Topic: Which F-150 engine

[Shnak]

Hey everyone, my dad's very close to pulling the trigger on a 2010 F-150 XLT 4x4 SuperCab, but isn't quite sure what do in regards to the engine. This model is available with the 4.6L 24 valves as well as the 5.4L Triton... any opinions on either engine? From what I can see, it's only a $650 premium to upgrade to the 5.4L model.

He's not going to tow huge amounts, but decent loads of firewood, ATV's, small boats, possibly a small to medium RV for fishing/hunting at some point. He figures the 4.6L should be enough, but is it worth paying the extra $650 for the 5.4L? Also, how does the reliability of each engine stack up to each other?

Thanks for any help!

[tpl]

There ain't no replacement for displacement.   

[Shnak]

Ok sure, but is it worth it for casual use? Like I said, he'll never pull huge amounts of cargo or anything that would require the extra oooomph the 5.4L provides... but if the 5.4L is a much better engine in other criterias such as reliability or refinement, maybe the $650 would be worth it. From what I can see, the 5.4L doesn't consume that much more compared to the 4.6L...

[Weexy]

Ok sure, but is it worth it for casual use? Like I said, he'll never pull huge amounts of cargo or anything that would require the extra oooomph the 5.4L provides... but if the 5.4L is a much better engine in other criterias such as reliability or refinement, maybe the $650 would be worth it. From what I can see, the 5.4L doesn't consume that much more compared to the 4.6L...

That alone would have be going with the 5.4

I figure its the same analogy as with a big screen TV.  I doubt anyone has ever uttered the words "damn I wish I bought the smaller TV!"

[mrthompson]

http://www.canadiandriver.com/2009/10/16/buyers-guide-2010-ford-f-series.htm/2

Fuel consumption 4.6 3V 4×4
City: 14.9 L/100 km (19 mpg Imp)
Hwy: 10.2 L/100 km (28 mpg Imp)

Fuel consumption 5.4 4×4
City: 15.6 L/100 km (18 mpg Imp)
Hwy: 11.2 L/100 km (25 mpg Imp)

[Shnak]

http://www.canadiandriver.com/2009/10/16/buyers-guide-2010-ford-f-series.htm/2

Fuel consumption 4.6 3V 4×4
City: 14.9 L/100 km (19 mpg Imp)
Hwy: 10.2 L/100 km (28 mpg Imp)

Fuel consumption 5.4 4×4
City: 15.6 L/100 km (18 mpg Imp)
Hwy: 11.2 L/100 km (25 mpg Imp)

Those are the numbers I found on Ford's website too... once you're at 14.9L/100km in the city, I doubt anyone would cringe at the extra 0.7L/100km for the 5.4L engine... 

[bridgecity]

The new F150 is a BIG truck.  I wouldn't even consider the 4.6.  I don't know what the horsepower numbers are for the 4.6, but we have a couple 4.8 Chev's (285hp) here at work and they are anemic.  Some reviewers even say that the 5.4 is a bit weak.  I'd go for the 5.4, no question.

[articsteve]

Ya, the 4.6 is not even worthy of consideration.

GOV mileage estimates for light trucks are complete fantasy.

What he needs to do is decide on an axle ratio.  Must be a couple choices.

[Loudpedal]

The new F150 is a BIG truck.  I wouldn't even consider the 4.6.  I don't know what the horsepower numbers are for the 4.6, but we have a couple 4.8 Chev's (285hp) here at work and they are anemic.  Some reviewers even say that the 5.4 is a bit weak.  I'd go for the 5.4, no question.

Totally agree.   My buddy had/has the 5.4 in an '06 and now his '10.   It's not the fastest thing with the 5.4, I can't imagine the 4.6 would only be painful.   

[Snowman]

Ya, the 4.6 is not even worthy of consideration.

GOV mileage estimates for light trucks are complete fantasy.

What he needs to do is decide on an axle ratio.  Must be a couple choices.

I agree, 5.4 with a lower rear axle ratio as your dad is only towing "light" loads. Will not notice much in city driving.

[Shnak]

The new F150 is a BIG truck.  I wouldn't even consider the 4.6.  I don't know what the horsepower numbers are for the 4.6, but we have a couple 4.8 Chev's (285hp) here at work and they are anemic.  Some reviewers even say that the 5.4 is a bit weak.  I'd go for the 5.4, no question.

Well, the 4.6L 3V makes 292hp and 320 lb-ft at 4,000rpm as opposed to 320hp and 390 lb-ft at 3,500rpm for the 5.4L Triton engine. I personally would go for the bigger engine considering the much better torque, less than an extra 1L/100km in fuel consumption for only a $650 premium. For a truck with a MSRP over $40k, $650 isn't a whole lot.

My dad seems happy with the 4.6L 3V though... he knows many people with that engine and everyone seems fine with it. Like I said, he doesn't need a race car or haul 4+ ton trailers... just some loads of fire wood and maybe a mid-sized RV trailer at some point.

