Well, I didn't before I posted. I just did and while it does say that, I'm betting on BOF having better info than edmunds.

 

*shrug* I've seen way too many "insiders" on this forum have downright BS info to believe anything from one of them anymore. Rather sad actually.

Remember that the 3.7L will probably have more power and torque than the 4.2L and be a DOHC design, but it'll need to rev to make useful power.

 

have yall seen the 08 250's and 350's. Whats up with that look. That thing is fugly. I Dont like the grill nor the headlights being under the turn signals. I wouldnt drive that ugly thing even if it was giving to me. Wth were they thinking?? Alright my Rant is over!!

 

OK, I can understand how you see the new SuperDuty trucks at first. I thought the same about the first several that I saw. And kept looking at the first of the new (then) body styles of the 99-? front end and my mind kept thinking they blew it with the new truck. Then I decided it was retro pre 1980 look. Yet now it has since not only grown on me, but it has become more of a favorite to my eyes. I actually see it as a transition design than an end state. The next SD will probably blow away any doubters...however, the direction of truck design is changing and it maybe towards more Aeromaximization. IMHO, of course.

 

IMHO, I'd hardly call the SD aero-anything lol. It's a brick. A brick that can tow a lot, but a brick.

I'm with ya dixiemudder04 for the most part. I couldn't stand the early pictures of it, the spy photos and what not. In person, I don't think it looks horrible, but I still don't find it attractive coming down the road. You definetly won't mistake it for anything else though.

The fleet ones, IMO, look much better. To this day I stand by my arguement that what makes it look bad is the large amber reflector between the headlight and turn signal. You lose that reflector, the front end looks totally different.

 

"Igor" says 280 lb ft @ 2000rpm for the 3.7, which doesn't even seem possible to me without a turbo, but I guess we'll see.

 

Eesh wow...brings back thoughts of the 300-6 to have that much low end grunt. It will be interesting to follow, for sure.

 

Definitely and with tons more refinement. The 3.5 has been flawless so far, I wouldn't expect anything different from the 3.7.

 

just to say i had a 97 F150 XLT 4.2L V6 4x4 never had an engine problem for the 10 years i owned it...for a 6 banger she moved!

 

I agree Captain, I think it'll turn out to be a good solid engine with the way the 3.5L is performing. Not many complaints with that engine.

I have a buddy with a '99 with a 4.2L, extended cab, 2WD auto. It'll move alright, he's just gotta get his foot into it. It sorta reminded me of the old 350 my GMC had, the first half of the throttle or so was real responsive, but above that it kinda flattened out, full didn't seem to be a lot more than half.

 

Just as a source of comparison: Dodge is getting 215 horses at 5200 rpm and 235 torque at 4000 rpm out of its current 3.7L SOHC design on the Ram. With a DOHC design Igor's numbers would sound legitimate wouldnt they?

 

Pure desinformation I think. The 4.4-liter diesel is said to arrive one year from now but if Ford want the competitors to ease their efforts cathing up , so why not slipping those lines.

 

I seriously doubt the cometitors will be easing anything.

 

Something may have happened, I donīt know, but other "insiders" have told that the 4.4-litre will appear in less that a year.

 

How long have they been working on it? A diesel engine isn't something you rush into production...think 6.0L and early 6.4L. And don't say that "Well it's Ford...not International...so they can handle it."
I'd be suprised if the 4.4L was out "in less than a year".