Bob Rosadini Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Rest easy. Ford is not dropping the 6.8-liter V10 from the F-450/F-550. Mike Levine Ford Trucks Communications Manager. Twitter: @mrlevine Thx- puts this thread to bed- nice to see that someone at Ford looks at this site. While I don't expect we will ever get "inside" info, hopefully some of the opinions given on this site end up on the table at Ford for consideration. Nothing like end user experience. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Rest easy. Ford is not dropping the 6.8-liter V10 from the F-450/F-550. Mike Levine Ford Trucks Communications Manager. Twitter: @mrlevine Talk about first-hand information! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Sorry. No other news to announce about the 6.8-liter V10 at this time. It's a kick ass engine in its current state. - Mike Well, maybe for Class 4 and 5. But it still has "below average" fuel economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted May 10, 2013 Author Share Posted May 10, 2013 Well, maybe for Class 4 and 5. But it still has "below average" fuel economy. And it would be nice if the exhaust manifolds would stay on them. Nonetheless, good to hear that they will still be around. I thought the initial report sounded a little strange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Well, maybe for Class 4 and 5. But it still has "below average" fuel economy. Is there another 6.8L or larger gas engine powered truck that gets better fuel mileage? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLPRacing Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Sorry. No other news to announce about the 6.8-liter V10 at this time. It's a kick ass engine in its current state. - Mike I agree. Thanks for setting the record straight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted May 12, 2013 Share Posted May 12, 2013 I wonder just how far a 6.8L can be punched out to and stroked to maximize the size? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted May 12, 2013 Author Share Posted May 12, 2013 (edited) I wonder just how far a 6.8L can be punched out to and stroked to maximize the size? It is at it's limit. Ford might be able to get a slight increase in bore by going to a saimesed bore block, but I would question the wisdom of doing that in a truck engine. There's not really enough room in the crankcase to swing a longer stroke crank. Remember that the 5.4L is the practical size limit for the Modular V-8. The 6.8L is just a 5.4L with 2 more cylinders. Edited May 12, 2013 by 7Mary3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurtisH Posted May 13, 2013 Share Posted May 13, 2013 It is at it's limit. Ford might be able to get a slight increase in bore by going to a saimesed bore block, but I would question the wisdom of doing that in a truck engine. There's not really enough room in the crankcase to swing a longer stroke crank. Remember that the 5.4L is the practical size limit for the Modular V-8. The 6.8L is just a 5.4L with 2 more cylinders. The 5.8 in the GT500 is based on the 5.4. That would seem to indicate that the 6.8 could go to 7.3. It's strong enough to withstand the stress of a super charger in the GT500. Maybe it would be strong enough in a medium duty. Of course, that still might not be big enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted May 13, 2013 Share Posted May 13, 2013 I wonder what the old 460 block with direct fuel injection Boss-type cylinder heads and EcoBoost would do for torque, fuel economy and emissions? For truck rpm's and NVH, pushrods are OK, IMHO. It strokes to 600+ cubes, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petersterncan Posted May 16, 2013 Share Posted May 16, 2013 From my perspective, I'm looking forward to when the 6.8L V10 goes out of production. My exposure to this engine is mainly when I have to rent the odd large moving truck. And I hate getting a moving truck with this engine. I find that it isn't particularly smooth (the V6 in a Camry I drove was way smoother) and it's a terrible gas guzzler when compared to other moving trucks I've used that had the 7.3L diesel. Haven't tried a truck with the 6.7L scorpion engine... but sooner or later, I'm sure I will. It seems to use even more fuel than the GM-based moving trucks I've used that had the 8.1L V8. And if I was buying/renting an RV, I wouldn't want to have this V10 gasser.. Whatever I'd save upfront would likely get blown away in all the extra fuel burned. And note where I live (Canada), fuel costs me about $1.30L... which is roughly $5/gallon. And while CNG looks good on paper because the fuel is so cheap, it isn't that useful in an RV because of the lower driving range and limited refueling locations. And the situation is made worse by the fact the V10 gets lousy mileage to begin with. I'd rather see a CNG version of just about ANY other Ford engine... especially the 3.5L Ecoboost. I understand that some of you will miss the mod V10 because it's cheap and reliable. But I won't miss it when it eventually goes out of production. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
procyon Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 (edited) The 5.8 in the GT500 is based on the 5.4. That would seem to indicate that the 6.8 could go to 7.3. It's strong enough to withstand the stress of a super charger in the GT500. Maybe it would be strong enough in a medium duty. Of course, that still might not be big enough. I doubt that the crankshaft in the V10 could take the added power while still meeting durability requirements. From what I have heard, it's rather bendy with the split pins required for even firing. Edited May 17, 2013 by procyon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 17, 2013 Share Posted May 17, 2013 (edited) A lot of the concern was for the 6.8 in the MD F650 and F750 but last month's production at the Mexico JV plant was around 300. Compare that to monthly production of SD at just over 22,000 (F250, 350, 450, 550.) 1200 F Series Chassis trucks and of course, 54,000 F150s It's easy to see where Ford's priorities actually lie... Edited May 17, 2013 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 I doubt that the crankshaft in the V10 could take the added power while still meeting durability requirements. From what I have heard, it's rather bendy with the split pins required for even firing. Sounds like a forged crank is in order? Or is it already forged.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted May 18, 2013 Author Share Posted May 18, 2013 Sounds like a forged crank is in order? Or is it already forged.... I remember way back when the V-10 came out I read that Ford had to use a forged crank in it for strength because of the offset journals. For the record, I have never seen any V-10 bottom end failures. