Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I traded my ‘19 F150 on a new Explorer ST for my wife.  Similar story, no major issues, just never loved it and they gave me almost what I paid for a 2yr old, 30k mile truck.  I had the 3.5 ecoboost - plenty of torque, fast, but sucked gas when hauling or towing anything.  Decided I wanted to go back to a v8, so I found a ‘21 AT4 with the 6.2 - very happy with my decision.  It’s not quite as fast/quick and empty fuel mileage not quite as good.  Hauling or towing the mpg doesn’t drop like the ecoboost did (almost cut in half hauling a utv on a utility trailer, 3000lbs total but more about wind resistance).  Wife and I both agree the AT4 seats are more comfortable, which was another complaint about the F150.

 

If I only needed to tow occasionally or haul mulch, etc, I would have kept the F150.  But 30% of my driving the F150 was towing the trailer/utv.

Posted

Like you, I went from a Ford F-150 to Silverado. I had a nicely loaded 2016 Ford F-150 XLT Supercrew 4×4, the best one WITHOUT leather. I traded it in 2019 for a Silverado RST 4×4, the best one WITHOUT leather.


The bed in the 5.7-ft bed Silverado is a LOT bigger than the bed in the 5.5-ft bed F-150. I could sleep diagonally and have a foot above my head to spare while both my head and feet were touching the corners, forcing me to opt for the 6.5-ft F-150 XLT, but not with the Silverado. That's becuase the insides are more efficient and wider.


The RST is definitely more exciting to drive but the others here and I have had issues with the twin-tube shocks, and I would not recommend the RST if it is four-wheeling performance you seek. The F-150 handled rocks and dirt roads very well, I used it every day on the ranch. Highway cruising, the F-150 wins. Four wheeling, the F-150 wins. It really is versatile. Seats, I'd say the Silverado wins.

One thing the F-150 has is the keypad outside the door. I can leave my keys inside and lock it in without having to worry about it. I do that many times if I leave it parked at the airport and go somewhere. I can't do that with the Silverado.


The 5.8 V8 in the Silverado may have a little less power, but gets much better gas mileage than the 5.0 V8 in the F-150. And that's based on the computer.. F-150's MPG calculations are a lot more optimistic than the Silverado's so I know I am even getting better gas mileage in the Silverado. After 400 miles, my Silverado shows 22.1 mpg, not bad for a V8 with 4×4. My F-150's best was 16.8 mpg (probably 15 mpg if I measured it by hand instead of using the computer).


Due to issues I've had with handling, I may go back to the F-150. I am hoping the new 2020 models and after that are better than the 2016 I owned.

Posted
On 10/23/2021 at 6:53 PM, F-150stxguy said:

Thank you new dude, very helpful information. 
 

With the HO 2.7 having 420 pounds of torque and as low as 1500 rpm, I wouldn’t feel overweight with 4X4. 
 

I’ll probably have to custom order what I want if I want a single cab with the 2.7. 
 

Hell, knowing me I’ll end up with the 4x4 again lol. 
 

 

 

 

Ordering would be ideal due to the ongoing inventory.  Last year we had 3 WT reg cabs and 2 of the 3 were 2.7T.  Didn't get a chance to drive them though.  And no, you don't need the 6.2 unless you want to spend the $$$ and get a Custom Trail Boss or an RST or higher.  If you shop V8, the 5.3 with 8 or 10 speed is a great setup.  

 

 

On 10/23/2021 at 9:14 PM, uood8 said:

 

The new 2.7 max torque will now be above 3k rpm, not at 1500 like the current 2.7. I came from a 2.7 Eco and you'll be severely disappointed with GM's performance unless you go with the 6.2.

 

 

Max torque on the 2.7 HO is at 3000rpm, not above.  There is no GM SAE dyno chart on the new engine in any of GM's media releases yet so nobody knows how the torque curve lays out compared to the current 2.7T.  

 

348tq from 1500-4000rpm is impressive, but the HO motor more than likely follows this formula but curves the power up from say 348tq at 1500rpm up to the 420tq at 3000.   

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • I had an 88 K1500 with a 5.7 that had those symptoms, I know totally different, it ended up being the ECM. Once you get the fuel system fixed if it still runs lousy you may want to investigate that. it didn't set any codes, stalled ,ran rough at times etc
    • Congratulations Isttype, on your gmc. Really like my 2024 2500hd sle doublecab now with 85,500 miles.  I checked the oil today at 4800 miles since last oil change and barely reading on the stick.  I don't care if GM says it's Acceptable adding a quart every 2000 miles because that is 100% BS, It is not a 1966 Harley Shovelhead! Sounds like it's setting up a future failure like I had with my 1500 6.2l. Other than oil consumption problems, I really like the 6.6l gas and 10 speed is really nice.  Towed a light 4000 pound trailer last week and averaged 14 mpg.  I was pretty impressive that a 7300 pound gas truck did 14mpg towing, Later-
    • Long Term Cold Cycle Limited Testing   Back to the 1990's and XOM's million mile test. Since then there have been others and there will be more. Schaeffer's, AMSOIL to name two. Of these Schaeffer's is the stand alone which I will explain in a bit later.    http://papers.sae.org/600190/:   http://papers.sae.org/850215/:   Up to 75% of  engine wear occurs on cold starts. These two links (above) provide the technical reasons for engine wear. In a nut shell, and by a large margin, cylinder wear is what takes out most motors and even with a pre-oiling system that part of the engine is dry enough on cold starts and cold warm up to pierce Stribeck.   So when you put a motor, or a car, on a dyno for a million miles stopping only for oil changes, (yes fuel is uninterrupted) or break down maintenance, you are depriving the test of the most important part of it's wear cycle. Yes a million is then a pretty easy walk even for a mineral oil under those conditions.    How about cleanliness during the long test cycles? Same thing. Varnishes that stick rings and insulate parts are laid down by repetitive 'heat cycles'. It's the cool down the precipitates the varnishes. These long runs also hinder acidic attack caused by cold start richness and less than optimal cold start ring sealing. They hinder water formation and enhance breathing of the crankcase; the petri dish of acid formation, the first step in sludge formation, amalgamation and precipitation. These motors are also monitored and controlled for water and oil temperatures to within the "normal operating range".      https://www.swri.org/sites/default/files/sequence-iiih-test.pdf Note the test sequence in some boutique oils literature for testing, API IIIH, is not the standard used for the ILSAC G7 testing. Does that mean it is irrelevant? No, not as used. As used as a 'visual guide' it makes it's point. The G7 weighted piston deposit minimum is lower.      Back to Schaeffer's. That was a cyclical test of an engine in fleet service and not a dyno mule and if you saw the video it was not mirror clean but wear was low.    There are oils like BioSyn and other 'Renewable" source oils that taught cleanliness and have proven themselves in fleet testing. Havoline an other example.    The newest ILSAC G-7 test prioritize cleanliness, LSPI mitigation and fuel economy OVER WEAR. In comparison Porsche C30 Specification Verses ILSAC G-7 Specification below:      Some will balk that this graph isn't apples to apples and I will challenge that in that this graph represent the SPECIFICATION and not the any One Oil Performance.   It is absolutely possible to minimize wear, maximize cleanliness and mitigate LSPI etc., It just isn't cheap and currently I see none that are not walking toward profit over performance.     
    • I don't think you will need a split, separate product, etc., the OBD port should be able to deliver everything you need. Since your device would be plugged into it all the time, it wouldn't miss anything.    Hardware in this case will be the easiest part of your project - ELM 327 devices will already deliver all the data you need. Reporting/software is where your advantage/marketability is.
    • I do too. I’ll never be stuck again 😂
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...