Jump to content

New Truck

jdubub

By jdubub
in The Off-Topic Bar

Recommended Posts

jdubub Senior Enthusiast

jdubub

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks. It is strong. This 5.0 with 3.73s is strong as hell. I'm impressed with it only being a 5.0.

 

 

Soon I will be purchasing the power extend and power fold tows.

  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply
20Tahoe12LT Enthusiast

20Tahoe12LT

Posted
Posted

Congrats on the new truck!! I hope you continue to enjoy it.

BlackZ71Silverado Senior Enthusiast

BlackZ71Silverado

Posted
Posted

:puke:

 

I hate the way the F-150 looks...........Strong power plant though that's for sure. As long as you like it that's what counts. If it had the Raptor body I would probably own an F-150 myself......Keep us posted on how she treats you.

  • 2 weeks later...
'01LS1 Senior Enthusiast

'01LS1

Posted
Posted

That FX4 is really nice.

 

I have always bought GM trucks, but one of Fords videos caught my attention awhile back dealing with structure.

There are several that follow it.

 

Ran some insurance quotes between Ford GM Dodge this past summer & Ford was a couple bucks cheaper.

Dodge or Ram on the other hand was always the highest. On a side note, it did not matter on the GM truck whether

it had a 5.3 or 6.2.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQET-JW81DE&list=PL7A7928FBDF2B8545&index=3&feature=plpp_video

jdubub Senior Enthusiast

jdubub

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Still LOVE the truck. Only 2500 miles on it. The mpg is awesome in this thing. I booked it at 90mph the other day from Dallas to Houston. Averaged 15.8mpg and it never had to down shift.

 

I'm only 24, so my insurance rates are high for another 6 months, but on a truck that is newer and more expensive than my Z71 I traded, somehow my insurance went down $5 a month lol.

 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

00Silverado4x4 Senior Enthusiast

00Silverado4x4

Posted
Posted

That FX4 is really nice.

 

I have always bought GM trucks, but one of Fords videos caught my attention awhile back dealing with structure.

There are several that follow it.

 

Ran some insurance quotes between Ford GM Dodge this past summer & Ford was a couple bucks cheaper.

Dodge or Ram on the other hand was always the highest. On a side note, it did not matter on the GM truck whether

it had a 5.3 or 6.2.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQET-JW81DE&list=PL7A7928FBDF2B8545&index=3&feature=plpp_video

 

 

Isn't this the same guy who made the video bad mouthing the Ram's rear coil spring suspension? Talk about talking up one company. Personally, my bumper is what is going to be what takes the most of the brunt in a collision so I really could care less if I don't have a "structure" around my engine bay. If the design was so horrible for GM I pretty sure the "Safety" people would have pulled the vehicle off the road long ago.

'01LS1 Senior Enthusiast

'01LS1

Posted
Posted

It's all sales propaganda. They all do it.

 

 

Yeah, he has to be on the Ford pay roll, think he has/had a radio show or something at one point. Maybe still does?

 

Just makes me curious how the trucks all work or are suppose to work structurally.

 

There was a crash test a few years ago between a 50's Chevy car & a new Malibu. The driver or crash test dummy in the Malibu was protected while the other was not. So just a bunch of steel out front doesn't make the total difference. Just interesting is all.

dave_benn Enthusiast

dave_benn

Posted
Posted

I guess as long as you hit something at the frame height you would be fine, but if you plan on taking on something higher than your frame you might want the extra protection in the engine bay.

00Silverado4x4 Senior Enthusiast

00Silverado4x4

Posted
Posted

True, but average vehicle is lower than that. Plus front structure wouldn't help in a side or rear end collision. Either way, I've got too much time, money & memories invested in this truck to trade in right this moment

  • 2 weeks later...
jdubub Senior Enthusiast

jdubub

Posted
  • Author
Posted

New retrofitted lights are in. FX-R IV's, 3", 5,000k D2S for heads and 5,000k in fogs. Good projectors are effing awesome!

de6e2eda.jpg

emu5epy3.jpg

8ypepe2u.jpg

y7e8anuh.jpg

 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2

  • 2 months later...

