Open Roads Forum

Print  |  Close

Topic: F150 2009 - 2011 Engine Torque Curve Charts

Posted By: Mike Up on 09/03/11 07:24pm

Anyone looking to buy a recent F150 may want this information to help them make a more educated decision on their purchase.

There's also Toyota, Chevy, and Dodge engine torque curves.

Ford released the torque curves for all the motors in 2009 - 2011 in their marketing booklet. I took pictures and have the results:









Here's the breakdown:


3.7L

1500 rpm = 237#
2000 rpm = 250#
2500 rpm = 244#
3000 rpm = 250#
3500 rpm = 256#
4000 rpm = 275#
4500 rpm = 269#
5000 rpm = 262#
5500 rpm = 265#
6000 rpm = 262#


4.6L 3V

1500 rpm = 269#
2000 rpm = 275#
2500 rpm = 287#
3000 rpm = 287#
3500 rpm = 302#
4000 rpm = 320#
4500 rpm = 315#
5000 rpm = 300#
5500 rpm = 280#
6000 rpm = 255# (Redline)


5.0L

1500 rpm = 275#
2000 rpm = 302#
2500 rpm = 315#
3000 rpm = 327#
3500 rpm = 350#
4000 rpm = 362#
4500 rpm = 379#
5000 rpm = 356#
5500 rpm = 348#
6000 rpm = 315# (Redline)


5.4L

1500 rpm = 260# ?
2000 rpm = 315#
2500 rpm = 340#
3000 rpm = 356#
3500 rpm = 365#
4000 rpm = 365#
4500 rpm = 363#
5000 rpm = 350#
5500 rpm = 297# (Redline)
6000 rpm =


Ecoboost 3.5L

1500 rpm = 375#
2000 rpm = 381#
2500 rpm = 415#
3000 rpm = 420#
3500 rpm = 413#
4000 rpm = 413#
4500 rpm = 400#
5000 rpm = 390#
5500 rpm = 350#
6000 rpm = 275# (Redline)


6.2L

1500 rpm = 360#
2000 rpm = 372#
2500 rpm = 390#
3000 rpm = 387#
3500 rpm = 397#
4000 rpm = 406#
4500 rpm = 434#
5000 rpm = 413#
5500 rpm = 397#
6000 rpm = 372# (Redline)

3.7L has an impessive torque curve and the Ecoboost has the best low rpm torque curve.

4.6L 3V has a decent torque curve while the 5.4L 3V has a good torque curve.

5.0L and 6.2L have the worst torque curves in the low rpms.

The 3.7L, while having a good torque curve, had lower outputs.

The Ecoboost Looks to be the best motor to tow with a side of any current overheating/transmission problems.

While the 6.2L has a terrible torque curve, it's output is high enough to get past that.

All motors have the curve start at 1000 rpm while the 5.4L starts at 1500 rpm. Curve below 2000 rpms on the 5.4L looks inaccurate as the curve just starts off at 1500 rpms. Don't know why they started testing so late in the rpms on the 5.4L 3V.

For those making a decision between a 2009/2010 5.4L 3V engine against the new 5.0L, I compiled the differences of torque output at differing rpms.

5.0L compared to 5.4L
This is the 5.0L torque

2000 rpm = -13#
2500 rpm = -25#
3000 rpm = -29#
3500 rpm = -15#
4000 rpm = -3#
4500 rpm = +16#
5000 rpm = +6#
5500 rpm = +51# (5.4L Redline)


2012 Jayco Jay Flight 26BH
29'1" bumper to hitch, 8' wide, 6'9" ceiling, 5050# unloaded and ~6500# loaded.

2012 F150
5.0L, CC, 5.5' bed, 3.73 Locker, 4x4, TBC, 360 Hp/380# Torq, 9300# Tow/1050# Hitch Rating, 1582 lbs payload. Great TV!

Campers and Trucks



Posted By: carringb on 09/03/11 08:40pm

Mike Up wrote:

Don't know why they started testing so late in the rpms on the 5.4L 3V.


Probably transmission control limitations.


Bryan

2000 Ford E350 DRW Wagon, V10 - 385,000 miles
2014 CreekSide 31KQBS (QuadSlide bunkhouse)



Posted By: SoCalDesertRider on 09/03/11 08:55pm

I'd say the 6.2 Ford's torque curve and overall torque output is better than the other engines shown on it's same chart. The 6.2 makes more torque than the others at low rpm, is about the same as the Dodge, GM and Toyota engines from about 3000-4000 rpm and is higher than the others at higher rpm. What's not to like about that? Put that together with Ford's available 4.30 axle gearing and 6 speed trans and the 6.2 should far out pull any of the others it's being compared to.

The Ford 5.0 has higher torque output at every single rpm, from low to mid to high, than any of the engines on it's chart. The curve is smooth from idle to peak. What's not to like about that?


