Click above for high-res gallery of the 2009 Ford F-150
The new 2009 Ford F-150 will get an updated version of its venerable 5.4L V8, and thanks to a sneaky dealer with a camera phone, we have some details on exactly what the updates will be. A new process of fuel injection called 'open valve technology' will give the 5.4L V8 a bump in horsepower from 300 to 320 and increase torque from 365 pound-feet to 390. The technology does exactly what it says: injects fuel into the cylinders while the intakes valves are open (normally they're closed). In addition to the updated 5.4L V8, we also expect some Eco-boost powerplants to drop in the F-150 soon, though whether or not they debut with the new 2009 model isn't known.
_thumbnail.jpg)
[Source: Pickuptrucks.com]
New KITT Attack Mode revealed at Comic Con
London 2008: Honda OSM concept roadster says, "Cheerio!"
London 2008: Lotus unveils the Evora
2010 Chevy Camaro - Official Details and Images
2010 Chevy Camaro - LIVE from the reveal
First Drive: Maserati Quattroporte S in Europe
First Drive: 2008 MINI Cooper S JCW
In the Autoblog Garage:2009 Nissan GT-R
North American Exclusive First Drive: Alfa MiTo
First Drive: 2009 Kia Borrego
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
nardvark @ May 16th 2008 11:34AM
The fine print on one of the Ford TV commercials about EcoBoost says "available on select models in 2010." Based on that, I wouldn't expect it on any 2009 models.
TriShield @ May 16th 2008 11:41AM
F-150 isn't getting a turbo "Ecoboost" V6. It's getting a new V8 though when Ford unveils it later.
why not the LS2LS7? @ May 16th 2008 11:53AM
With port fuel injection, the fuel is always injected into the cylinder with the intake values open. Watch the BMW commercial to see it in action.
The only time you inject when the valves are closed is when you have a direct-injected engine, which this isn't.
Open valve technology sounds like a modified Miller cycle to me.
Bah @ May 16th 2008 12:00PM
Well, maybe that's just because Ford has been doing it wrong all these years?
havoc @ May 16th 2008 12:39PM
i agree, perhaps they looked at the old millenia and decided to use some type of miller cycle to reduce pumping losses. otherwise... unless you are DI, how are you supposed to get fuel into the cyl?
naggs @ May 16th 2008 12:48PM
unless there is a supercharger, this will not reduce pumping losses.
maybe it is referring to the placement of the injector, spraying directly at the back of the valve?
why not the LS2LS7? @ May 16th 2008 1:20PM
Port injection always sprays at the back of the valve, which is why it is critical it be open when you spray.
I guess I meant Atkinson cycle.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atkinson_cycle
Basically, leaving the intake valve open for part of the compression stroke effectively gives you a longer power (expansion) stroke than compression stroke, which can give better efficiency. Can it lead to increased output without changing anything else inside? I dunno, the only way I can think it would is just by reducing the amount of power consumed in the engine and thus more comes out at the shaft.
Daniel @ May 16th 2008 11:55AM
Ford never ceases to amaze me. Pickups are their biggest money maker and now they are working on giving up their once very substantial lead in this segment along with the others they have pissed away over the years. All of their major competitors offer V8s with between 380 hp and over 400 hp and Ford is once again stuck at the back of the pack in terms of engine power. This weak kneed engine is an anchor on a very nice pickup.
American pickup drivers are a demographic that wants their power big time!!! Ford really needs a larger, competitive V8 engine (6.4 L Hurricane – not 6.2 L) to retain its now very thin lead in pickups. If they do not come to market with this engine soon, they will give away the lead in pickups they have held for a few decades. If that occurs, the stockholders of Ford should revolt and throw the Board of Directors and the Executives out on their ear.
brmacrae @ May 16th 2008 11:58AM
Right on...........what a bummer, another massaged version of the 5.4L that STILL doesn't match the power & efficiency of the competition. New Tundra has 381hp and 401 lb.-ft, GM and Dodge have cylinder deactivation, etc.
C'mon, Ford, get with the program!!
Bah @ May 16th 2008 12:09PM
Ford is only the "leader" in pickups because GM splits their sales between Chevy and GMC. Add those sales together and Ford has been #2 for years.
