lower gears because it makes a lot less power but fuel mileage isn't even close to what the Dodge gets.

Higher gears equalling better fuel economy is a myth with V8's IMO Even gas trucks. you can get past the point of helping yourself either way to low or to high. 3.9-4.20 seems to be the sweet spot.
I had more pulling power AND better fuel economy with 4:10's w/OD than the equivilent trucks with 3.55 guys did, ESPECIALLY pulling.
When equipped OD, the lower gears are much better. You get out of the hole quicker, and you still have OD for hwy cruising, PLUS the tires are pretty tall now a days. They must be running ~1300 rpm in OD at 65mph... thats stupid for pulling a load with a V8 DIesel.
My old IDI would do 100 mph no problem with 4:10's and a 4spd OD. How fast do they need to go?
Its not a 6 cyl diesel, they like to spin a little faster.

Diggindeeper wrote:

Higher gears equalling better fuel economy is a myth with V8's IMO Even gas trucks. you can get past the point of helping yourself either way to low or to high. 3.9-4.20 seems to be the sweet spot.
I had more pulling power AND better fuel economy with 4:10's w/OD than the equivilent trucks with 3.55 guys did, ESPECIALLY pulling.
When equipped OD, the lower gears are much better. You get out of the hole quicker, and you still have OD for hwy cruising, PLUS the tires are pretty tall now a days. They must be running ~1300 rpm in OD at 65mph... thats stupid for pulling a load with a V8 DIesel.
My old IDI would do 100 mph no problem with 4:10's and a 4spd OD. How fast do they need to go?
Its not a 6 cyl diesel, they like to spin a little faster.

Brent your calculations (or should I say guesstimat )are wrong. Using the calculator at Randy Ring and Pinion here a drop from 4.10 to 3.73's lowers the rpm from 2170 to 1975 (I used 33" tires). This is pretty much where my truck is as well. That is still right in the torque curve of a diesel and also where you best mileage is.

Every Ford I have owned from my Festiva, my 5.0l capri rs, all my F150's and my F350 get the best mileage below 2000 rpm. Gas, diesel it doesn't make a difference. At 65 my 7.3 gets around 19 mpg, at 75 it get 14-15 mpg. My capri got 23 mpg at 1800 rpm and 14 mpg at 2400. Even my Festiva only got 40 mpg above 2200 where as below 2200 it would get 63 mpg.

jasonf wrote:

Diggindeeper wrote:

Higher gears equalling better fuel economy is a myth with V8's IMO Even gas trucks. you can get past the point of helping yourself either way to low or to high. 3.9-4.20 seems to be the sweet spot.
I had more pulling power AND better fuel economy with 4:10's w/OD than the equivilent trucks with 3.55 guys did, ESPECIALLY pulling.
When equipped OD, the lower gears are much better. You get out of the hole quicker, and you still have OD for hwy cruising, PLUS the tires are pretty tall now a days. They must be running ~1300 rpm in OD at 65mph... thats stupid for pulling a load with a V8 DIesel.
My old IDI would do 100 mph no problem with 4:10's and a 4spd OD. How fast do they need to go?
Its not a 6 cyl diesel, they like to spin a little faster.

Brent your calculations (or should I say guesstimat )are wrong. Using the calculator at Randy Ring and Pinion here a drop from 4.10 to 3.73's lowers the rpm from 2170 to 1975 (I used 33" tires). This is pretty much where my truck is as well. That is still right in the torque curve of a diesel and also where you best mileage is.

Every Ford I have owned from my Festiva, my 5.0l capri rs, all my F150's and my F350 get the best mileage below 2000 rpm. Gas, diesel it doesn't make a difference. At 65 my 7.3 gets around 19 mpg, at 75 it get 14-15 mpg. My capri got 23 mpg at 1800 rpm and 14 mpg at 2400. Even my Festiva only got 40 mpg above 2200 where as below 2200 it would get 63 mpg.

Thats funny, I did the same calculation and came up with 1728 rpm at 65. now i'd be surprised if its allowing for lockup too. another 200 or so rpm.
You cant use the same truck at different speeds as an RPM vs fuel economy comparison. Theres obviously a lot more wind resistance at 75 vs 65 mph.
ps i think you were looking at the standard trans box.

with a 12000 lb trailer, 3.55s and a 5spd the ol 7.3 power smoke did 13.9 miles per gallon @ 65 mph

bluovldude wrote:with a 12000 lb trailer, 3.55s and a 5spd the ol 7.3 power smoke did 13.9 miles per gallon @ 65 mph

how big is your gallon

Well.

I guess i need to clear up the air!

You can read all you want, Chevy is trying to make a point that they are better! (this test they were)

Chevy paid for this test, they picked the test location and the results were or are just what we at FORD all-ready knew! Our single sequential turbo is not as efficient in higher elevation's. It's an all new turbo and will be up-dated as we continue with on-going development of the 6.7L

If the match-up or test was done anywhere else, Ford would of come out on top.! As we did in every other test or match-up we were involved in!

Keep in mind this engine, turbo, trans, everything....... are all new! The 7.3L didn't start off PERFECT! It takes time to get to that point.
FORD has over 50% of the heavy duty market.! That say's allot for our new combo!

Adam

Diggindeeper wrote:

bluovldude wrote:with a 12000 lb trailer, 3.55s and a 5spd the ol 7.3 power smoke did 13.9 miles per gallon @ 65 mph

how big is your gallon

the same as your gallon

bluovldude wrote:

Diggindeeper wrote:

bluovldude wrote:with a 12000 lb trailer, 3.55s and a 5spd the ol 7.3 power smoke did 13.9 miles per gallon @ 65 mph

how big is your gallon

the same as your gallon

I don't know about that because it doesn't say where you are from. A Canadian gallon is 4.54 litres where as a US Gallon is 3.78 litres. I often wonder if chevy guys use the 4.54 when they do their calculations so they are getting farther on less gallons.

blown86hallet wrote:Well.

I guess i need to clear up the air!

You can read all you want, Chevy is trying to make a point that they are better! (this test they were)

Chevy paid for this test, they picked the test location and the results were or are just what we at FORD all-ready knew! Our single sequential turbo is not as efficient in higher elevation's. It's an all new turbo and will be up-dated as we continue with on-going development of the 6.7L

If the match-up or test was done anywhere else, Ford would of come out on top.! As we did in every other test or match-up we were involved in!

Keep in mind this engine, turbo, trans, everything....... are all new! The 7.3L didn't start off PERFECT! It takes time to get to that point.
FORD has over 50% of the heavy duty market.! That say's allot for our new combo!

Adam

It's funny to read people talk about GM products being a "real truck". They must not pay attention to trucks sitting on job sites.