Jump to content

WHY? 4-6-8

SS502

Recommended Posts

OnTheReel Senior Enthusiast

OnTheReel

Posted
Posted

I guess we have a draw...

 

The 5.0 in the Mustang is great and was (maybe still is) quicker than the 6.2 Camaro. I would say it’s a better sports car engine with a more “rev happy nature”...

 

The 6.2 in the Silverado is great and definitely a bit quicker than the 5.0 F150. I would say it’s a better truck engine with a flatter torque curve. Also, having a lower specific output almost always ensures a longer engine life, which is more important to truck buyers than any other group.

 

Bottom line is displacement and simple pushrod architecture is what makes for a great truck engine and even Ford would concede that with their newly released 7.3 pushrod V8. 

  • Replies 72
  • Created
  • Last Reply
M1ck3y Senior Enthusiast

M1ck3y

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, magnum74 said:

I heard you loud and clear. It's a twin turbo. What do you expect and why do you think they didn't continue with their own 6.2? They didn't build a twin turbo 6 to have less HP per liter than their own 6.2 let alone GM's 6.2.

 

If you can't handle a spirited discussion you should leave.

 

BTW, I'm happy I bought a truck built in Flint to support the US and North America. Don't let the door smack you on the way out.

 

 

Wow... We are not on the same page. Where do you live in devon, I'll be there in 2hrs. I'd give you the page number but I don't think you would find it...

magnum74 Enthusiast

magnum74

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, M1ck3y said:

Wow... We are not on the same page. Where do you live in devon, I'll be there in 2hrs. I'd give you the page number but I don't think you would find it...

What does this even mean? Are you making a threat? Sure sounds like it.

M1ck3y Senior Enthusiast

M1ck3y

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, magnum74 said:

What does this even mean? Are you making a threat? Sure sounds like it.

Ok, well I rest my case... You wouldn't find the page.

 

I'm stating that I'm Canadian. And I wasn't sure if you were playing stupid or you really didn't get what I was talking about.

 

*Edit*

 

And in case you didn't get that. I AM NOT MAKING A THREAT... I don't know any other way to say that, any clearer. I believe the authorities will be able interpret it, if you feel the need to contact them.

magnum74 Enthusiast

magnum74

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, M1ck3y said:

Ok, well I rest my case... You wouldn't find the page.

 

I'm stating that I'm Canadian. And I wasn't sure if you were playing stupid or you really didn't get what I was talking about.

 

*Edit*

 

And in case you didn't get that. I AM NOT MAKING A THREAT... I don't know any other way to say that, any clearer. I believe the authorities will be able interpret it, if you feel the need to contact them.

Your wording was not at all obvious with it's intent but no, I wasn't planning to get the RCMP involved. They're probably doing something else tonight, anyway lol

 

Probably a good time to bury the hatchet and move on, I think.  :thumbs:

 

 

 

 

TXGREEK Senior Enthusiast

TXGREEK

Posted
Posted
You need to read my post again. I am not embarrassed by my 6.2; and no where did I say I was making a comparison between the ecoboost and the l86.

 

What I said is embarrassing is that ford can make an f150 5.0 with... +400 hp/tq? Higher in the mustang I'm sure... And gm needs 6.2 litres to pull out in front of that. I could be very wrong but I think the 5.0 in the mustang makes 420hp, 460tq. Obviously different rpm ranges/curve, engine tech , application, but peak numbers are peak numbers.

 

With that being said, I will say it again. I don't want an f150 or a 5.0. I love the 6.2 wish I had the extra cash to get my headers on it, tune it, cam it... and heads.

 

I was comparing power output to the number of litres it takes to get the job done.

 

Oh, and this is the only forum I visit. But with the number of idiot's on here really thinking about discontinuing it... Especially because of Canadian idiots.

 

Don’t drop out, believe me, I’ve dealt with major trash idiots but eventually filter through the riff raff. Learn and teach is what it’s all about. Ford Mustang GT is 460HP and 420 Torque. The 2018Ford Coyote 5.0 is 395HP and 400 torque.

 

 

Sent from above

SS502 Senior Enthusiast

SS502

Posted
  • Author
Posted
10 hours ago, M1ck3y said:

You need to read my post again. I am not embarrassed by my 6.2; and no where did I say I was making a comparison between the ecoboost and the l86.

 

What I said is embarrassing is that ford can make an f150 5.0 with... +400 hp/tq? Higher in the mustang I'm sure... And gm needs 6.2 litres to pull out in front of that. I could be very wrong but I think the 5.0 in the mustang makes 420hp, 460tq. Obviously different rpm ranges/curve, engine tech , application, but peak numbers are peak numbers.

 

With that being said, I will say it again. I don't want an f150 or a 5.0. I love the 6.2 wish I had the extra cash to get my headers on it, tune it, cam it... and heads.

 

I was comparing power output to the number of litres it takes to get the job done.

 

Oh, and this is the only forum I visit. But with the number of idiot's on here really thinking about discontinuing it... Especially because of Canadian idiots.

 

6 hours ago, TXGREEK said:

 

Don’t drop out, believe me, I’ve dealt with major trash idiots but eventually filter through the riff raff. Learn and teach is what it’s all about. Ford Mustang GT is 460HP and 420 Torque. The 2018Ford Coyote 5.0 is 395HP and 400 torque.

 

 

Sent from above

@TXGREEK is the winner!

