fuzzymoomoo Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 If a smaller engine (3.0 GTDI) can make north of 400 in the Continental and MKZ, I don't see a reason why they can't or won't justify an increase in power beyond torque for the F-150. The only thing I'm certain of is the Raptor will get the most powerful version for trucks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 If a smaller engine (3.0 GTDI) can make north of 400 in the Continental and MKZ, I don't see a reason why they can't or won't justify an increase in power beyond torque for the F-150. The only thing I'm certain of is the Raptor will get the most powerful version for trucks. Because truck engines are specifically tuned for more torque at lower RPM and to withstand towing loads. You don't have to worry about that in a car so it can rev higher which yields more HP. Look at the HP/Torque on the 6.7L Diesel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 If a smaller engine (3.0 GTDI) can make north of 400 in the Continental and MKZ, I don't see a reason why they can't or won't justify an increase in power beyond torque for the F-150. The only thing I'm certain of is the Raptor will get the most powerful version for trucks. akirby mentioned the reason, and I agree that the Raptor will get the most powerful truck version. However, I just find it odd that they aren't increasing the HP at all. I would think a 30 ft-lb bump would go along with a 15-20 HP bump at least. Maybe they have focused more on efficiency and are shooting for pure MPG, since we are pretty confident it will already outrun and out-tow everything else in the class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 Or they're playing possum with GM. Not that they've ever done that before <cough>powerstroke<cough>. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 Or they're playing possum with GM. Not that they've ever done that before <cough>powerstroke<cough>. That is quite possible. "Well, after re-evaluating, we've decided the new 3.5L EB will produce 420 HP instead of our initial 365 HP." "Oh, and BTW, we've increased fuel economy by 3 MPG's as well." "Thank you, and I hope you enjoy the view of our LED tail lights." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 Hmm.....says 365 HP but we're seeing 350 HP at the rear wheels.....hmm....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blwnsmoke Posted May 4, 2016 Share Posted May 4, 2016 (edited) 400/450 sounds like a nice number.. the raptor would have 50 more HP. On a side note, my Explorer is in for service today (2011) and the dealer has finally made an agreement that when you have rental coverage, they must provide you with a Ford rental. Never understood why they would allow a Toyota or Nissan etc.. all they are asking for is to put a Ford owner in a competitors car to test out. I didn't know this until my $30 per day coverage got me a 2016 Ford Expedition Limited. All I can say is WOW!!! This is the first time I've drove the Ecoboost 3.5 since 2011 when I test drove the Ford Flex. WOW, this motor is a monster and I can't believe how fast it is in such a heavy vehicle. Taking my wife in it tonight for a ride and I know that she will want this to be her next vehicle. I'm sure the updated 3.5 and 10 speed will go in this as well.. have averaged almost 20mpg so far and I only get 21 out of the Explorer. Also loved Sync 3. I've had no complaints about MFT but I love how the screen acts like a smart phone now. VERY impressive. Sorry to side track the thread. Edited May 4, 2016 by blwnsmoke Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MY93SHO Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 The only pictures they've shown look like they're of the rear of the engine. The cut-away rendering shows a belt, but that's probably because a belt is easier to draw than a chain. Watch the video fordmantpw posted above. Chains. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) Watch the video fordmantpw posted above. Chains.I'm talking about the pictures Ford has posted, and I'm agreeing with you--I think the engine has a chain, it's just the rendering that shows what looks like a belt. ETA: yeah, there's at least one clear shot that shows a timing chain, somewhere around the 1:20 mark. Edited May 5, 2016 by SoonerLS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bossman351 Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 The Raptor engine at the auto shows had chains. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) I'm looking at that and I'm a little confused. It looks like a belt, but it runs over what looks like teeth used to pull a chain. when you blow the image of the show engine right up, you see the profile of the cam gears and what appears to be a little bit of gray on the side guide bar.. (a lot like a cog belt to me) Link to image and this one blows up better and lets you see the cog belt.....LINK Edited May 5, 2016 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 This is a pretty good read. Goes into more detail on the mechanical changes. http://www.forbes.com/sites/samabuelsamid/2016/05/03/ford-refreshes-its-original-ecoboost-v6-and-makes-the-jump-to-10-speeds-for-2017-f-150-and-raptor/#6818688648e8 Thanks Pioneer. For those wondering why two sets of injectors, this article explains the issues perfectly The single most significant change to the engine is a new dual fuel system that now includes both port and direct injection. Since the beginning, direct injection (DI) and turbocharging have been the defining characteristics of EcoBoost engines. DI enables the use of higher boost and compression ratios that improve torque and driveability by cooling down the compressed air that the turbos push into the cylinders. They also enable greater fuel delivery precision for better fuel economy and emissions in most conditions. However, at higher flow rates the need for larger holes in the injectors detracts from the flow control resolution. Gasoline DI engines are also prone to produce higher levels of particulate emissions, especially following a cold start when the fuel is sprayed on cold cylinder walls. The new Tier III emissions regulations that go into effect in 2018 significantly reduce the amount of particulates that all engines are allowed to emit. Al Cockerill, Ford engine systems supervisor for the 3.5-liter engine acknowledges that the addition of port injection will enable this new engine to meet Tier III emissions standards without resorting to a particulate filter of the type that is required on modern diesel engines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biker16 Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 I doubt Ford will have 2 different materials for blocks of the same engine. Due to the weight loss, it's a safe bet this engine is Al, and it will be Al across the board. the Modular engine is available in Iron and Al. