ESP08
-
Posts
212 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Downloads
Store
Posts posted by ESP08
-
-
On 8/14/2021 at 5:40 AM, SteelyD said:
They sure have. Powertrain engineers like the screw rotor design too.
Chrysler is the only manufacturer I'm aware of that uses twin screw superchargers in a production capacity (today).
The fact that twin screws have one rotor that must spin much faster than the other reduces the durability, service life and blower speed capability of the TS.
The TVS design is inherently superior and only hindered by Eaton's limited rotor size selection.
-
20 hours ago, Deanh said:
not a fan of the C8 at all....that backend is absolutely horrible....no denying how good the car is...but styling?….not my cup o tea.
I agree, but I suspect the upcoming Z-versions will address that.
The basic C8 proportions aren't bad but these base models definitely seem underbaked and a little dainty (or cheap) somehow.
-
15 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:
Nobody buys that overpriced junk, the sloppy mechanics crowd only buys $500 Gen IV 5.3s from the junkyard.
-
37 minutes ago, Stray Kat said:
Don’t get me wrong the Mods have been great for their exact purpose but not much more. They haven’t been embraced by enthusiasts as a whole while GM and Chrysler just rack up new and younger car enthusiasts.
Mods haven't been attractive for swaps because the 2V is the LS junkyard competitor and the OE ECU wasn't capable of supporting the RPM needed to make really powerful 4V combos -- being capped to 7000 rpm before experiencing coil driver induced misfires.
Regardless, *NO* engine family has been as quick or as fast as the Mod with OE cylinder head and block castings in either the 1/4 mile or standing mile.
Not bad for an engine family that hasn't been embraced by enthusiasts.
The Gen 3 Hemi also hasn't been embraced by enthusiasts in the way the LS has in spite of also having some inherent architectural performance advantages, FYI.
The late model Ford aftermarket is *much* stronger than Mopar's.
DAMB is the Ford verbiage for direct acting mechanical bucket.
-
1
-
-
Note that with the Gen 2 3.5 EcoBoost Ford went though the expense of ditching the DAMB setup for the Modular-style cam over follower RFF arrangement.
-
12 hours ago, Stray Kat said:
I don’t disagree with you but certainly a smaller bore can just as easily be put in a little bit wider bore spacing. This would leave some room to grow for trucks which are not subject to the same emissions standards.
Second the 6.2 head type could just as well shared parts with different displacements.
The Mods with the cam over follower over valve are unnecessarily tall and wide.
The Coyote was able to reduce engine width while retaining the Mods cam over follower arrangement.
The Mods cam over follower arrangement is probably the most ideal RFF setup as it retains the roller follower (lower friction and longer life than the more compact DAMB) while minimizing reciprocating mass and failure points.
The 6.2's rocker arm arrangement, while allowing for ideal valve angles with a single cam per bank, is clearly not as reliable nor any more compact that the Mod's RFF arrangement.
-
23 hours ago, Stray Kat said:
Tragic the 6.2 Raptor engine is probably going away. As far as SOHC Mod power plants the cylinder head design is a no compromise design in my opinion.
The 4.6/5.4/6.8 SOHC 2 valve engines all have the same set of limitations. First and foremost the bore space issue and second the intake valve is on the wrong side of the camshaft centerline.
Right, and the reason having the intake valve on the "wrong side" on the intake cam is it results in one of the worst intake valve angles seen in recent memory.
It's an absolute flow killer on an engine that was already valve area limited due to bore diameter.
It just shows that Ford was never overly concerned with the 2V as a performance application.
Thankfully there were the 4V engines.
OEM 2V on the left, TFS on the right.
-
On 7/16/2021 at 12:10 PM, FordBuyer said:
I always liked the name Sunliner.
Isn't that just another name for tan line?
-
1 hour ago, edselford said:
After the 6.2 was put into production at Romeo engine plant, Roush Engineering did a 460 cubic inch version as a development project. Same bore centers with a unique cylinder head design.
It produced over 850 hp on the engine dyno naturally asperated!
If the 6.8 is a performance engine, maybe it’s a derivation of this 460 development engine?There is a u tube video on this engine on the dyno. The valve covers look somewhat wider than a production 6.2 V8 SOC!
edselford
That was the 777, the cylinder heads were modified "production-intent" Boss heads.
The valve covers only looked wider because of their styling; that engine definitely had the production Boss SOHC rocker arm arrangement.
Good article on it here: https://www.hagerty.com/media/automotive-history/how-a-secret-21st-century-7-liter-ford-v-8-reached-9000-rpm/
The 6.2 is such a great foundation for a performance engine it's a damn shame Ford is letting it die without giving it a fair shake.