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted May 18, 2013 Author Share Posted May 18, 2013 A lot of the concern was for the 6.8 in the MD F650 and F750 but last month's production at the Mexico JV plant was around 300. Compare that to monthly production of SD at just over 22,000 (F250, 350, 450, 550.) 1200 F Series Chassis trucks and of course, 54,000 F150s It's easy to see where Ford's priorities actually lie... And you really have to question the wisdom of designing a new 650/750 and bringing production back 'in house'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 (edited) And you really have to question the wisdom of designing a new 650/750 and bringing production back 'in house'. I just acquired: these figures for April '13 vs April '12 sales... Class 4 .......................... 2,853 / 1,310 (118%) Class 5 .......................... 3,187/ 2,447 (30%) Class 6 .......................... 969 / 150 (546%) Class 7 .......................... 245 / 545 (-55%) Class 8 .......................... 14 – – 37 – – Ford ........................ .......7,268 / 4,452 (63%) I can imagine how profitable Class 4 and 5 must be to Ford but 6 and 7 seem to be coming back to life. Maybe that's why Ford wants production in Avon Lake to speed up deliveries to customers and maximize sales. Edited May 18, 2013 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydro Posted May 18, 2013 Share Posted May 18, 2013 I just saw an article in Truck Trend saying RV manufactures Love the Ford F-53 chassis and production is at the highest level in 5 years. They also mentioned the V-10 will increase 25% (sales) for 2014. Doesn't sound like it going anywhere? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted May 19, 2013 Share Posted May 19, 2013 I just acquired: these figures for April '13 vs April '12 sales... Class 4 .......................... 2,853 / 1,310 (118%) Class 5 .......................... 3,187/ 2,447 (30%) Class 6 .......................... 969 / 150 (546%) Class 7 .......................... 245 / 545 (-55%) Class 8 .......................... 14 – – 37 – – Ford ........................ .......7,268 / 4,452 (63%) I can imagine how profitable Class 4 and 5 must be to Ford but 6 and 7 seem to be coming back to life. Maybe that's why Ford wants production in Avon Lake to speed up deliveries to customers and maximize sales. Those class 6 numbers show what happens when you all of a sudden offer something no one else has. We shall see how well the V-10 does once in service and it gets some real world mileage/hours under its belt. 7M3- RE your comment questioning the wisdom of getting back into an in house 6 and 7, I guess the 64 dollar question will be the level of committment they make- also the ability to get economies of scale out of whatever design work has taken place in Turkey and SA. Again, assuming "One Ford" applies to trucks too. By the way, you still think GM will get back in to mediums? I believe you have previously expressed the thought they would?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted May 19, 2013 Author Share Posted May 19, 2013 .............By the way, you still think GM will get back in to mediums? I believe you have previously expressed the thought they would?? Not any more. I heard a rumor from a source that I consider to be very reliable 2 years ago that GM had a whole new family of medium duty trucks under development, and class 4 and 5 versions of the Silverado/Sierra were specifically NOT part of that program. Since that time I have heard very little, but it now seems that 4500 and 5500 chassis cab Silverado/Sierra's may be in the future. I doubt GM would consider anything larger on their own, I don't think they could make the numbers work. GM is working with Isuzu again, and I suppose there might be a possibility GM could do a joint venture medium duty with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Someone posted an idea of reviving the 385 series (429-460) motor for truck use....if Ford were to do that, they might be better reviving the FE series instead. Wedge heads, low rise intake, tuned for gobs of torque....modern engine control management...overall light weight design that is uber reliable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 ...they might be better reviving the FE series instead. ...overall light weight design that is uber reliable.That has to be the first time in history that anyone ever referred to an FE mill as "light weight"...though I guess the 700+lbs of an FE might be better than other engines used in medium-duties... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Someone posted an idea of reviving the 385 series (429-460) motor for truck use....if Ford were to do that, they might be better reviving the FE series instead. Wedge heads, low rise intake, tuned for gobs of torque....modern engine control management...overall light weight design that is uber reliable. I did- silence was deafening! As for FE, that was old 390-427-428 correct? Not sure about Super Duty 401-534. - Agree with Sooner-must weigh a lot more than the 429/460 7M3-were the Super dutys part of the FE family? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted May 21, 2013 Share Posted May 21, 2013 Someone posted an idea of reviving the 385 series (429-460) motor for truck use....if Ford were to do that, they might be better reviving the FE series instead. Wedge heads, low rise intake, tuned for gobs of torque....modern engine control management...overall light weight design that is uber reliable. IIRC, the 429-460 family is a later design, and considered to be stronger, with wider bore spacing. As to "Wedge heads, low rise intake", this is an era of direct fuel-injection, VVT, and computer engine management, so with completely redesigned cylinder heads and intake manifold, it might do the job. With raised deck-height, the engine will stroke to over 600 CID or 10 liters. IIRC, John Kaase even make an 800-cube version. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted May 21, 2013 Author Share Posted May 21, 2013 I did- silence was deafening! As for FE, that was old 390-427-428 correct? Not sure about Super Duty 401-534. - Agree with Sooner-must weigh a lot more than the 429/460 7M3-were the Super dutys part of the FE family? The Super Duty V-8's were their own deal. Somewhat similar to the MEL V-8's (430, 462) but much larger and no parts interchangeability. 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.