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mettech Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Why still make the 6.2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 the Modular engine is available in Iron and Al. Which engine is available in both? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Why still make the 6.2? For the Super Duty. I just wonder how this thing would do in a Super Duty. 365/450 is a few HP shy, but 45 more ft-lbs than the 6.2L, at a much lower RPM. Would the fuel economy suck due to being under boost too much because of the weight of the truck? Is the Al block an issue? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 I find it difficult to believe that they would create a next-generation 3.5 and not have an increase in HP from a marketing perspective. That doesn't make any sense, considering the HP wars that are regularly occurring. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92merc Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 I'm thinking one of two things. Either Ford intentionally tuned it to be the same HP to gain more torque and better fuel economy. Or they are sandbagging and when they release the EPA fuel ratings, they'll suddenly state that the 3.5 is actually 380HP, roughly same as the 5.0. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbone Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 I would like to think that HP, torque, and fuel economy are not mutually exclusive when redesigning a modern engine. I hope you're right that Ford is just sandbagging HP numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 I would like to think that HP, torque, and fuel economy are not mutually exclusive when redesigning a modern engine. In reality, it's a compromise of all 3. You can't have ALL of them at the same time, you pick and choose what is most important and tune for that while compromises are made in all areas to get what you want. Could Ford tune for 450/450? Sure, the Raptor will likely see more than that, but fuel economy will suffer. Could Ford tune for more MPG? Sure, but HP or torque may dip. I would like to see a switch with 3 different modes (similar to the track key on the Boss Mustang): -- Haul-ass mode -- Towing mode -- Fuel economy mode I'm sure it'd be tough to get that one through the EPA though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) Whoa! Expected it, but not to start the '17 MY. 450 ft-lbs is quite impressive, but no word on HP. This thing is going to put the GM's 6.2L completely in the dust. Can't wait to see fuel economy numbers. They'll still be advertising "Best in Class V8 blah blah blah blah blah......" Hope they drive a fleet of early production to Cleveland and park them in a ring around Drumpf's Tahoe. Americans still make some pretty great things, Donny. Congratulations on the 10-speed..... Nice way to stick it to the V8 club...... Ford man. I really liked the F-150 but hey they want everyone to drive an ecoboost, so gotta start fading the V8 out somehow. The 6.2 is still a beast and to sit there and say that without knowing what real numbers this will have is silly, as I'm sure the 6.2 will be updated anytime now, so it will be making big power still. We already have boat loads of power as it is, anything more is icing on the cake. I say focus on transmission efficiency across the Ford/Lincoln lineup..... We've know this since the 2015 Detroit AutoShow when they showed off the 2017 F-150 Raptor. There is no reason for Ford to up the official power rating... is it already the most powerfully rated class 1 truck. But I'm sure there will be real power improvements with the new engine. I think Ram and GM are both rated above the max HP of the F150. Maybe Tundra too (can't remember), and likely the new Titan. Doesn't the GM 6.2 have 460 lb-ft of torque in the Silverado/Sierra vs. 450 lb-ft for this in the F-150, on top of the GM having 420 HP vs 365 in the F-150? Power: 420 hp @ 5600 rpm Torque: 460 lb-ft @ 4100 rpm http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2015-chevrolet-silverado-1500-4x4-62l-v-8-8-speed-test-reviews But then, that's a V8 though, and more thirsty. Edited May 5, 2016 by zipnzap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Doesn't the GM 6.2 have 460 lb-ft of torque in the Silverado/Sierra vs. 450 lb-ft for this in the F-150, on top of the GM having 420 HP vs 365 in the F-150? http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2015-chevrolet-silverado-1500-4x4-62l-v-8-8-speed-test-reviews But then, that's a V8 though, and more thirsty. Yes, but the current F150, while down 55HP and 40 ft-lbs, performs nearly identically in acceleration. That's with the GM having an 8 speed tranny, too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 (edited) Yes, but the current F150, while down 55HP and 40 ft-lbs, performs nearly identically in acceleration. That's with the GM having an 8 speed tranny, too. The current 3.5 Ecoboost apparently also has better towing numbers. I wonder where all that extra power in the GM is going. Speaking of the bolded... Edit, teh great part about this is no matter what Ford does, that EB 3.5 and 10AT are going to be a tough combination to beat, fuel economy alone should be significantly better than todya's 6AT and the Silverado 6.2 8AT at 21 MPG has a problem that means GM has to restrict those build numbers.. Curious to see what effect the 10AT will have on the 5.0 Coyote if / when it's delivered, should make a significant improvement.. Since this 10-speed is one of the two joint venture transmissions and it's already going into the Camaro ZL1, will Ford allow GM to put this into their trucks? Edited May 5, 2016 by zipnzap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordmantpw Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 The current 3.5 Ecoboost apparently also has better towing numbers. I wonder where all that extra power in the GM is going. Speaking of the bolded... Since this 10-speed is one of the two joint venture transmissions and it's already going into the Camaro ZL1, will Ford allow GM to put this into their trucks? Yeah, the GM trucks will get it, but I heard they will probably be a year behind Ford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipnzap Posted May 5, 2016 Share Posted May 5, 2016 Yeah, the GM trucks will get it, but I heard they will probably be a year behind Ford. If they stick with the 6.2, how much would this help? 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.