I agree Ford has been behind on their engine for a long time as well. I forget how many years ago it was I first heard that the Triton was limited to 5.4L but it has been a long time, and still no replacement. Meanwhile Chevy/GMC are going strong with an engine that is up to 6.2L and can definately still go bigger in future iterations - at least up to 7.0L.
As for the stockholders revolting - that cannot happen. Due to the way the Ford stock system is set up, the Ford family has a guaranteed majority vote. So, unless one of the Fords votes against the board or sells out, the public shareholders effectively have no power.
why not the LS2LS7? @ May 16th 2008 12:23PM
A bigger motor?
Give me a break. This country has gone completely insane. Almost no one needs 380HP in a half-ton truck. If you do, perhaps you could be interested in an optional motor, even a Diesel.
I remember back when I was a boy, the entire country was paralyzed because half-ton trucks only had 270HP. We literally couldn't build houses or haul manure around because once you loaded the bed of a truck, the engine couldn't move it.
Here's an idea. Maybe Ford could catch up on efficiency. Anyone who has had an Explorer knows Ford is still catching up on mpg for a given power output.
Andrew L @ May 16th 2008 12:36PM
sure it does not have as much power but it can tow more than the Tundra so it does not need a bigger engine
Dan @ May 16th 2008 12:58PM
It's not a trade off between mileage and power. With worst in class power the current F-150 consistently shows worse real world mileage than every other fullsize truck except the Titan.
It's a trade off between spending R&D money on a new engine or using the Mod V8 they already have, which goes back to 1990 and wasn't a very good engine even then.
Guenther @ May 16th 2008 2:20PM
Dan, although its long in the tooth now, the Triton 5.4 was repeatedly ranked one best truck engines around. that said...
If you aren't doing VVT, overhead cams are a waste of money,space and friction in a truck motor.
The HP race in these trucks is silly, but the race is still on. If their tweaks to the old engine gave them fuel econ comparable to what GM is mustering from the 5300, they might not be finished. Ford builds a good truck (although I find the 09 rather offensive looking) but resting on reputation and unfounded tow capacity increases just wont get you very far.
Dan @ May 16th 2008 4:12PM
Ranked best engine by whom? People who'd just traded up from a Dodge with the LA 360 from 1971?
The 4 valve variants Ford has put in SVT Mustangs and Oz Falcons etc. is pretty good but the 2 and 3 valve versions that have seen truck duty here have trailed GM - and now Nissan and Toyota and the Hemi - from day one.
Randy @ May 18th 2008 1:15AM
With all due respect! I believe Ford knows what they are doing with the F-150. Think about this... We all agree that the new Focus looks like ass! But it's a huge success! Who's wrong, us or Ford? I think we (including myself) get stuck in ways that we believe are the right way because we are familiar with it or because it's something that we know is better! Ford on the other hand has data to backup such a move. I would hope anyway! I doubt very much that there will be a lacking of anything in the F-Series anytime soon!
I'd worry more about the grille on the front of it than anything else! Not as funky as the E-150, but close!
Landy @ May 16th 2008 12:01PM
I guess the addition of 20 horses will turnaround the declining sales for the F-150 in the blink of an eye...
It's good to see that Ford-US has finally learned where the problem was!
Dan @ May 16th 2008 1:05PM
No surprise here, you knew from day one they'd rate it at 316-320 hp to outadvertise the GM 5.3 with 315 hp.
The current iteration of the 5.4 wasn't tested under SAE rules and by most dyno and acceleration tests is really putting out more like 270 hp.
So if this tweaked engine makes an honest 320 that would be a major improvement - but I wouldn't count on it.
300Kid @ May 16th 2008 1:12PM
Slightly off topic but, why didn't they change the interior? It's confused me since this 'new' truck debuted. For all the people on here/in the press that always moan about interiors, I don't see much about this one. I'm sorry, maybe as a Chrysler fan my opinion is biased, but you have to admit the exterior styling AND the interior of the 2009 Dodge Ram and way ahead of this.
K, have a great weekend!
brmacrae @ May 16th 2008 1:31PM
There might be a couple of configurations of the F150 that can out-tow a Tundra (10,300), but the 2 Crew Cabs I just spec'd out (FX4 and King Ranch) are at 9,300 towing capacity......... and there's no way that a 5.4 has as much towing power at any given weight as the 5.7 Tundra, 5.6 Titan, 6.0 / 6.2 GM trucks...........