Jump to content

None

slemke

Member
  • Content Count

    25
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. But, it did outsell the GT 5:1 and the MKT so it wasn’t all bad.
  2. Agreed that all new would be expensive. But, a 5.5l I6 could share bore, stroke, bore spacing and many parts with the 7.3L. It would be less expensive to build than a smaller displacement version of the 7.3, but have higher up front costs and be cheaper than all new. Volume would be key to whether it is feasible. As you stated, it would be a limited application. It will likely just be the 7.3L as the gas option. Accessories will likely all be electric as they are on Mercedes “new” I6 (it shares parts with the I4 instead of the v6 sharing parts with the v8) for updated engines. There is still significant life left in internal combustion engines. Electrification of accessories will be part of the efficiency gains needed to keep them viable. California was supposed to be all electric how many years ago? And weren’t we supposed to have run out of oil by now?
  3. I agree that an inline 6 with bore and stroke of the Godzilla v8 would be a good cheap solution. Not sure about the ohv part, though. I would think a sohc 2 valve per cylinder would be just as cheap or cheaper. Height shouldn’t be an issue, and if it was, just tilt it 15 degrees or so. A single or dual turbo could be added for extra low end torque. A 90 degree v6 of that displacement would require a balance shaft (extra cost) and may still have nvh issues. An I6 would be the cheapest solution and have additional desirability.
  4. Going with either of those would open up the pro power on board option. I think the power boost w/7.2kw pro power option would be popular for campers.
  5. https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=41957&id=43460 not seeing the image when I added the url. anyway, F150 gets good mileage for what it is. Same highway and 2mpg better in the city vs a mustang gt convertible. So much for cars getting better gas mileage.
  6. That’s an impressive gain in city mpg. Considering how the city cycle is weighted for cafe, I can see why Ford is optimizing for it and we don’t see similar improvements in highway mpg. Ecoboost makes a bigger difference in city driving. Stop start helps too.
  7. slemke

    Another new V8 ?

    Since you didn’t specify Ford, I’d take the bet. V12s are still being developed for super cars. Over 1000hp from 6.xL. 12 cyl to stay close to the 500cc combustion chamber size. I think you meant a Ford with more than 8 cyl. In that case, I doubt it. Might make a 5.4-6.0L v12 ecoboost for some specialty mfg, but I doubt it would show up in any Ford product. A v12 GT would be cool, though.
  8. slemke

    Another new V8 ?

    Are you talking v-10 or v12? If so, I’ll need to raise my hp target. Cosworth heads?
  9. I believe the Toyota Corolla and Geo prizm had a similar discrepancy. The best though, was when they harped on GM for rebadging everything and then came up with drastically different reliability for essentially the same car from 2 or 3 different brands. That was sometime in the late 80’s. I quit reading CR after that.
  10. You’re either joking or have never heard of driving a slow car fast. The Miata has always had a small 4cyl ( a turbo was available for a short time) with not a lot of power, but great handling balance. The Rx-7 and 8 were similar. A large v8 sitting over the front axle upset the balance. Sure it was fast in a straight line, but that wasn’t what the Miata was about. Similarly, the wrangler is foremost a low speed off-road vehicle. It doesn’t need lots of hp. It needs tons of low speed torque. A diesel is a much better choice for that task. Jeep/fiat/@#$& (lost track of the name changes and just going with random symbols now) removed the low range on the 392 version claiming it had enough torque it didn’t need it. So much for the extra torque being useful for low speed situations. No idea how many of these things show up at the drag strip.
  11. I think it is overkill and disrupts the balance of the vehicle. Sort of like shoving a v8 in a Miata.
  12. slemke

    Another new V8 ?

    What would be cool is if the 6.8L is dohc 32 valve. With a specific output of the voodoo v8, it would be a naturally aspirated hellcat competitor.
  13. Nice. Is your aviator a job2? My wife’s aviator is a job2 that we bought just before Christmas last year. Hasn’t been back for service. Probably due for an oil change soon. It is a great car. I never test drove or rode in it until after we bought it. Went by my wife’s opinion that I would like driving it. She was correct.
  14. slemke

    Another new V8 ?

    I doubt it. If EB3.5 buyers are like my engineering friends, they bought the ecoboost for the torque. A 5.8 would be similar to the 5.0 coyote in terms of output so no significant change in the buyers. The 3.5 EB and power boost are in a different league when it comes to torque....410 vs 500 and 570. Ram attracted buyers with the interior, particularly the large screen. The ‘21 f150 closed that gap. GM has the 6.2, which is the most powerful non-specialty 1/2 ton v8 (lots of disclaimers there). The power boost edges it out in hp and easily beats it in torque and fuel economy while delivering the nifty 7.2kw pro power feature. A 6.8L or 7.3L Godzilla would bring in some customers. But that would be because of it being more powerful than the competitor’s v8s, not the pushrods.
  15. You would have a stronger point if the HO 3.5EB wasn’t available with 450hp, or the 460hp Mustang didn’t get such terrible gas mileage. I was checking the fuel economy numbers on the Mustang GT convertible 6 speed and it was atrocious. The ‘21 coyote f150 was similar or better in the combine. Ford could increase the power on either one (and the 2.7) if they wanted. Cafe is dictating the tune.
×