GTP Cool Wall: 1999-2004 Ford SVT F150 Lightning

  • Thread starter Jahgee
  • 99 comments
  • 4,032 views

1999-2004 Ford SVT F150 Lightning

  • Total voters
    118
  • Poll closed .
A sports truck that America DOES like is the Raptor, which has been far more successful than the Lightning. Raptors have become about as common as Porsche Boxsters here.

I think part of the reason the Lightning failed was because of it's lack of identity. A truck is supposed to tow things and go off-road, but the Lightning is RWD and other Ford trucks are better suited for towing at the same price. So it's assumed the Lightning is supposed to be used on the road, but if that's the case, why not just buy an actually sports car, like a Mustang? The Raptor doesn't suffer this problem because it's obvious it is intended for off-road use.
 
I really like these. If I could find one for a decent price (which seems difficult as there are few enough of them that prices remain fairly strong), it's the sort of car I'd want to own for at least a while if I ever moved to the States.

However, I can't really vote it cool. The only people who'd really be wowed by it are people in other F-150s, and that isn't a demographic that strikes me as having a particularly good nose for coolness.
 
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...

*Puts on devil's advocate hat* You need a ton of torque right off idle? It seems trucks would be the perfect match for a hybrid powertrain..
 
Leggy1
Almost completely pointless.

It's a shame America doesn't really like diesel, would be much better for a 'sports' truck.
Click to expand...
You must not be familiar with the gigantic cult following of diesel trucks in America.

My god that is arguably the biggest automotive scene in the US.
 
Slash
You must not be familiar with the gigantic cult following of diesel trucks in America.

My god that is arguably the biggest automotive scene in the US.
Click to expand...

Indeed, it's a stereotype, nothing more.
Tons of diesel trucks here in the states and quite a few cars as well.

As for this particular truck.
I said nope.
Too street, too much of a compromise for a truck, and most of all, too many broken transmissions. I'm surprised no one has mentioned it with the group we have here but I know of at least a few of these that went through more than one transmission well before it should have... Leaves me wondering if the transmission wasn't exactly up to the job or if the spirited driving helped with the trouble. :mischievous:
Not sure I care either way. :P
 
Slash
You must not be familiar with the gigantic cult following of diesel trucks in America.

My god that is arguably the biggest automotive scene in the US.
Click to expand...
I am not familiar with it but I do know that a lot of pickups are diesel. But a diesel engine, instead of a petrol V8, in this and other sports trucks seems like a much better idea.
 
Leggy1
I am not familiar with it but I do know that a lot of pickups are diesel. But a diesel engine, instead of a petrol V8, in this and other sports trucks seems like a much better idea.
Click to expand...
It depends what you want from the vehicle. If your aim is excitement, then arguably diesel still doesn't compete on that front. A diesel V8 sounds like a slightly more sonorous diesel. A petrol V8 has a proper character. With the supercharger in the Lightning, you've got another dimension.

Also, we'd come back to the old "is diesel cool?" factor in the case of this particular thread, to which the answer is "no". Not that the Lightning is cool anyway, but putting a diesel engine under the hood would not help it in that regard.
 
Diesel V8s sound cool.

Anyhew.

Why doesn't this 'sports' truck have a manual transmission? If you build something silly, do it the proper way dammit.

Meh.
 
Leggy1
Almost completely pointless.

It's a shame America doesn't really like diesel, would be much better for a 'sports' truck.
Click to expand...
I don't really get how diesel would be better for a sports truck. It's supposed to be a road going sports car built off an F150. Would you put a diesel in a sports car?

They sell tons of diesel trucks in North America, they just tend to be the super duty/heavy duty trucks that get used for towing farm equipment and stuff like that. There just really isn't a point otherwise, the gas and diesel prices are close enough that you won't make up the extra cost of a diesel engine over a gas one, and unless you're towing heavy weight you don't need the diesel torque. The F150 Lightning isn't really for that purpose.
 
homeforsummer
Also, we'd come back to the old "is diesel cool?" factor in the case of this particular thread, to which the answer is "no".
Click to expand...
Diesel is different, and "different" earns cool points by my measure. However, it's certainly influenced by the significantly lower number of diesel cars we have over here.
 