05E350 6.0PSD
97F350DRW 7.3PSD 4x4 4.10 11' flatbed
98Ranger
69Bronco ATC250R CR500
20' BigTex flatbed carhauler
Callen Camper

92F350 CrewCab 4x4 351/C6
B&W TurnoverBall, Curt Magnum V
HD Springs Bilsteins,
285/75-16E BFG AT on 16x8 Stocktons
4.56's & LockRite rear


Posted By: Golden_HVAC on 09/03/11 09:07pm

Looks like great numbers for the Ecoboost! If they had made a 6.2L Ecoboost, they would be in the 800# range for sure! That would have started a HP race, but broken a few crankshafts in the process.

I was looking at the new 2012 Edge, and it will have the 2 Liter inline 4 Ecoboost in it. 240 HP and 270 foot pounds torque.

Fred.


Posted By: Mike Up on 09/03/11 10:01pm

SoCalDesertRider wrote:

I'd say the 6.2 Ford's torque curve and overall torque output is better than the other engines shown on it's same chart. The 6.2 makes more torque than the others at low rpm, is about the same as the Dodge, GM and Toyota engines from about 3000-4000 rpm and is higher than the others at higher rpm. What's not to like about that? Put that together with Ford's available 4.30 axle gearing and 6 speed trans and the 6.2 should far out pull any of the others it's being compared to.

The Ford 5.0 has higher torque output at every single rpm, from low to mid to high, than any of the engines on it's chart. The curve is smooth from idle to peak. What's not to like about that?


The 5.0L should as many of the engines compared to it are not 4 Valve and have smaller displacements. It is a great replacement for the Ford 4.6L 3V but although it has awesome horsepower, it still lacks in torque against the previous 5.4L which many directly compare it against.

I guess I love the idea of a turbo 3.5L but then again, I've never heard of any turbo gas engines that didn't require a lot of work 'other' than the Grand National which my brother owns.

As one poster on the F150 threads commented, diesel turbo engines don't put out anywhere near the heat that a gas turbo engine does and there are a few people that tow heavy trailers that have had the ecoboost go into limp mode from overheating while towing 8000 lbs trailers in the Southern heat while climbing mountains or large hills. The same people previously towed with the 5.4L and had no issues.

Either this is a new problem that was never discovered or there are a batch of bad sensors. These people are still getting their trucks worked on so the the end result isn't known yet. However this does play into the fears that many have with turbo gas engines. For those people, a new 5.0L, a new 6.2L which is only offered in Lariat and above models, or a used 5.4L, is an option.

I was really pleased to see these torque charts now as it really helps compare the different engines for different needs.


Posted By: Mike Up on 09/03/11 10:06pm

SoCalDesertRider wrote:

I'd say the 6.2 Ford's torque curve and overall torque output is better than the other engines shown on it's same chart. The 6.2 makes more torque than the others at low rpm, is about the same as the Dodge, GM and Toyota engines from about 3000-4000 rpm and is higher than the others at higher rpm. What's not to like about that? Put that together with Ford's available 4.30 axle gearing and 6 speed trans and the 6.2 should far out pull any of the others it's being compared to.

The Ford 5.0 has higher torque output at every single rpm, from low to mid to high, than any of the engines on it's chart. The curve is smooth from idle to peak. What's not to like about that?


Many makers are in a horsepower war with the other, so low end torque seems to be taking a back seat to higher horse power. After seeing the charts, I was really disappointed with the majority of torque curves. What ever happened to torque curves that provided 90% of peak torque at 1500 rpm?? Well they're extinct now for higher horsepower.


Posted By: Mike Up on 09/03/11 10:08pm

carringb wrote:

Mike Up wrote:

Don't know why they started testing so late in the rpms on the 5.4L 3V.


Probably transmission control limitations.


Not really as all the engines use the same 6R80 transmission although the 2011s have updated clutch, electronics for manual shift mode, and programming. Otherwise there should be no limitations. The 2010 4.6L 3V uses the exact same transmission the 2010 5.4L 3V uses.


Posted By: SoCalDesertRider on 09/04/11 08:34am

Mike Up wrote:

Many makers are in a horsepower war with the other, so low end torque seems to be taking a back seat to higher horse power. After seeing the charts, I was really disappointed with the majority of torque curves. What ever happened to torque curves that provided 90% of peak torque at 1500 rpm?? Well they're extinct now for higher horsepower.
I'll agree with you there. Almost all new gas engines are high rpm screamers, versus the older gas engines (GM 350/454, Ford 351/390/460, Chrysler 360/440) that developed their peak torque in the 2500-3000 rpm range and their peak hp in the 4000-4500 rpm range. The gas engines in those days were slower turning engines with good low end torque, well suited for truck use.


Posted By: lbrjet on 09/04/11 08:47am

I have no idea why you would say the 6.2L has a terrible TQ curve.

If you want gobs of TQ at 1500 RPM's then buy a diesel. That's what their made for. Gas engines typically are not. Also remember that this TQ is being measured at the flywheel and may not accurately represent real world TQ getting to the wheels.


