7Mary3

Don't remember Ford working on a twin-cam-in-block V-8, but GM experimented with one: https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/c8-general-discussion/4268742-gen-vi-engine-based-on-xv8-dual-cam-in-block-concept.html

Yeah, I was thinking that as well. Unless they are for specific large deliveries.

Amazon around here mostly runs large Transits, but lately I have been seeing a lot of Isuzu NPR's. Don't know how much of their fleet is owned by them or contracted. I guess a lot of their own vehicles will be dumped in a few years when they electrify.

Absolutely, but I think it would be more accurate to say that DI increases one particular type of emission, but is an enabling technology that can allow for reductions in other types of emissions. I think the NOX situation is a bit more complicated. DI allows for substantial increases in compression ratio, which ostensibly increases NOX, but through accurate fuel delivery afforded by DI NOX is mitigated to a large extent. The Ecoboost situation was unique when it was introduced as boost increases NOX as does higher compression and lean mixtures, and all three factors are present in Ecoboost engines! No way you could make an engine like that pass current regulations without DI and some pretty advanced engine management. Nobody at Ford saw that NOX problem coming? Any Smog Tech in California could have clued you in! Yes, Ecoboost was a Bosch invention. Heard Bosch in India did most of the work on it. Also heard a lot of Ford engineers felt a bit snubbed over the deal. Ecoboost, Twin-I-Beam...........

Sure, same power with better fuel economy and emissions. I just don't see Ford needed another high performance V-8. Would be nice, but is there a business case for one?

I think the 7.3L's intake ports and manifold were configured to make room for direct injection, which will pretty much be a requirement to meet upcoming EPA/CARB/GHG regulations shortly. I just had a thought, maybe the 6.8L is going to be a direct injection replacement for the 7.3L in the next generation Super Duty.

I thought the 6.8L was supposed to have an aluminum block.

In retrospect, I wonder if 'Blue Diamond' wasn't a missed opportunity for Ford. It enabled Ford to market a medium duty truck with a wide range of options at minimal cost. I won't get into all the reasons why it didn't work, but looking at all the Chevy badged Isuzu's and GM/NAV trucks I saw today got me thinking about the variety of commercial trucks Chevy is offering these days at minimal cost through joint ventures. And very shortly they are rumored to have a Cummins/Allison powered class 7 LCF through Isuzu and possibly a class 6/7 conventional through Navistar sometime later. That's going to be quite some model lineup. Wonder if Ford is thinking about a commercial truck partner.......

At what valve size/lift?

Don't think there would be enough difference in power or economy to justify offering both a 6.8L and the 7.3L in the Super Duty. I think the 6.2L will eventually be replaced in the Super Duty by the lower power/higher economy 7.3L currently offered in the E series. Also, isn't the 6.8L supposed to have an aluminum block? Might not want that in a Super Duty.

The 7.3L was indeed designed expressly for the Super Duty line, in particular the 250-550. It is probably not optimal for the 650/750, but it's cheap and it works. As for the 6.8L, there has has been no news on it for quite some time. With the EPA quickly re-writing vehicle emission standards (in particular GHG emissions) and word that a California style de-facto ban on ICE vehicles is NOT going to be ruled out, I hate to admit the 6.8L's future is a lot more murky than it was 3 months ago.

I'll bet that new KW will be priced quite a bit higher than the 650 and 750 Super Duty. I was wondering who would be the first to use the new ZF transmissions, I have been hearing rumors Ram will use it in the HD's soon.

If Ford made a mistake exiting the heavy truck business, it was their timing. In retrospect, they should have sold out before starting the HN80 program. From what I understand, HN80 was late and over budget, and I suspect Freightliner would not have paid that much less for the operation without the New Louisville trucks. Freightliner wanted the dealer network more than anything else, and though the HN80 had some potential it never materialized into a really great truck. Certainly nothing like the 1970 Louisville was. It was ironic that 'Sterling' never went anywhere, and a big reason for that was Freightliner's own growth in vocational class 7/8. Yeah, I though the Brazilian Cargo would have been a good addition to Ford's N.A. truck range, but it never happened. The larger Otosan trucks would never fly here. I have a feeling that Otosan will eventually team up with Traton............

True now, but as improvements are made to the grid in high risk areas it will become less of a factor. Funny this is being mentioned, a good friend of mine is working on these projects as we speak. In any event if there is a blackout, you are not pumping any gas or diesel either.

The rolling blackouts are done to reduce the chance of forest fires caused by downed power lines in windy (Santa Ana) conditions in certain high-risk areas. They are not the result of a lack of capacity at present. The utility companies will be able to meet the challenge as the phase-in of BEV's will be gradual. I ought to know, near 40 years in the energy business. In California.