Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Sevensecondsuv last won the day on September 18 2018

Sevensecondsuv had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Sevensecondsuv

    Ford files to trademark Excursion name

    I have to think the business case is there. It's just parts bin engineering using the 6.7/7.3 and a bunch of existing super duty stuff and some expefition body bits and pieces. Then sell them for $75k each. Doesn't take much volume at all to make that work. My guess is it's more an issue of factory capacity and bigger fish to fry. FWIW my 2000 Limited w/ the V10 is a forever vehicle for us. There's just nothing else like it available then or now.
  2. Not if the motor is between the clutch and the trans. That way the clutch doesn't disengage the motor from the input shaft. Of course it would still be disengaged if the driver takes the trans out of gear while braking. It'd certainly be a bit of a learning curve driving one.
  3. I'm actually currently on the hunt for a 96/97 7.5L gasser ZF-5 truck. I love those OBS trucks, but it's getting real hard to find nice clean examples at this point, especially here in the rust belt. Maybe I should wait a year and see what Ford has up their sleeve. Aluminum would be nice.
  4. And hybrid is simple. Just put the electric assist motor between the clutch and trans. Also a fly-by-wire clutch pedal opens up some truly fascinating possibilities for manual transmissions.
  5. The torque rating is enough for any gasoline engine Ford currently produces. The ~9000 lb gvwr / 29,000 lb gcwr is enough for pretty much all gas versions of F150/250/350. The 7.15:1 first gear is ideal for a HD gas pickup as it facilitates getting a big trailer started up a grade without slipping the clutch. For reference, The ZF-5/6, T-18, NP-435, and NV-5600 all have first gear ratios between 5.5 and 7.0. Makes you wonder just how many applications Ford has planned. Obviously more is better to help amortize development costs. If Ford makes an F-250 available with a 7.3L gas V8 and manual trans in 2021 I'll take back anything negative I've ever said about their product decisions lol!
  6. Sevensecondsuv

    7.3 D.Van/ Chassis/ RV

    You know, it would be just like Ford to design a new engine or transmission for super duty and then realize it doesn't fit in E series, aka 2V vs 3V 5.4/6.8 and diesels after the 6.0. So I wouldn't be surprised if Ford is still building the 6R140 specifically for E series 10 years from now....
  7. And again, who exactly is going to buy all these EVs? Obviously you can't ignore the segment, but EV sales history to date does not give me confidence that I should bet the company's future on EVs. They've been "the future that's going to take over next year" for the last 10 years. Yes invest in them enough that you're not caught flat footed if they do eventually take off, but by all means keep pumping resources and talent into ICE programs because that's what's going to pay the bills and dividends for the next several CEO cycles.
  8. Sevensecondsuv

    New light & medium duty news

    What I want to know is why the mediums got the 429 and not the 460. They're literally the same engine aside from the rotating assembly. Seems like the 460 delivering the same powerband at a lower RPM would have been more ideal for the big trucks.
  9. Sevensecondsuv

    New light & medium duty news

    What makes a person think a gasser will only last 100k in commercial service? That's nonsense. Even 30-40 years ago that wasn't true. I see tons of old medium Ford with 361FT, 370 and 429 gassers with 200k+ never been rebuilt run just fine. Lots and lots of V10s running around still in active fleet service with 300k+ on them. At the same time, modern pickup truck diesels (Duramax, PSD, etc) aren't built to the same "lbs of cast iron per hp" ratio the old mechanical diesels were. They run a lot more boost and EGTs. Not to mention the extremely complicated fuel systems running at insane pressures. And the emissions systems that create a lot of extra heat. If you ask me, gas longevity has stayed the same vs 30 years ago and diesel longevity has decreased. Today there's only one reason to buy a diesel: you get the rated hp at approximately half the rpm. That makes for much more comfortable towing of big loads long distances. All that said, even 7.3 gas is barely adequate in the heavier end of class 6. And by the time you're in Class 7, something in the range of a gas 9.0L would be most welcome.
  10. Sevensecondsuv

    New light & medium duty news

    No thanks on the center console. Leave that for XLT and above for people that actually want it and will pay the extra for it. Nothing kills interior space for throwing tools, straps, etc like a giant hunk of plastic bolted between the seats. Not to mention eliminating seat belt capacity for one extra passenger.
  11. Sevensecondsuv

    New light & medium duty news

    That iron block is a pretty big deal. The loomnum coyote block is reliable to about 800ish HP whereas the old iron 5.4 blocks (and 4.6 to a lesser extent) were good to 1200+ and is a big reason the very fastest mod motor powered cars and still running 5.4 derivatives. Block availability and hp capacity is currently one parameter the LSx has it all over the coyote so it's good to see Ford addressing the issue. Hopefully Ford can find a use for the iron block in some trucks. If for no other reason than I can find them in a junk yard in ten years 😁
  12. Sevensecondsuv

    New light & medium duty news

    I don't see Ford making the 7.3 the base offering any time soon. The smaller gas engine has always outsold the big one in 250/350 for every year Ford offered both for the last several decades. 5.8 always outsold the 7.5 and the 5.4 always outsold the 6.8. I see two reasons for this: 1) a significant portion of retail 250 buyers still tend to be concerned with fuel economy and, right or wrong, believe the smaller engine will be more efficient, and 2) there's an awful lot of fleet 250/350 sold for nothing more than moving a bed full of shovels from jobsite to jobsite, plowing snow at a fixed location like a factory or power plant, or just transportation for a supervisor, none of which require really anything more than an atmo V6. So I think the 7.3 will remain optional on 250/350 for the foreseeable future. Whether the 6.2 stays as the base engine or gets replaced by a de-bored / de-stroked / de-cylinder'd godzilla, the coyote, or even a hybrid 3.3 v6 remains to be seen. Also there's E Series that need engines. I don't see Ford just giving away 7.3s to van buyers that tend to really not care what's under the hood - hence the huge popularity of 4.9 and 4.2 in E-250/350s for all those decades
  13. Sevensecondsuv

    New light & medium duty news

    I'd be willing to call it a variant..... Same pistons, rods, valves, etc. Crank, heads, camshaft would be different from the V8 in the same way V6 versions would be: length and firing angle. One could make the argument that an inline block is more of a departure from a V8 than a V6 block, however my understanding of block machining lines are that bore spacing and deck height are the two major attributes, and those would be the same for V8, V6, or I6 versions. Basically an inline could be machined on one of the two planes the V8 Iine is already set up for. It would require 1.5x times the operations at each station vs a V6 running both planes at 0.75x the operations at each station. The operation for machining the cam bores would also be a different location than a V8/V6. So I guess the V6 would have an advantage in block machining efficiency. Honestly the biggest impediment to a straight-six I can see is fitting it in the engine bay. However I gotta think the super duty bay could accommodate one if Ford wanted it to. It's not a small engine bay.
  14. Sevensecondsuv

    New light & medium duty news

    Just put those six cylinders in a row. Problem solved!
  15. Sevensecondsuv

    TFL: Silverado 1500 diesel

    Meh. Ford managed to fit the old 300/4.9 with it's 4.48" bore spacing in E Series. Where there's a will, there's a way. Plus I doubt any clean sheet straight six of 3.0L displacement has anywhere near 4" bores.