7Mary3 Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 (edited) And then there were two: http://media.navistar.com/index.php?s=43&item698 Notice Navistar comments about current propane engines that are underpowered and lack torque at lower r.p.m.'s.? That's a dig against the Ford V-10 it you ask me. Regardless, their Powertrain Solutions 8.8L puts out some very impressive numbers. Edited September 2, 2014 by 7Mary3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted September 2, 2014 Share Posted September 2, 2014 And then there were two: http://media.navistar.com/index.php?s=43&item=689 Notice Navistar comments about current propane engines that are underpowered and lack torque at lower r.p.m.'s.? That's a dig against the Ford V-10 it you ask me. Regardless, their Powertrain Solutions 8.8L puts out some very impressive numbers. 7M-I think you are missing an attachment? I see nothing regarding school buses or propane power as an option Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted September 2, 2014 Author Share Posted September 2, 2014 Try it again, transposed the last 2 numbers: http://media.navistar.com/index.php?s=43&item=698 Sorry about that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 I would have to agree-plenty of negative comments about the "other" propane options and why Navistar offers a better option. And the 8.8 is a 6 cyl Navistar diesel block??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 (edited) Navistar propane bus Here is the link....Gotta say....at 8.8 liters...it has the Ford beat by 2 liters....not a small amount, and it is an 8.8 liter I-6...those pistons have to be the size of paint cans...no wonder it has more torque.... Edited September 3, 2014 by twintornados Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 The PSI 8.8 liter looks like a V8 to me. It is not a Navistar block. I think it is a derivative or extension of the out of production GM 8.1 liter V8 block. PSI has an 8.1 liter that looks as if is a straight 6 - a completely different engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 The PSI 8.8 liter looks like a V8 to me. It is not a Navistar block. I think it is a derivative or extension of the out of production GM 8.1 liter V8 block. PSI has an 8.1 liter that looks as if is a straight 6 - a completely different engine. I did not see any pictures of the motor....assumed it was a straight six....even a V8 in that size would have some rather large pistons...would love to read about it some more... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted September 3, 2014 Author Share Posted September 3, 2014 The PSI 8.8L is a development of the GM 8.1L. The old Chevy Big Block never really went out of production, PSI markets this engine and another company named Powertrain Integration markets an 8.0L that is closer to the old 7.4L. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Did someone mention large cylinders? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old_fairmont_wagon Posted September 3, 2014 Share Posted September 3, 2014 Technically speaking, there's nothing technically insurmountable stopping Ford from taking the existing mod v-10 block and doing to it what they did to the coyote or 5.8 l block and turning it into a 7.4l engine. Its also not technically far fetched for them to adapt the dohc setup from the 4 valve 5.4l engines and make only the intake cam variable and drive the balance shaft from the exhaust cam. Doing both of those things would result in a taller and broader torque curve that is more competitive than the existing engine. If that setup is suitable for the 5.0l in the F-150, it should work here too. Just my 1.5 cents Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted September 4, 2014 Author Share Posted September 4, 2014 I think it would be tough to get the 6.8L over 7.5L without sacrificing strength and reliability, particularly in a medium duty truck/school bus application. Can't bore it much more before the cylinder walls and coolant flow between cylinders become compromised, can't stroke it too much because there isn't much room in the crankcase to swing a bigger crank. Rod ratio gets pretty bad too. This is a different ball game than a high performance car engine, the duty cycle is much more punishing. 7.5L is still short of 8.8L and I don't see how you would get the V-10 to there unless you made it a V-12. Good idea about a VVT intake cam. Would like to see proper cam bearings and a more robust timing chain/tensioner for heavy duty service as well. Is the Lima tooling still around??? There's the answer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 (edited) Did someone mention large cylinders? 9 cylinders? Anyone with more practical understanding of firing order & balancing know how a 9 cylinder engine would work? You'd fire once every 80 degrees, which seems to mean that no two pistons would ever be simultaneously at TDC & BDC. Would you just fire them sequentially from front to back? Edit: Oh, wait. I guess there's 10. Edited September 4, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 It's a two stroke diesel - 6 to 14 cylinders. http://www.wartsila.com/en/engines/low-speed-engines/RT-flex96C#_0_TechnicalPapers__undefined Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Two stroke diesel? Holy crap. That thing probably emits as much pollution in hour as a brand new car will emit in its designed lifespan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang_sallad Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 The classic GM fishbowl bus (think Speed...) ran on a two-stroke diesel. I'll never forget the sound of those buses... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GM_New_Look_bus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Oooh. Four speed non-synchromesh transmission? Wow, that must've been just a bundle of joy to drive, or get stuck behind in traffic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 New motor for next Ferd F-Teenthousand?? Did someone mention large cylinders? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted September 4, 2014 Author Share Posted September 4, 2014 Very few of those New Look coaches had the 4 speed manual, that transmission was for suburban operators. The transit models usually had one of the Allison V-drive automatics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Non synchromesh manual transmissions may seem difficult to those who only drive automatics, but like any skill, shifting them can be learned. You just have to concentrate on driving, not the personal electronic devices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Is the Lima tooling still around??? There's the answer! I believe I suggested that a while ago -but with state of art ignition, injection etc. I think there were a few responses as to why that would not work-other than production equipment all gone. How about it guys??? (Too lazy/busy to research xxx posts ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 (edited) Non synchromesh manual transmissions may seem difficult to those who only drive automatics, but like any skill, shifting them can be learned. You just have to concentrate on driving, not the personal electronic devices. I was thinking more of the fun of double-clutching to shift a transmission with only four speeds on a vehicle of that size, and with that much inertia to overcome over and over again in traffic. Especially if first was really short and you'd have to keep shifting to second once you hit 5 or 10 mph. Edited September 4, 2014 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 As far as I know, the casting and machining lines are long gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goinbroke2 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Jon Kasse is making massive hp and tq with the Boss heads he designed/built/offer for sale. Imagine if Ford made a twin cam, direct inj one at say 545 CU IN or so...even 521 or 514 is easy to do. Leave it at 8-9:1 comp for the lugging without detonation and it would have CRAZY numbers at diesel rpm's. We had a few 8.1 GM's in cut away cube vans here, they'd roast the dually's at will, but nosed over around 38-4000rpm. Full throttle would roast the tires, taper off then bark into 2nd and then quickly taper off again, bang into 3rd then taper off and felt "all done" around 110kph at 4000rpm. Wicked weight transfer when you hammered it LOL! umm...I heard..yeah that's it, I heard that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 As far as I know, the casting and machining lines are long gone. Thx- probably your answer months ago that I had in the back of my mind. didn't know if it was Ford SOP to scrap EVERYTHING. I do believe there are Ford tractor components still being built in the third world using old ford tooling- or so I thoiught I read on one of the tractor sites. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Well, there's those big Ford Otosan diesels . . . run those on propane. 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.