2010 F250 4X4 5.4L 3.73 LS
2011 Flagstaff 831FKBSS
Equalizer E4 1200/12000


Posted By: Mike Up on 09/04/11 11:42am

lbrjet wrote:

I have no idea why you would say the 6.2L has a terrible TQ curve.

If you want gobs of TQ at 1500 RPM's then buy a diesel. That's what their made for. Gas engines typically are not. Also remember that this TQ is being measured at the flywheel and may not accurately represent real world TQ getting to the wheels.


Your not the first to be offended by the 6.2L curve so I'll give you the same response I gave to others.

I come from the muscle car period and the torque curve from the 6.2L is anything but muscle. It's all high end with a steep ramp up from the low rpms. I personally want a torque curve more rounded where the curve is less triangular or peaked. I want all my curve points to have torque as close to the peak output as possible. The Ecoboost has the best obviously.

However with the combination of high horsepower, the 6.2L is a powerhouse, it just could have better torque output in comparison to it's peak rated torque.

Obviously this is not uncommon as all truck makers are doing this for the bragging rights of having the most horsepower and torque. This is common for a 4 valve, dual overhead cam setup. The truck isn't tuned for the flattest curve but the highest output curve.

When I was young buying muscle cars, marketing then was about if the engine could provide 90% of it's peak torque at 1500 rpm so you can have plenty off pull when you needed it. Also, these were not DIESEL engines but GAS engines.


Posted By: Fordlover on 09/04/11 02:28pm

Mike Up wrote:

What ever happened to torque curves that provided 90% of peak torque at 1500 rpm?? Well they're extinct now for higher horsepower.


I can't tow at 1500 RPM. From a dead stop at idle, when I hit the throttle the RPM's fly up to about 2000. So for me, I couldn't care less what happens below 2000. To me, requiring 100% output at 1,500 RPM is lugging the hell out of the engine, and that hammers the rod bearings. I guess my experience with the high reving Yamaha SHO motors makes me love to hear a motor sing.


02 Ford Explorer 4.6 V8 4x4, prodigy and equalizer
07 Crossroads Sunset Trail ST19CK
07 Infiniti G35 Sport 6 speed, Hauls @$$
and no payments


Posted By: Mike Up on 09/04/11 04:39pm

Fordlover wrote:

Mike Up wrote:

What ever happened to torque curves that provided 90% of peak torque at 1500 rpm?? Well they're extinct now for higher horsepower.


I can't tow at 1500 RPM. From a dead stop at idle, when I hit the throttle the RPM's fly up to about 2000. So for me, I couldn't care less what happens below 2000. To me, requiring 100% output at 1,500 RPM is lugging the hell out of the engine, and that hammers the rod bearings. I guess my experience with the high reving Yamaha SHO motors makes me love to hear a motor sing.


Yeh, I'm not sure where the torque converter locks up according to different gears.

However I know when I'm cruising, the truck often times is between 1000 rpms and 1500 rpms so having torque down there keeps my truck, under mild acceleration, from down shifting.


Posted By: music69 on 09/04/11 05:16pm

Mike Up wrote:

What ever happened to torque curves that provided 90% of peak torque at 1500 rpm?? Well they're extinct now for higher horsepower.


Although not the biggest motor in the lineup, the GM 5.3 produces ~90% of peak torque @ 2000 rpm, and is at 86% @ 1500 rpm. It doesn't peak as high, but it's pretty flat overall. Always has been...


Posted By: Mike Up on 09/04/11 05:28pm

music69 wrote:

Mike Up wrote:

What ever happened to torque curves that provided 90% of peak torque at 1500 rpm?? Well they're extinct now for higher horsepower.


Although not the biggest motor in the lineup, the GM 5.3 produces ~90% of peak torque @ 2000 rpm, and is at 86% @ 1500 rpm. It doesn't peak as high, but it's pretty flat overall. Always has been...


The 5.3L probably has the best torque curve but it also is the lowest output everywhere. It puts out 5 Hp more than the 5.4L but it's torque output is significantly lower than the 5.4L's output. The 5.3L has 315 lbs @ 3000 rpm while the 5.4L has 356 lbs @ 3000 rpm. That's a huge 41 lbs difference for only .1L of displacement difference! If they could keep the curve while boosting the output, they'd have a winner.

Surprisingly, the 3.7L has the torque curve of a V8, just lower output. This is the motor they should be using in their Explorers instead of the weaker torque output of the 3.5L .

* This post was edited 09/04/11 05:39pm by Mike Up *


Posted By: LimogesMan on 09/06/11 11:49am

Mike, can you post horsepower graphs as well?

Ford 3.7 V6 HP = GM 5.3 V8
Ford 5.0 V8 HP = GM 6.0 V8


2002 Ford F150 SuperCrew 4X4 FX4 Lariat, 5.4L Triton V8, Precision 4.10LS
2004 Keystone Springdale 249BH 26' Fifth wheel (5800# empty)
Husky 16K dual pivot glider. TomTom One 3rd edition.
18 mpg empty, 11 mpg towing.



Print  |  Close