Just look at those cylinder heads, with larger valves and ports allowed by Godzilla's 4.22 bore you have a legitimate performance engine:
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, NLPRacing said:
A 6.8 would also be a lot simpler and probably cheaper to make than a Coyote. Being pushrod, things like cylinder deactivation is easier as well. A 6.8 hybrid in a Super Duty would make a lot of sense.
They've already made the investment in cylinder deactivation for Coyote though, and given the widespread problems with DoD/AFM OHV lifters the two-piece OHC follower method may likely being the more reliable implementation of cylinder deactivation in the long run.
-
I can't remember the last time Car & Driver, Motor Trend, Consumer Reports, et al. opinions mattered or even normally aged well in retrospect.
I'm assuming the Mach-E won, I would check but I don't want to give C&D the clicks...
-
3 hours ago, jpd80 said:
And that’s one of the possibilities because we know that Ford loves to reuse engines
when it can (6.8 V10 in MD). aAso all the development work that went into the 7.0 Boss
might be an easy solution / money already spent.
The way Ford can mix and match parts these days, it could do anything on either architecture.
I am still holding out hope the 6.8 is an all aluminum variation of the old 777 Boss
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, Stray Kat said:
Are you saying that the 6.8 is a destroked 7.3 with the same bore size?
I hope this is the case from a performance standpoint.
I don’t think it’s very likely as the automotive world goes headlong into electrification but an even smaller version say in the 5.8 range with an aluminum block and lower deck height but with the big bore would be a phenomenal engine for tinkerers.
Just dreaming sorry......
More than likely.
Take the 7.3s 4.22in bore diameter combined with the 6.2s 3.74in stroke and you get a 418ci 6.8.
Godzilla and Boss share bore spacing.
-
2
-
-
13 hours ago, bzcat said:
The aluminum block will shave 150+ lbs from the weight
That hasn't been the case in with previous iron to aluminum block transitions.
The 4.6 lost ~80 lbs going from iron to aluminum with steel sleeves
The 5.4 lost ~110 lbs going from iron to aluminum with PWTA liners
-
2 hours ago, SteelyD said:
Ford prefers the screw charger over the roots.
Ford has been running Eaton TVS superchargers since 2013 which is a roots style rotor with notable durability and slight efficiency advantages over twin screw rotors of similar displacement.
-
11 hours ago, SoonerLS said:
My recollection is that a Godzilla doesn't weigh much more than a Coyote, so going to a 'loomnum block in a smaller displacement would dang near make it a featherweight.
I'm not sure what it would actually gain you in an F-150 (possibly excluding the Raptor). On paper, the numbers for the F-150's 5.0 and Super Duty's 7.3 are not that far apart; obviously, they're not exactly apples to apples, but a NA 6.8 in F-150 trim would still probably come in somewhere between the Coyote and EB35, which seems like a non-starter in that lineup--Mustang needs the volume of the F-150 to keep the V8 viable, and they're all-in on EcoBoost, so reducing either one seems highly unlikely. The 6.8 would have to outperform the EB35 to make sense in the F-150, IMHO, which means it would effectively have to outperform the 7.3, which would seem unlikely if it is based on the 7.3.
Now, if the 6.8 is a Coyote derivative rather than a Godzilla derivative, that could all change.
If it's a Godzilla derivative, it makes a heck of a lot of sense in the Super Duties, though. If you replace the "old" workhorse 6.2 and consolidate its manufacturing with Godzilla, you simplify both production of the mill and the logistics of producing its host truck, and it doesn't have to fit into a gap between the other engines in the lineup.
Coyote long block - 425 lbs
7.3 Godzilla long block - 540 lbs
-
9 minutes ago, Stray Kat said:
I don’t know. I don’t think Ford needs to win every horsepower pissing contest.
If the 6.8 is an alloy block as has been rumored the weight advantage the Raptor would have over the TRX would be substantial and it would benefit it’s off road performance greatly.
The TRX is pretty awesome but it’s also a brute. I think a more nimble Raptor would win the sales and customer satisfaction battle.
The only scenario I could see is a 6.8/10spd hybrid which they could pull off the shelf at this point.
Yes that ☝️adds weight but it’s unique enough to be very attractive to customers.
I’d rather have a 500hp 6.8 hybrid with the Powerboost technology that would be epic good and useful off road than a blown sand sucker 5.2 brought in to just regain bragging rights?