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Transmission Temperature Hitting 220s

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Most thermostatically controlled ATF systems use a 'wax' pill just like the one in your water thermostat. They work on the expansion volume of the wax and the pill is constructed in such a way as to limit the travel to remain within that range. This means it has an opening temperature often called the 'cracking temperature' and a fully open temperature. For whatever reason oil is designated by it's fully open temperature and water by it's cracking temperature.    Between the two it the "Regulating Temperature" The entire range is about 20 F from closed to open. In your example the lower limit, opening point of 145 F then has a fully open temp of 165 F and a throttling temperature of 155 F.    Thing is, the throttling temperature needs two things to work properly. Enough system load high enough to reach the minimum and a heat sink (cooler/exchanger) large enough to prevent any load applied from exceeding the fully open temperature.    If your system exceeds the fully open temperature it is screaming MORE COOLER.    Here is the silly part of the whole thermostat system where the oil is cooled/heated by the radiator. Nothing is flowing to that system until the oil temperature reaches the cracking temperature unless it is equipped with a minimum flow bypass orifice or a bypass built into the seating surface of the plunger. That system meant to get it up to temp quicker isn't doing a thing until WORK drives if from ambient to cracking temp. One a cold winter day, like zero F, it may never get hotter than about 110 F. Sometimes not even that.    People forget or are young enough to not know that until this millennia transmissions were cooled by the radiator cold tank alone and without a thermostat at all.  In the 50's they weren't even cooled. OEMs learn everything the hard way.    When an OEM tells you the trans "Works best" between 175 F and 220 F it means works best for THEM. The transmission thermostat is fuel play. If you watch you trans temps like I do you will learn that it may take a hundred miles if you are not towing and not driving more than say 55-60 mph on a zero F day to even reach 120 F and it might sit there all day if it's colder. Yet if functions perfectly over about 100 F. It may need to get a bit warmer for the fuel and spark maps to go without an multiplier.    Worry more about too hot. Use a cooler large enough to put that thermostat in range.         
    • KARNUT
      Gas Prices

      By KARNUT · Posted

      Around 2008 if memory serves they took sulfur out. That was when diesel went up. 
    • richard wysong
      Gas Prices

      By richard wysong · Posted

      Question for you Grumpy, why is diesel so much more than gasoline? Seems to me that it may be slightly a little less refined than gas and it doesn't have 10% alcohol which presumably lowers the price of gas
    • TrueBlue
      Transmission Temperature Hitting 220s

      By TrueBlue · Posted

      Thanks, so being a different beast altogether, anyone know what the "optimal" temp is for the 10L80/90 for proper shifting?
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      How many years have I pointed out every point in that link to the folks here and been avalanched with criticisms and outright hostilities at times? I ran counter to even the great CUSTOMBOSS and Lake Speed Jr and the half dozen experts on YouTube and in the final.....GM, Physics (Stribeck) backs that Grumpy old Bear.    Honestly, I never said a thing engineering hadn't studied silly and laid in concrete during WWII. But I'm old, the information is old and yet, the Laws of Physics are eternal.    Okay there is one exception. I vehemently disagree with their use of the word 'tolerances' when what it meant is "clearance".   The clearance is the distance between two objects. The tolerance is the degree of acceptable variation permitted in that clearance. I.E., piston to bore clearance is 0.004" with a tolerance of +/- .0002" so the clearance is in specification if it lies between 0.0038" and 0.0042". Cutting that 'tolerance in half has ZERO impact on lubrication requirements. Makes for more difficulty in manufacturing.  But a tighter clearance 'MAY'. Depends on finish. Anyway....   It's one of those statements made by people to make themselves look smarter than they are to convince people who are as un-enlighten as they seem to manipulate their behaviors. But hey, the blind leading the blind puts them both in the pit. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...