Mid engine swap?

They were way more reliable than the similar caddy, and outclassed the Lexus in terms of power and style. I’d go so far as to say it was the best of it’s class.

You mention the taurus relation. Fun fact, the earlier Conti is upgraded by swapping in the SHO v6. The V8 SHO is upgraded by swapping in the Conti 4.6!

Does anyone get why Ford offers all these different similar displacement and power V6s? By my count there’s a 3.3, a 3.5, a 3.7, a 2.7t, a 3.0t, and a 3.5t (in at least 3 states of tune) why not just 3.5 and 3.5t?

To see 400hp snubbed...

No, the tpi z71 only had 200hp/300tq and 4x4 weight with taller gearing.

And in the real world a vette withlarge displacement and tall gearing, idling along the hiway gets stellar mileage. I hope we come to our senses.

That’s downright outstanding. I have a 2003 Tundra, and it gets 14. My dad had a 2002 z71 Tahoe. Took a big road trip from tx to the grand canyon in it. 14mpg.

My 2003 tundra with only 245hp (the 454SS had 255btw) only gets 14mpg

For a more thorough analysis, use calculus (differential equations) to find the area under the curves.

Ralph was wrong, these were 255/405. And you gotta factor in the rpms at which this occurred. The point is character.

Fwiw Ralph is wrong, this motor was 255/405.

Fwiw these were 255, but it’s not about specific output (the vortec 5.7 also made 255) it’s about engine character, and tourque (the 5.7 only made 330 to the 7.4s 405).

A) This thing has 255/405 more than the other 454 trucksof the time. (But less than the vortecs that came after)

I see some cost cutting for sure, the use of a small block, the mustang 2 suspension...

Ah, you are one of the guys pushing the vintage 4x4 market. I knew it was happening, buy you are the first I’ve run across. Kudos for getting to this point in life

I think this is a small block, from what other commenters said

Again, if you knew what you were talking about, you’d know what I meant by Cook et all. (You indirectly referenced the work, mentioning the consensus, without knowing it)

It’s a scientific paper, authored by cook and his homeboys. It is the source of the 97% consensus claim, that Obama tweeted and has been parroted ad nauseum.

America, 1994