The thing is a Predator powered Raptor @ ~720 HP would eat the TRXs lunch on the straights and also be the lighter and more nimble truck.
Predator is lighter than Hellcat.
The current SuperCrew Raptor is 5680 lbs vs TRX @ 6400 lbs.
I'd agree with you with if Raptor R wasn't a halo product but it is, it needs at least match the TRX in straight line.
-
On 6/20/2021 at 3:25 PM, Stray Kat said:
I have voiced an opinion about this very subject. I’m just a simple old backyard boy but my instincts tell me that a high strung V8 with a “super sucker” supercharger on top is NOT a great idea for vehicles that are intended to be used in silty desert conditions.
I don’t think fixed rotor superchargers can deal with getting sandblasted for very long.
I’d rather see Ford put a healthy N/A V8 in the Raptor R and let Stellantis have the horsepower bragging rights with a foolish design that will never tolerate the conditions.
Ford needs to win by being the best not just having the best magazine numbers.
Sand should not be entering the inlet tract.
For desert running something like a Donaldson Powercore would cure that issue as that's what they were designed for.
Ford does not need to give themselves a major performance handicap for what is (IMHO) a non-factor design criteria.
I also doubt a healthy N/A 6.8L V8 -- especially a Godzilla derivative -- would offer enough of a performance benefit over the HO 3.5 EB to be worth even talking about.
Although a 6.8L version of the long-runner intake Gen 3 Coyote (Mustang GT trim) would make ~630 HP/570 lb-ft any 6.8L high performance variant of Godzilla will be stuck around LS7-ish numbers.
Figure 500-530 HP, 470-500 lb-ft best case for a 6.8 Godzilla with fairly wild for a OE truck V8 cam timing (it will need to rev to 7000) and heads that flow 30-40 cfm more than the 7.3 truck heads.
A naturally aspirated 6.8 liter DOHC 4V @ 630/570 could compete with the TRX given the weight advantage of having no SC/IC system compounded with a slightly lighter base chassis.
A "Hi-Po" 6.8 liter version of Godzilla will need some boost to avoid having the TRX eat its lunch.
Hooray for the return of pushrods... (◔_◔)
-
2
-
-
16 minutes ago, bzcat said:
Lightning is for sure some sort of halo model. Ford knows EV will be the future of F-150 so they can't abandon the fundamental F-150 brand with transition to EV.
The regular models should just be called F-150. Period. It will just be a drivetrain option like checking the box for 2.7 EB or 5.0 V8. You'll get a couple more choices: single motor EV, dual motor EV etc. Lightning is going to be like Raptor... reserved for extra money performance models.
I hope you're right
-
On 5/11/2021 at 3:22 AM, SteelyD said:
They still are cool. The F-22 Lightning, F-35 Raptor, and A-10 Thunderbolt are still defending our country.
F-22 Raptor, F-35 Lightning II
The P-38 was the original Lightning
-
On 5/1/2021 at 12:21 PM, twintornados said:
The same crowd that hates the name Mustang Mach-E...
Branding a high-performance, fully electric F-Series a Lightning is very fitting.
The Mustang Mach-E's backlash came mainly from branding a crossover a Mustang, people felt they were diluting the Mustang name.
-
2
-
-
On 4/9/2021 at 5:39 PM, akirby said:
A lot of that noise is direct injection. -
13 minutes ago, akirby said:
Absolutely not. Mach-E already has 3 powertrains - 4 if you count the 7 motor 1400 hp prototype. Those were also in development for years. There is no rocket science here. This is what Ford was planning from day one.
We'll see how the F-Series BEVs spec out. If the Lightning ends up with a unique motor arrangement and a claimed 0-60 in the 3.0 second range I'd say it's safe to assume the Lightning specifically is a direct response the the triple-motor Cybertruck's 2 year old performance claims.
-
3 minutes ago, akirby said:
Seriously? The BEV F150 has been in development for YEARS. The prototype pulled a freight train 2 years ago. The Cybertruck was Tesla's answer to the already announced BEV F150 and Rivian, not the other way around.
This isn't a new model, it's the same BEV F150 they've been developing. They just named it Lightning.
Cybertruck had 3 powertrains announced in 2019: single motor, dual motor and a triple-motor capable of 0-60 mph in 2.9 seconds.
You don't think Ford's choice to resurrect a legendary high-performance nameplate has anything to do with Cybertruck's top spec models?
The New 6.8L V8 Thread
in Ford Motor Company Discussion Forum
Posted
I honestly don't think the 6.8 will see the light of day.
Maybe if Trump stayed in office...