Wolfe
Diesel is different, and "different" earns cool points by my measure. However, it's certainly influenced by the significantly lower number of diesel cars we have over here.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's the thing. Here, diesel is basically every regular family car sitting at the traffic lights pumping carcinogens into my face, so I'm rather less enamored with them. I do like some diesel engines* but I've got the smelly (petrol smells awesome, diesel smells nasty), greasy gunk on my hands far too many times filling up press cars to find it cool.


* Three entirely disparate ones, off the top of my head: Alfa Romeo's old 1.9 JTD, the 0.8-litre 3-cylinder in the Smart Fortwo, and the 3-litre V6 diesel we get in the Infiniti QX70).
 
homeforsummer
Yeah, that's the thing. Here, diesel is basically every regular family car sitting at the traffic lights pumping carcinogens into my face, so I'm rather less enamored with them. I do like some diesel engines* but I've got the smelly (petrol smells awesome, diesel smells nasty), greasy gunk on my hands far too many times filling up press cars to find it cool.


* Three entirely disparate ones, off the top of my head: Alfa Romeo's old 1.9 JTD, the 0.8-litre 3-cylinder in the Smart Fortwo, and the 3-litre V6 diesel we get in the Infiniti QX70).
Click to expand...
I've said for years that a rich burning, carbureted engine smells amazing. Like, you haven't lived until you've smelt that :P
 
Sorry, what's the point of a rear wheel drive pick-up with a huge V8 again. How is that supposed to help a park ranger?
 
Pagey279
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.
Click to expand...
Because its fun. Drive one and you will realize how much fun it is. I like them just would never own one due to the sub 10 MPG they get. I voted SZ because its a crazy fun truck/idea that just pisses some people off.
 
On simple "Like" I'd give it cool. Objectively though, it's just like the crossovers I despise - a fusion of two purposes that doesn't do either of them as well as a specialist - only heavier and possibly clumsier. Also, no manual trasmission. Thus on the border between uncool and seriously uncoo.
 
As much as I prefer Ford to GM or other US brand marques (Except these days maybe Fiat/Chrysler) There's not much to like about this car.

Sure, it's really fast in a straight line, but for 5.4 litres, let alone a supercharged 5.4 litres, 380bhp is pretty sad, yes even in 1999... when it only had 360bhp(?) Look at the Ford GT, I get that it had to be slightly detuned, but they missed a huge opportunity to have more power, it's been seriously neutered. And don't say it made it more reliable, check out its history, it had heaps of issues.

It is damned ugly, I'm not even sure if its better looking than the car its based upon, it does seem to have a friendly face though.

A ute *cough* pickup that can only handle 610kgs, and that's after a revision in 2003, before that it was only 360kgs?

But mostly I take away that Ferrari wanted to call their latest super car the F150, and Ford blocked them, because they thought people would somehow confuse a giant ugly pickup with a beautiful purpose built super sports car - remember when Peugeot did that to Porsche with the 901/911? Remember how cool that was? Oh wait, it wasn't. And when you wiki this car's lineage, the second line in the article highlights that.

Seriously uncool.
 
Asking for a manual transmission on a Lightning is like asking for a torque converter automatic on an Atom. It just doesn't suit the purpose.

The Lightning was built simply for the straight-line bragging rights. And in a drag race, torque converter autos are still the go-to transmission for muscle lovers on the drag-strip.

-

That doesn't explain why they couldn't take the abuse, if they really couldn't, as @Kent suggests. And it doesn't make the truck any cooler or uncooler.

It's still not a Syclone. And I still haven't voted. :P
 
Running through the gears for the fun of it with your supercharged V8 makes at least as much sense as drag racing in a RWD pickup truck.

What's probably true enough is that manual transmission just doesn't suit the market for the Lightning.
 
@niky ...
Don't mention the Cyclone in this thread. /blasphemy
Fact is, the Lightning was a beast, just like any Ford, they know how to build an engine...

Not to speak for the world... -__- ... but the Lightning had a transmission that couldn't handle the power as a daily driver.

Plain and simple, the transmission couldn't handle the power (abuse?). :lol:
 

Latest Posts

Back