OHV 16V Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 - Single overhead camshaft with roller-rocker shaft drivetrain... Now who was that yo-yo on here awhile back arguing with us that the 6.2 would be an OHV configuration? I remember him specifically asking Nick if he liked eating crow.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 In essence I agree with you, but owning a V-10 and pulling some serious loads with it, I can attest to that beast. The 6.8L is known to be one of the greatest gas engines ever built. It can (and will) keep up with the diesels in the Superduty both in uphill pulls (see pickup.com's comparison) and also is noted for its long life (300 K not all that unusual). The torque curve on that motor is pretty flat from 1800 rpm through 5500. I too can attest to the 6.8's greatness. It has plenty of power to move my very heavy 35' motorhome & tow our Expedition EL "Toad". It can even get up to 7 mpg with the generator running & towing at 65 mph. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 In essence I agree with you, but owning a V-10 and pulling some serious loads with it, I can attest to that beast. The 6.8L is known to be one of the greatest gas engines ever built. It can (and will) keep up with the diesels in the Superduty both in uphill pulls (see pickup.com's comparison) and also is noted for its long life (300 K not all that unusual). The torque curve on that motor is pretty flat from 1800 rpm through 5500. I too can attest to the 6.8's greatness. It has plenty of power to move my very heavy 35' motorhome & tow our Expedition EL "Toad". It can even get up to 7 mpg with the generator running & towing at 65 mph. Will agree the 6.8L is one hell of a gas motor, both in power & reliability. But here in the CO mtns, no gas motor truck competes with the turbo desiels, whether its a PSD, Cummins or Duramax. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) I had a 20 foot Uhaul truck with the Ford V10 in it. I had to drive from Jersey to NC for work. The rental guy said it would never make it (had nearly 100 or 150K on the clock), ate gas like no tomorrow (think it was getting about 10-12 MPG doing 80ish down there), but she ran like a top down there and up again. Had Ok power to boot, since my coworkers where complaining I was driving it like my Mustang :P Edited August 21, 2009 by silvrsvt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Now who was that yo-yo on here awhile back arguing with us that the 6.2 would be an OHV configuration? I remember him specifically asking Nick if he liked eating crow.... I believe there were several of those yo-yo's. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Now who was that yo-yo on here awhile back arguing with us that the 6.2 would be an OHV configuration? I remember him specifically asking Nick if he liked eating crow.... http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums/index...showtopic=28765 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 http://www.blueovalforums.com/forums/index...showtopic=28765 My last post there made me chuckle. I have absolutely zero recollection of writing that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) My last post there made me chuckle. I have absolutely zero recollection of writing that. Kinda hard to remember when you post so dam much! I did like the "It farts rainbows" part though. Edited August 21, 2009 by fordmantpw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpvbs Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) I certainly understand the value of a broad powerband over peak numbers, but I can hear the Chevy/Dodge guys proclaiming their superiority if the new, high tech, OHC Ford wonder motor doesn't make (significantly) more power their LSwhut/Hemi. Again, I know 400hp is utter overkill anyway, but it does matter in the pickup truck pissing match. Typically, Ford likes avoid a lot of variation in drivetrains, but a big torque, lower hp engine for Superduty applications would be nice, with a higher HP version for lighter duty, personal use applications. BTW, Dodge is rumored to have a 6.4l hemi for release in their HD trucks soon. The unofficial speculation is it will be over 450hp. Edited August 21, 2009 by jpvbs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
therealmrmustang Posted August 21, 2009 Author Share Posted August 21, 2009 BTW, Dodge is rumored to have a 6.4l hemi for release in their HD trucks soon. The unofficial speculation is it will be over 450hp. I'll believe that when I see it. I have no doubt that the 6.4l Hemi (...in name only) is capable, but they're seriously going to need to improve the efficiency. The above mentioned is a pig, even with cylinder deactivation. The 6.2l will get the job done, and Ford will continue in truck leadership. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 ... but owning a V-10 and pulling some serious loads with it, I can attest to that beast. And an extremely thirsty one also ! It can (and will) keep up with the diesels in the Superduty both in uphill pulls (see pickup.com's comparison) ... Will agree the 6.8L is one hell of a gas motor, both in power & reliability. But here in the CO mtns, no gas motor truck competes with the turbo desiels, whether its a PSD, Cummins or Duramax. Never owned either, but I have been told by many you can''t beat a turbo diesel for power and fuel economy when hauling a heavy load up a hill ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V8-X Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Never owned either, but I have been told by many you can''t beat a turbo diesel for power and fuel economy when hauling a heavy load up a hill ! This is why most people around CO anymore opt for a 250 over the 150. They don't really need all the capability the 250/350 PSD has to offer, but they love to fly up the mtns passing gassers with a 10K lb trailer in tow behind them. Truly a scary site at times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpvbs Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 6.4 hemi story It'd still be in a Dodge truck though. Disclaimer, I do own a "Hemi" an 05 Durango. It is rather peaky and it sucks gas like nobodies business - lifetime mpg is probably less than 14. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpvbs Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 This is why most people around CO anymore opt for a 250 over the 150. They don't really need all the capability the 250/350 PSD has to offer, but they love to fly up the mtns passing gassers with a 10K lb trailhugeer in tow behind them. Truly a scary site at times.d I was just going to comment about that. Recently I passed through CO on I70 in my afformentioned hemi Durango. I was loaded with 6 people, 4 bikes, and a roof carrier. Near the top of the first pass just west of Denver (10miles maybe), my hemi was struggling to maintain 55mph (without kicking down to 2nd gear) when I got passed by Duramax Silverado doing about 75, while towing 5th wheel horsetrailer. Wreckless as it may have been, I was envious of the power at that point. I did catch him on the downgrade where he was responsible enough to keep the speed down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) 6.4 hemi story It'd still be in a Dodge truck though. Disclaimer, I do own a "Hemi" an 05 Durango. It is rather peaky and it sucks gas like nobodies business - lifetime mpg is probably less than 14. Off topic, but the other good story buried in that non-Ford article you have there was the ZF Powerline transmission that was installed in to the F450. LINK battyr & theoldwizard, you guys might want to read this: The PowerLine has also been designed for improved fuel economy. “The torque converter [used to transmit engine power to the truck’s transmission] has a turbine torsional damper,” Olexa said. “What this means is that we can lock up [the clutch] earlier [to quickly match engine and transmission speeds during acceleration] without getting engine vibration. Sometimes, if you lock too early, you’ll get engine shudder. The PowerLine locks up at just over 1,000 rpm, and all shifts up or down stay locked.” How does this give a truck better mileage? When a torque converter is disengaged, the engine is still running but it’s not driving the wheels via the transmission, so fuel is wasted. This is important if you’re driving a vehicle with an automatic transmission, so it won’t stall at a stoplight. When you get going again, engaging the torque converter at a lower rpm means power can be sent to the wheels sooner, thereby improving fuel economy. The PowerLine can also keep the torque converter locked while upshifting and downshifting. Some transmissions disengage or “loosen” their torque converters while shifting, reducing efficiency. Think of it as taking some of a manual transmission's inherent fuel economy advantages and applying them to an automatic gearbox. Edited August 21, 2009 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Good news! Just would hate to have to change 16 plugs, good lord. Can't be any worse than a 2 valve V-10. That is, unless the V-10 has spit out some plugs beforehand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 In any event, the 6.2L sounds really good. I wonder if it will have commercial applications. Might make a good CNG engine too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 This is why most people around CO anymore opt for a 250 over the 150. They don't really need all the capability the 250/350 PSD has to offer, but they love to fly up the mtns passing gassers with a 10K lb trailer in tow behind them. Truly a scary site at times. Many years ago, when the 7.3L was still in development, the engineers took a trip to CO. With the truck loaded to 15,000 lbs and a 10,000 lbs trailer they hit the start of the grade up to Eisenhower at 70 mph in 5th (manual transmission) and the cruise control on. The never downshifted or dropped out of cruise all the way up ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Re: ZF Powerline 6 speed auto The PowerLine locks up at just over 1,000 rpm, and all shifts up or down stay locked. This puts a lot of wear on all of the other friction elements in the transmission. Obviously they have to oversized to make of for this. Upshift and downshifts take hundreds of milliseconds. During that time the friction elements are slipping. The longer the shift duration (time) the less noticeable the shift is for the customer. One way around this is incorporate one-way