I'm guessing I won't be able to convince him to go for the 5.4L if his mind is set on the 4.6L... I just figured I'd give it a try to see if people thought the 4.6L wasn't reliable or something.

[Shnak]

Ya, the 4.6 is not even worthy of consideration.

GOV mileage estimates for light trucks are complete fantasy.

What he needs to do is decide on an axle ratio.  Must be a couple choices.

I agree, 5.4 with a lower rear axle ratio as your dad is only towing "light" loads. Will not notice much in city driving.

Ok, what's the deal with the rear axle ratios? The higher the ratio, the more it can tow? The lower the ratio, the more fuel efficient the vehicle is? Something like that? Once I know more about this, I'll have to bring it up to his attention...

[Pleem]

The new F150 is a BIG truck.  I wouldn't even consider the 4.6.  I don't know what the horsepower numbers are for the 4.6, but we have a couple 4.8 Chev's (285hp) here at work and they are anemic.  Some reviewers even say that the 5.4 is a bit weak.  I'd go for the 5.4, no question.

Totally agree.   My buddy had/has the 5.4 in an '06 and now his '10.   It's not the fastest thing with the 5.4, I can't imagine the 4.6 would only be painful.   

Coincidently, I parked beside a 2010 F150 Lariat yesterday.  Beautiful machine but big! (crew cab/6.5' box).  I too have heard/read that the 5.4l feels under-powered for its size but performs much better with after-market S/W.  If I were buying a F150 like that I'd want the 5.4l motor for the torque.  The 4.6l might be acceptable in reg. and ext. cab / short-box, no-tow configs.   Fuel consumption is going to be high regardless of the power plant, especially in winter, so this really shouldn't be a purchase or operating consideration.

[wing]

If he ever plans on selling it, it will be worthless without the 5.4.

[Shnak]

If he ever plans on selling it, it will be worthless without the 5.4.

That's what he's heard too... that vehicles with the 5.4L hold their value much better than those with the 4.6L... but his intent is keeping it for like 10 years, so that's not a big concern.

I'll have a talk with him tonight to make one last push for the 5.4L, but I may already be too late as I believe he was going to the dealer today ready to buy if he found what he wanted. Oh well.

[articsteve]

Your dad should read this:

http://www.fordvehicles.com/assets/pdf/towing/10FLMrvF150sep09.pdf

Unfortunately, the Ford sales ppl have got him locked in on price only, not on what he really needs.

If he even remotely dreams about towing any RV trailer he must get the basic Ford towing package.  Otherwise warranty is toast.  He needs a factory tranny cooler, larger rad and heavy duty alternator.  These are really inexpensive when ordered new and are just good to have anyways.

IMO, he must get the 3:55 axle as a minimum with the 4.6 3V.  Since it has a 6 speed auto it won't be an issue on the highway.  But the standard axle will have terrible off the line acceleration and we will just end up putting more foot into it.

The Ford ppl won't tell him what he needs to hear, because they are just trying to push the vehicle out the door, but if he is keeping this truck for ten years then it should be done right.

[Shnak]

Yeah he wanted the Ford towing package from the get go. And I totally agree with about 'doing it right' if he wants to keep it for a long time. If it was me, there's no doubt I would have gone with the bigger engine as it's not very expensive option anyways, and I would have given more thought to the transaxle ratio, but oh well. It's his truck, he'll buy what he wants, uh? 

Anyways, I got word from him yesterday that he did buy his truck. A 2010 XLT SuperCab 4x4 with the 4.6L 3V, with towing package, 6.5' box, Candi Red exterior / Taupe interior and a few other packages I'm not too sure about (he's got the keypad lock, mud flaps, bed liner, step bars, two-tone paint, chromed grille, upgraded 18" chrome rims, upgraded 10 tread tires and a few other things I'm forgeting).

Unless it's change since I last spoke to him, I believe the on-the-road price to be around $36k, without any down or trade-in. MSRP would have been around $44k if I remember correctly. Ford had $7k off MSRP, and he's bought it through a friend who works for Ford, so he got the Ford employee pricing (he figures about $2-3k off). All in all, he's pretty pleased with the price he paid, I think.

It'll be a huge improvement from his 2002 Sonoma CrewCab 4.3L with all of its 190hp! Biggest change of all I think is the fuel tank; he's going from like 60L in the Sonoma to 130L in the F-150!!! He finally won't have to bring 2 or 3 five gallons of gas whenever he goes hunting or fishing. 

[PJungnitsch]

I drive the 4.6 for work with an extended cab 4WD and it is perfectly fine, seems to have plenty of power. As noted for the power and mileage difference there is not much point to it, but it is not a dog.

Much different than my 03 4.7 Dodge, that did feel awfully sluggish unless you flogged it.

[wing]

The tank is bigger but it won't last longer at 130L he'll still need the extra haha

[Shnak]

The tank is bigger but it won't last longer at 130L he'll still need the extra haha

I'm pretty sure the F150 won't have TWICE the fuel consumption of the Sonoma. The Sonoma was easily into the 15L/100km range for mixed driving...