V6 vs. V8....'02 ST vs. '00 Eddie Bauer

[Chad Merry]

The ST's are heavier than all the Exlporers.

 

[Tom Schindler]

If you use Bill's number for the EB 4x2, and then add another 400 LBS for the transfer case, front diff, etc, it comes up to about 4300 LBS.



My Trac weighed 4700 LBS at the scrap yard. That right there is a 400 LB difference.





Tom

 

[Ray McIntireJr]

Huh. I never would have thought that. Learn something new everyday. Later, Ray

 

[Don Donaldson]

...I have no numbers but my slightly modded motor seems faster... And I would say the v8 has more modding potential. The stock v8 explorer numbers are not that great though... however from my research you can easily get another 100hp with about 2 grand and some bolt on mods (headers, new heads ect.) and still have a reliable engine.





[Broken External Image]:



just my 2 cents...

-Don D.

 

[Tom Schindler]

Don,



I agree completely. Having a stock 302 in your vehicle has the basis for pretty much anything you want to do. There are literally hundreds of bolt on parts that give gains with little cost to get it.



I was just surprised that my Trac was able to take that EB Explorer with a V8. I expected the opposite. I expected it to walk away from me like nothing.



While I would still like to have a V8, I am more satisfied with my V6 than I was before.





Tom

 

[Don Donaldson]

The v6 is a very sprightly motor compared to the v8. The V8 dose seem sort of lazy. For example at 80 miles per hour it revs at 2500-2600 rpm in top gear. in third gear it sits at 1300 at 45mph (kinda a sweet speed) most of that I would suppose is due to the really tall gearing of the 4r70w transmission and larger tires I am using. but the engine its self dose not rev up as quickly either when floored. The noises it makes however... well it has some nice notes to it even with the red neck flex pipe I am using.



-Don D.

 

[Bill Barber]

Nice thing about the 302 is the modding potential is huge as is the aftermarket parts on the cheap.

 

[TomT]

I never saw the need to go from my V6 to a V8. Maybe if I was towing but even then if I thought the ST needed a bigger engine for towing something than I probably would have bought an F150 or some other larger vehicle. And if it's a need for more speed than I would be looking at something besides a truck. My V6 is just right.

 

[EddieS'04]

Nice thing about the 302 is the modding potential is huge as is the aftermarket parts on the cheap.

That is why I hated to see Ford drop it. Why didnt they play with some advanced tech., like GM did with their pushrod motors? Gm pushed more HP from their pushrod motors and better mpg than Ford even.



Not to say Ford doesnt have some good tech in the OHC motors. Just the 302 pushrod was a prooven durable motor.

 

[TrainTrac]

Eddie,



The main reason is probably the gov't CAFE regs. In addition to seeking more HP from their engines, Ford, like everyone else was/is looking to squeeze more MPG out of them without losing power to meet the ever-rising CAFE regs.



The pushrod small-block Chevy/Ford engines were designed in a time when fuel economy was hardly a factor at all (the '50's for the Chevy, and early '60's for the Ford). Once the CAFE regs came about in the '70's, the Detroit automakers tried to keep up with them using existing engines & technology as long as they possibly could to keep costs down. By the mid-'90's, I think that Ford/Chevy had squeezed just about all the MPG of them possible without giving up HP. That's why the 302 was replaced in cars with the modular 281 V8, and eventually in trucks with the 281 and 331 V8's. The modular engines had the potential for significantly higher MPG and HP at the same time. And I think the same will be true of the direct-injection and EcoBoost engines. They may eventually completely replace the current modular engines.



If Ford can achieve 305HP/31MPG out of the 2011 3.7LV6 (direct injection) Mustang and 365HP/350 lb-ft of TQ out of the 2010 Taurus SHO EcoBoost 3.5L V6, just imagine what kind of HP/TQ/MPG Ford could attain from an EcoBoost V8!:banana:

 

[EddieS'04]

TT



I do like the direction ford is going. I grew up when motors were easy to mod. Not many special tools were needed. Alot could be done with out pulling the motor. Motors were easy to pull also....:banana:



This eco boost tech has me very intrested...:supercool:

 

[gary s]

from what i remember my 07 4x4 V-8 (fully loaded w/ magnaflow catback & zabtech TB) it ran a 16.2 1/4. my 04 4X4 V-6 (fully loaded w/ magnaflow catback) ran a 16.9 1/4.

don't remember what the vehicles weighed at the trac.

either way, imo not much more you will gain for the dollars spent.



i just thought that the gen2 trac i had would have been as quick as my 4run.



but agree, ford is improving and have some good products on hand.

 

[Ray McIntireJr]

 

[Korey Kreiter]

Stock for stock, I think there is quite a difference between the V6 and V8. C&D tested an XLT V-8 4X4 on '07. It did 0-60 in 7.5 secs, and 1/4 mi. on 16.0. Curb Weight was 4936 lb.



http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/06q2/2007_ford_explorer_sport_trac_xlt_v-8_4x4-short_take_road_test



The only test I could find for a 4.0 was for an early 1st Gen 4x4. It did 0-60 in 9.5 secs, and 1/4 mi in 17.1. Curb Weight = 4337. That was with 4:10 gears!



http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/car/00q3/2000_ford_explorer_sport_trac_4x4-road_test



2 seconds to 60 MPH is quite a large difference. There would even be a larger margin between a V6 2nd Gen (heavier - and higher gear ratio now), and V8 2nd Gen.

 

[Richard L]

Also, remember that Caymen said he changed the plugs and wires on the EB Explorer before they raced....Perhaps it just speaks of poor workmanship..Or perhaps the 114K miles on the V8 have taken a toll on performance. If the plugs and wires had not been replaced in 114K miles, I'm sure other things probably needed to be freshened up.



...Rich

 

[Tom Schindler]

Perhaps it just speaks of poor workmanship..Or perhaps the 114K miles on the V8 have taken a toll on performance. If the plugs and wires had not been replaced in 114K miles, I'm sure other things probably needed to be freshened up.

Wrong. It means that my Granatelli MAF, Aptin chip, and K&N FIPK do make an improvement. My workmanship is far from being poor.



The vehicle was very well taken care of. Sure the OEM plugs were in there 114,000 miles. Many people, including many here, fell if it ain't broke...don't fix it.



Incidently, my Trac will eat my 2K Explorer alive. Both have a 4.0L SOHC V6 engine, same tranny, etc. The 2K Explorer is a 4x4 while my Trac is a 4x2.



Either way, I know you know everything. I know you were once a crew chief for an NHRA racing team, you taught Gale Banks everything he knows, and Art Arfons used to consult you for proper tuning of the gas turbine.:bwahaha:



Oh well.





Tom

 

[Bill Barber]

The jerk lives on:angry:

 

[Gavin Allan]

I know you were once a crew chief for an NHRA racing team, you taught Gale Banks everything he knows, and Art Arfons used to consult you for proper tuning of the gas turbine.

Huh, that's funny. I taught Andy Granetelli every thing he knows, trained Roger Penske, was Carroll Shelby's main mentor, and totally raised Smokey Yunich.



Such a small world.... :rofl:

 

[Richard L]

Caymen,

First off, I was not talking to YOU !



Second, My opinoon of your workmanship is just that...My opinion.



Third. I don't really care about your vehicles or any of your BS excuses or rationalizations for everything you do, that nobody cares about. It's so easy to tell when you are lying because you ignore the questions people ask and only ramble on about unrelated things nobody wants to hear about...Just like you are doing now. :banghead::banghead:

 

[gary s]

wow,



that is some racing. watching those two vehicles go at it will be a prime time hit !!!