clutches on some/all gears. Works well, but it make the transmission larger, heavier and more expensive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 (edited) Re: ZF Powerline 6 speed auto This puts a lot of wear on all of the other friction elements in the transmission. Obviously they have to oversized to make of for this. Upshift and downshifts take hundreds of milliseconds. During that time the friction elements are slipping. The longer the shift duration (time) the less noticeable the shift is for the customer. One way around this is incorporate one-way clutches on some/all gears. Works well, but it make the transmission larger, heavier and more expensive. Yet more economical than the cheaper/lighter transmission they replace. Cost of repairs: Not a problem for customers protected by factory warranty but people with high mileage or second hand vehicles may get a rude shock...... Having said that, If Ford were to introduce copies or ZFs manufactured under licences, I could imagine the manufacturing, maintenance and repair costs would drop quite considerably. Our own ZF HP in the Falcons is not that much deared to repair than a 5R55 or GM 6 speeder Edited August 22, 2009 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White99GT Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Will agree the 6.8L is one hell of a gas motor, both in power & reliability. But here in the CO mtns, no gas motor truck competes with the turbo desiels, whether its a PSD, Cummins or Duramax. The big advantage of forced induction. At sea level or anything close to it, I don't see an advantage for the newest DPF equipped diesels versus a 3V V10. A lot of extra cost for no real advantages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atomaro Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Good point. Naturally aspirated engines do suffer much more than forced inductions at extreme elevations. At Denver elevations the 3.5 ecoboost would outgun the V10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_fairmont_wagon Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 I've put a LOT of miles on an E-350 extended length van loaded with metal tool cabinets full of tools and radio testing equipment with a 2V V10 under its stubby hood. Almost all of this was down on the gulf coast in hot, humid weather. I found the engine to be extremely thirsty for gas netting less than 10mpg at 75 mph on flat land from New Orlans to Lake Charles and back many times. It is not peaky, but builds power evenly and rarely does anything other than exactly what you tell it. If you were willing to mash the throttle to the floor, it would give you sufficient acceleration for passing on the highway or squirting (some call it careening, lol) through traffic in the city. I've not had the pleasure of driving a 3V equipped V-10, but have heard that it is just a stronger version of what we have in our van. I believe that if the 6.2L has only 400 lbs of torque, it will be a let down as a replacement for the 6.8L. Perhaps it will have two different states of tune. One for the F-150 that has 400/400 and another for the HD applications that has 380/430 or so. That, I believe, would be wholely acceptable for their target customer base. This especially as the 6.2L should weigh a decent amount less than the 3v 6.8L V10. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BOSSLESS Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 I've put a LOT of miles on an E-350 extended length van loaded with metal tool cabinets full of tools and radio testing equipment with a 2V V10 under its stubby hood. Almost all of this was down on the gulf coast in hot, humid weather. I found the engine to be extremely thirsty for gas netting less than 10mpg at 75 mph on flat land from New Orlans to Lake Charles and back many times. It is not peaky, but builds power evenly and rarely does anything other than exactly what you tell it. If you were willing to mash the throttle to the floor, it would give you sufficient acceleration for passing on the highway or squirting (some call it careening, lol) through traffic in the city. I've not had the pleasure of driving a 3V equipped V-10, but have heard that it is just a stronger version of what we have in our van. I believe that if the 6.2L has only 400 lbs of torque, it will be a let down as a replacement for the 6.8L. Perhaps it will have two different states of tune. One for the F-150 that has 400/400 and another for the HD applications that has 380/430 or so. That, I believe, would be wholely acceptable for their target customer base. This especially as the 6.2L should weigh a decent amount less than the 3v 6.8L V10. I wonder if the spark plugs will blow out of this engine like the 1997 and up mod motors? Hope not. Hopefully they can design aluminum heads with more than 4 threads to hold the plugs in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomServo92 Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 I wonder if the spark plugs will blow out of this engine like the 1997 and up mod motors? Hope not. Hopefully they can design aluminum heads with more than 4 threads to hold the plugs in. Wow...you've been waiting 9 years just to post that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.