Ok, am not getting any answers over on the Ferd group so I thought I
would ask here.

My brother is looking at an 01 with the 5.4L engine. He asked me about
the expected longevity, and I don't know (I am a GM kinda guy).

So my questions are these, what is he expected longevity, what mileage
should he expect (1/2 ton, extended cab, long box, auto trans), and are
there any issues?

I figure a chevy group will have the answers, though may be a bit
critical (though we are all GM guys, and scrupulously honest Right??)

George

Big Al wrote:
Thanks Al, that was the kind of answer I was looking for.

George

"George" <gvig01 (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net> wrote

They are not the best engines but plenty of them are on the road and doing
fine. IMHO, the 351W was the best Ford small V8. The 5.4 has a very long
stroke, 4.16 inches and a small bore 3.55 inches. Sounds like a great
combination for a truck engine, but in the real world the engine is not so
great.

In contrast, the 6.0 Chevy seems to be doing fine

Al

PerfectReign wrote:
for the input.

George

George wrote:

Could be a few hours. Could be a few years. Just depends on when the
truck decides to catch on fire.

Bob

Bob M wrote:
Thanks Bob, I appreciate the answer and the sense of humor,
unfortunately that is not the kind of information that I think my
brother wants. But I enjoy it.

George

"George" <gvig01 (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net> wrote

Actually I think that is exactly the kind of information your brother needs.
The truck he is looking at is most likely one subject to the recall for the
cruise control switch that has caused so many fires. Make sure the recall
has been done.

On the flip side, the 5.4L is not the best motor Ford ever put out but it is
still dependable enough. At the fire department we have quite a few in
Expeditions and pick-ups that we use for command vehicles, etc. I do not
like the E4OD tranny at all and the front end of our Exped's all have
problems with suspension bushings (multiple replacements on mine, which is a
2002). Gas mileage for mine is around 10-12 mpg, but that's for a heavier
Exped and we don't always drive conservitively (to say the least!).

Hope that helps - Jonathan

Jonathan wrote:
Hi Jonathan,

You are right of course, however I was referring to the fact that my
brother is a died in the wool Ford guy and he probably wouldn't
appreciate a negative comment, which in fact was wrong, he did
appreciate the comment and removed the truck from consideration.

I have been trying all along to get him into a GM diesel. A 6.5 diesel
would do him well as I have gained a ton of experience in keeping mine
going (am in the process of building a stronger version, splayed mains,
new heads, Holset turbo... ), and I know you have some experience in
them too.

He wasn't too concerned about the fire potential, what concerned him the
most was the over square aspect of the engine, go figure? He wasn't even
too concerned about the gas mileage, that is to him just a side
consideration. And he wasn't concerned about he E40D either.

What can I say, he is a Ferd guy.

Thanks,

George

"George" <gvig01 (AT) sbcglobal (DOT) net> wrote

He's also confused. An over square engine is one who's bore is bigger than
its's
stroke, and its the common design. Under square engine designs such as the
5.4 are supposed to have more bottom end torque, but they also have lower
redlines than over square engines. I dont know about Ford engines as far as
longevity of their under square engines is concerned, but most AMC 6 bangers
were under square and as much as I hate AMC, the engines do last.
The chrysler super slant six, the 225 was also an under square engine,
although the 170 was an over square engine. His local tranny shop will
appreciate that he isnt concerned about the E40D tranny.

Whitelightning

Whitelightning wrote:
Ok, so much for my typing when in a hurry (my nettiquette is lacking),
and I should never proof my own text. He said undersquare, I typed
oversquare. He truly is confused though, but only because he thinks a
Ferd is the only way to go.

Thanks,

George