GTP Cool Wall: 1999-2004 Ford SVT F150 Lightning

  • Thread starter Jahgee
  • 99 comments
  • 4,042 views

1999-2004 Ford SVT F150 Lightning

  • Total voters
    118
  • Poll closed .
Voted Cool because I'm wildly inconsistent, these weren't nearly as ugly as the ones that followed, and are apparently a bunch of fun. Fun is cool.

I liked the absurdity as a kid, and it's only marginally scary to realize the power rating is only middling compared to the F-150 range these days.
 
Leonidae@MFT
SERIOUSLY UNCOOL. Easiest one this far. Slapping a performance oriented motor on pick-up truck is about as reasonable and pointless as jet-powered trains.
Click to expand...
Hey now. I've had 2 performance oriented engines in our pickup.
 
Leonidae@MFT
Yeah, but did it help the truck to do what it is meant to do? Carry more stuff?
Click to expand...
Not really, all it did was make it go fast :lol:

The original 6 cylinder engine it had in it was more than adequate for pulling large loads. We just "upgraded".

Well more of an upgrade, then a downgrade in between the 2.
 
Slash
Not really, all it did was make it go fast :lol:

The original 6 cylinder engine it had in it was more than adequate for pulling large loads. We just "upgraded".

Well more of an upgrade, then a downgrade in between the 2.
Click to expand...

And downgrade on fuel efficiency too I bet :lol:
 
JAHHAJ
It just seems like it's pointless to put a V8 in a truck this size, I can understand big trucks that actually tow things but,, in my opinion a V8 seems silly (but awesome) in a truck this size.
Click to expand...

Oh, okay. I agree in part, as I'm happy with the V6 in my truck, but the bigger trucks need V8's, and some of them V10's.

Leonidae@MFT
SERIOUSLY UNCOOL. Easiest one this far. Slapping a performance oriented motor on pick-up truck is about as reasonable and pointless as jet-powered trains.
Click to expand...

Jet-powered trains? Sounds good to me!
 
JMoney689
Oh, okay. I agree in part, as I'm happy with the V6 in my truck, but the bigger trucks need V8's, and some of them V10's.
Click to expand...
V8's usually get the job done. Trust me. My dad and I had a screaming small block. Ever see a 7,500lb pickup with an automatic and 33" tires roar through the 1/8th mile in low to mid 7s? Yup.

:censored:ing power. :sly:
 
JMoney689
Oh, okay. I agree in part, as I'm happy with the V6 in my truck, but the bigger trucks need V8's, and some of them V10's.



Jet-powered trains? Sounds good to me!
Click to expand...
Ive never understood this argument. Ford has proven that you can get plenty of power and torque from a V6TT.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE my V8's and V10's.

But to say bigger trucks need big, gas-guzzling V8's and V10's? No. They're not really necessary at all.
 
The difference is strain on the engine itself. A V8 is going to be able to take the strain from a heavy load on it much easier than a 4 or 6 cylinder would, no matter how much power it's capable of making. Strain hinders RPM increases and smaller engines have a tendency to need to rev up a bit to build power, were as most V8s, at least from Ford, have a TON of torque right off idle to get you and the load you are hauling moving.
 
KinLM
Ive never understood this argument. Ford has proven that you can get plenty of power and torque from a V6TT.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE my V8's and V10's.

But to say bigger trucks need big, gas-guzzling V8's and V10's? No. They're not really necessary at all.
Click to expand...

Although at the end of the day the V6 really doesn't get much better gas mileage.

And now let's see what Ford can do with a 4 cylinder.
 
KinLM
Ive never understood this argument. Ford has proven that you can get plenty of power and torque from a V6TT.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE my V8's and V10's.

But to say bigger trucks need big, gas-guzzling V8's and V10's? No. They're not really necessary at all.
Click to expand...
Ford has proven that a downsized twin turbo V6 can perform almost identically to a larger V8 (including fuel mileage) while only costing considerably more money; but in the context of generation of truck designed when the most recent forced induction anything was this:
gmc-syclone-03.jpg


It's not really that relevant to the original "why do trucks need V8s" argument.
 
First, besides the Hilux I don't really like trucks. Then slapping a performance V8 in truck is absurd. And, in my opinion, truck are designed to go anywhere off-roaders go and carrying stuff off-roaders can't carry. So losing it's off-road capability, it compromises it's use as a truck and if it's a bit pointless it's a bit uncool.
 
It gets a meh, almost uncool. Trucks are for work, this was not designed for work (all though I'm sure it's more than capable of hauling stuff).
 
Utilitarian vehicles like trucks and vans are almost never cool. Ones that pretend to be sports cars or muscle cars are seriously uncool.
 
A prime example of cheap American crap with a stupidly big engine surrounded by crap, with lashings of crap, with more crap bolted on resulting in it being crap. You can tell just by looking at it that it's crap. If I saw someone driving one over here I'd stare in astonishment and wonder why they wasted their money on something so crap.

It's 'orrible.
 
Slash
The difference is strain on the engine itself. A V8 is going to be able to take the strain from a heavy load on it much easier than a 4 or 6 cylinder would, no matter how much power it's capable of making. Strain hinders RPM increases and smaller engines have a tendency to need to rev up a bit to build power, were as most V8s, at least from Ford, have a TON of torque right off idle to get you and the load you are hauling moving.
Click to expand...

Gearing helps too.
 
I'd love to drive one.

Seriously Uncool because a 90's F-150 with a body kit makes you seem like the kind of guy who wears a stained wife-beater around the house. The "Lightning" moniker is too obvious as well.
 
KinLM
Ive never understood this argument. Ford has proven that you can get plenty of power and torque from a V6TT.
Click to expand...

The thing is that many truck guys, myself included, do not like turbochargers. I hate the noise they make, I hate the lag, and I hate the green-sounding "Ecoboost" name. Superchargers, however, I like a lot, but they do little to increase fuel economy which is what most people want nowadays.
 
JMoney689
The thing is that many truck guys, myself included, do not like turbochargers. I hate the noise they make, I hate the lag, and I hate the green-sounding "Ecoboost" name. Superchargers, however, I like a lot, but they do little to increase fuel economy which is what most people want nowadays.
Click to expand...

I think you're failing to realize that many "truck guys" own turbo-diesels.

And the noise? Most stock turbo setups don't make a ton of noise and they don't have a ton of lag either. Also, superchargers by design rob the engine of power and who wants that?
 
JMoney689
The thing is that many truck guys, myself included, do not like turbochargers. I hate the noise they make, I hate the lag, and I hate the green-sounding "Ecoboost" name. Superchargers, however, I like a lot, but they do little to increase fuel economy which is what most people want nowadays.
Click to expand...

http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/news/2014/05/07/ford-ecoboost-f150-sales.html?page=all

People seem to like the Ecoboost just fine, judging by the sales. Though I'll readily admit the fuel economy isn't what Ford says it is.
 
Tornado
Ford has proven that a downsized twin turbo V6 can perform almost identically to a larger V8 (including fuel mileage) while only costing considerably more money; but in the context of generation of truck designed when the most recent forced induction anything was this:
gmc-syclone-03.jpg


It's not really that relevant to the original "why do trucks need V8s" argument.
Click to expand...
True, but my statement wasn't specifically about the car being polled, it was to the statement that "V8's and V10's are necessary in bigger trucks."

Check for yourself up above a few posts if you don't believe me.
 

Latest Posts

Back