 

5.0L TI-VCT V8

This legendary Ford V8 with 10-speed transmission delivers all the muscle you need plus best-in-class* payload. Experience robust 395 horsepower and 400 lb.-ft. of torque, courtesy of twin independent variable cam timing (Ti-VCT), as well as the Ford port-fuel and direct-injection (PFDI) system with two injectors per cylinder — one in the air intake port, another inside the cylinder — to increase power and efficiency.

 

SS502 Senior Enthusiast

SS502

Posted
  • Author
Posted

GM 6.2 is 420/460

Ford 5.0 is 395/400

We are discussing TRUCKS are we not???

Both engines are impressive, so I’d say there is no reason to trash either one. Support whatcha have or wanna have but no reason to take a thread and go into a pissin contest. You know who you are so keep the hatchet buried :thumbs:

SS502 Senior Enthusiast

SS502

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 2/22/2019 at 7:10 PM, M1ck3y said:

Completely different engine tech, but its embarrassing that an engine with1.2 litres less displacement, isn't far behind. Guess gm should be thankful ford didn't make a new gen 6.2...

Your statement might hold water if you were referring to the Ford 5.0 having better numbers then the GM 5.3 because it does. The Ford 5.0 is a good engine, sonis the GM 5.3 but to compare the 5.0 to the 6.2 and even suggest they are close in numbers is a little confusing. Now I will say (and I own a 6.2) that I’ve been in a Raptor and the truck is a screamer...both down the road and in your ears. If I was deaf, I’d probably enjoy the Raptor more but I’m not so the sound of my 6.2 coming out the Borla tailpipes is my drug of choice.

SS502 Senior Enthusiast

SS502

Posted
  • Author
Posted
6 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

Ford puts the 5.0 in most trims, GM?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That wasn’t their beef lol but I hear ya!

SS502 Senior Enthusiast

SS502

Posted
  • Author
Posted
11 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

Ford puts the 5.0 in most trims, GM?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think GM should make the 6.2 available as an option in every single truck they make...I would love a single cab short bed with a 6.2 and I’d throw the warranty out the window!!

KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted
That wasn’t their beef lol but I hear ya!

I mention it whenever I can, hoping GM is watching. I can picture Grumpy getting a 6.2 reg cab. Instead of fuel mileage, we’ve be reading about elapsed time in the 1/4 mile.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
TXGREEK Senior Enthusiast

TXGREEK

Posted
Posted
I think GM should make the 6.2 available as an option in every single truck they make...I would love a single cab short bed with a 6.2 and I’d throw the warranty out the window!!


But then everyone will have one and it’ll be Chaos!!


Sent from above

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Atlas
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Atlas · Posted

      You refuse to own anything made in this century yet you reportedly own... a 2007 Silverado, which is now almost 20 years old. The dissonance.... turn up your hearing aid?   You clearly don't understand the government contracting process, brother. We send people to die on front lines, keep the public safe, and make people's husbands, wives, children enter burning buildings with equipment from .....wait for it.....   ...the lowest bidder....   Just because something is used for a long time doesn't mean it's good. But it might be cheap and plentiful.   Please, continue to whine about new trucks in a thread dedicated to new trucks, which you've said you'll never own. We get it. Go tell everyone how you're stuck in time on a Panther forum. I mean, Jesus, an 86 isn't even one of the good Panthers.
    • KARNUT
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By KARNUT · Posted

      It really is comical when people don’t agree or see the reason some people prefer the older vehicles. They become condescending. All the while they may be busting their knuckles on old vehicles. I have found memories of swapping out engines in my old GM cars in a weekend without much hassle. Unlike today. One wrong move a computer will shut you down. Even on something as easy as a brake job. There’s a pretty comical YouTuber called the car wizard. A garage owner who puts it all in perspective. Another Vicegrip garage that’s shows just how tough the old stuff is. 
    • Jsdirt
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jsdirt · Posted

      I was around and remember that era very well, so I'm calling b/s on that statement. If they were that bad no police department or taxi company would've bought a single one ... but they were used in both services (and fire) for DECADES. They were bulletproof and proven. Even the early 21st century ones weren't too bad! The early models were legendary.   Mine is proof, but people like atlas are blinded by agenda and refuse to believe facts right before their very eyes.   Even decades after they were built, a new generation started driving them, posting all their builds and shenanigans on Grandmarq.net and Crownvic.net. The failures would show up then, since they all were deep past 100k-150k miles by that point, and younger drivers tend to be a little aggressive, especially with vehicles than can lay a one-tire fire for as long as you hold your foot in it. They've more than proven themselves over the decades.   The only thing that'll really take them out is road salt. The bodies and sheet metal were garbage. A victim of the cheapout FoMoCo and GM have been partaking in before then, and since.   Today it's the stuff that counts - the undercarriage that rots away first!    GMs Caprice was no slouch either. Reliable as a stone ax - the opposite of what they build now.    
    • Jsdirt
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jsdirt · Posted

      Let me know how your vehicles do in 10 years. You don't know ******, kid. 😂    There's a reason that Panther platform was used as police, fire, and taxi service for DECADES ... long before you were born, apparently.
    • davester
      Disconnecting Battery

      By davester · Posted

      If your connector also has a big lever to get the connector on and off, you don't want to force the lever either way, as it becomes a bigger problem if you bust the lever or the mechanism it works.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...