Topic Sponsor
2009 - 2014 Ford F150 General discussion on 2009 - 2014 Ford F150 truck.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

The 3.7 versus the 6.2 thread

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 08-04-2014, 06:43 PM
  #61  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
1994Vmax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Ardmore Alberta
Posts: 1,164
Received 157 Likes on 124 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by vozaday
TT that 6.2L already. Fuel economy of a v8 with the power of a monster truck. lol
Not twins and not a Ford....... but I have a single turbo setup and a forged 6 liter for in my 2004 GMC. I just need to assemble the stupid thing. The shortblock is done and the heads are ported...... just need to literally bolt it together because beyond pushrods its all there.... need to measure for length on those once the heads are on. The turbo it has will be too small ( PT 76/75) but it's the basis for what I want..... being around 1000 rwhp. These 6.2's have pistons that are pretty fragile..... even in comparison to the LS's. I want to do a 6.2 based build with better rods and pistons at some point but it's all time.


Plus a supercharger setup is appealing and easy..... like me lol. Well not the appealing part lol.
Old 08-04-2014, 06:47 PM
  #62  
Senior Member
 
vozaday's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Alberta
Posts: 1,209
Received 146 Likes on 130 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by Badass69
Not twins and not a Ford....... but I have a single turbo setup and a forged 6 liter for in my 2004 GMC. I just need to assemble the stupid thing. The shortblock is done and the heads are ported...... just need to literally bolt it together because beyond pushrods its all there.... need to measure for length on those once the heads are on. The turbo it has will be too small ( PT 76/75) but it's the basis for what I want..... being around 1000 rwhp. These 6.2's have pistons that are pretty fragile..... even in comparison to the LS's. I want to do a 6.2 based build with better rods and pistons at some point but it's all time.


Plus a supercharger setup is appealing and easy..... like me lol. Well not the appealing part lol.
Sounds like fun. Someday I want to put a blower on my stang. But have had bad luck with them. 2 superchargers blown up in 2 years. Mind you they were on personal water craft, both had about 70hrs each. One lobe style and the other centrifugal.
Old 08-04-2014, 07:29 PM
  #63  
Chrisj
 
Chrisj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Crestview, FL
Posts: 430
Received 69 Likes on 46 Posts

Default

I have a 2011 XLT 2 wheel drive SCAB. I love the truck for what I need it for. I had to have the 6.5' bed over the 5.5' that wasn't an option. I test drove it and thought I was driving a V-8. When I found out it was a V-6 I had to go out and make sure it said FLEX FUEL on the back. That way I knew it wasn't an Eco Boost. Im very impressed with the 3.7. I have pulled large car trailer with maybe a ton on it; she didn't notice. Have taken it to 8K ' AGL she didn't complain, no difference in power, slight reduction in gas mileage.


Normal gas mileage is over 20....right now its like 21.5. If I stay on the highway its around 23 or so


It pulls fast off the line at red lights. No one is waiting on me like they were in my '94 F-150 with the straight 6.


Handling, ride and steering is a million times better than my '94 and way better than I expected. Fit and finish is superb, doors, body moldings everything is as it should be. No squeaks, rattles or leaks, the tires are wearing perfect now that I up'd the pressure a tad. Who can complain this truck with the 3.7 engine has it all. I have no engine envy when I see a truck with a V-8.


Ford messed up by letting the 3.7 go...seriously, you have to drive it to believe it
The following users liked this post:
Wanted33 (08-06-2014)



Quick Reply: The 3.7 versus the 6.2 thread



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:44 PM.