MotorsportsGordon
MotorsportsGordon Reader
8/10/18 10:49 a.m.
Vigo
Vigo UltimaDork
8/10/18 10:54 a.m.

Im basically down with the idea but i'm slightly dubious of the 4.6 0-60. Maybe unfairly.

MotorsportsGordon
MotorsportsGordon Reader
8/10/18 10:58 a.m.
Vigo said:

Im basically down with the idea but i'm slightly dubious of the 4.6 0-60. Maybe unfairly.

The 706lbs feet of torque may play a role in that

Ranger50
Ranger50 UltimaDork
8/10/18 11:17 a.m.
MotorsportsGordon said:
Vigo said:

Im basically down with the idea but i'm slightly dubious of the 4.6 0-60. Maybe unfairly.

The 706lbs feet of torque may play a role in that

I’ll be there soon enough after the turbo on my Suburban.... lol

drainoil
drainoil HalfDork
8/10/18 11:44 a.m.

I’m down with going fast but I guess Id rather have that engine in a nice semi lightweight daycruiser (they do exist if you look hard enough) for long weekends of enjoyment on the water.

dean1484
dean1484 MegaDork
8/11/18 9:36 a.m.

I don’t care what the numbers are that would be fun. 

nutherjrfan
nutherjrfan SuperDork
8/11/18 11:24 a.m.

Yeah I could dig that. smiley

Furious_E
Furious_E SuperDork
8/11/18 11:34 a.m.

I like it just for the sake of how over the top it is. But I shudder to think what fuel economy it must get. For the money, I think I'd rather swap a Cummins or Duramax into one for decent mileage and all the torques.

1988RedT2
1988RedT2 UltimaDork
8/11/18 1:41 p.m.

8 mpg?  Atrocious.  My '85 C-30 Dooley easily gets 9!

Might be a few HP short of 550, though.

Datsun310Guy
Datsun310Guy UltimaDork
8/11/18 3:39 p.m.

I wonder if the heat in that engine bay is legendary?

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
6DGmSb8K8GeumyEvBLqO3J3dErCFvBxtdJaSB1jo83OCQ0tz9V5sRKNomnfcfI2h