New Ford 7.0 L....?

[RichardJensen]

 

Calc II was the most difficult I thought. The concepts were more 'out there' and more difficult to grasp.

 

Look at this GIF:

 

 

I took trig in high school & calc II in college and it wasn't until a decade after I graduated that I saw this demonstration of the relationship between sine function and the unit circle--and look how simple it is!

 

I can't believe how badly and how often the teaching of math is botched. Seriously. From 7th grade to my sophomore year in college, that's 15 semesters of classes, and I've already told you about the TWO competent math teachers I had.

[fordmantpw]

 

Look at this GIF:

 

 

I took trig in high school & calc II in college and it wasn't until a decade after I graduated that I saw this demonstration of the relationship between sine function and the unit circle--and look how simple it is!

 

I can't believe how badly and how often the teaching of math is botched. Seriously. From 7th grade to my sophomore year in college, that's 15 semesters of classes, and I've already told you about the TWO competent math teachers I had.

 

Wow, that makes it soooo easy!

 

I agree that math is taught horribly. Helping my eighth grade daughter with her math (she's in algebra), when I'm finished, she usually understands it so much better because I try to teach the REASON you do something, not "just do it because that's what you do" because that is what always worked best for me. Same goes with my son (math is hard for someone with ADHD because of the detail). I always ask 'why do you do that?' Once they know why, understanding is so much easier.

[RichardJensen]

What I loved about my good calc profs, and why I wanted to get into higher math, was because of things like that GIF. I wanted to know how things were related.

 

I mean, when Mo drew the diagrams on he chalkboard showing how the limit process for integration looked just like the limit process for differentiation... Like I said, I remember exactly where I was, because I thought that was just amazing.

[RichardJensen]

 

Wow, that makes it soooo easy!

 

BTW: Know how I came across that GIF?

 

I was looking for an explanation of why imaginary numbers are used so often in electrical engineering, and I found a GIF that explained this exactly: If you put the unit circle on a complex plane, then the cosine function moves along the imaginary axis and the sine function moves along the real axis, and that it is much easier to work with current functions when you taken them as unit vectors with both real and imaginary parts.

 

The article went on to explain that this is a reasonable model of what actually happens in a generator, if you view the magnetic field generated as being the imaginary component.

 

And I was like, 'why didn't anyone ever explain any of this to me? It's so simple!!'

Edited April 20, 2017 by RichardJensen

[fordmantpw]

 

BTW: Know how I came across that GIF?

 

I was looking for an explanation of why imaginary numbers are used so often in electrical engineering, and I found a GIF that explained this exactly: If you put the unit circle on a complex plane, then the cosine function moves along the imaginary axis and the sine function moves along the real axis, and that it is much easier to work with current functions when you taken them as unit vectors with both real and imaginary parts.

 

The article went on to explain that this is a reasonable model of what actually happens in a generator, if you view the magnetic field generated as being the imaginary component.

 

And I was like, 'why didn't anyone ever explain any of this to me? It's so simple!!'

 

Huh. Wow, that's eye (mind) opening. After all those EE course where we used i and I had no real idea what for, now it all makes sense. Thank you for the lesson...I knew there was a reason outside of cars why I come here!

[RichardJensen]

 

Huh. Wow, that's eye (mind) opening. After all those EE course where we used i and I had no real idea what for, now it all makes sense. Thank you for the lesson...I knew there was a reason outside of cars why I come here!

 

Crazy huh? Not only does it make sense, it's not even particularly difficult to grasp.

 

https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/info/signals/complex/cmplx.html

 

Also:

​Conversely, complex numbers may be used to code or represent the orthogonal components of any two-dimensional vector. This makes them invaluable in electromagnetic field theory, where they are used to represent the components of electric and magnetic fields.

 

https://cnx.org/contents/ef2A4oPY@6/Complex-Numbers-An-Electric-Fi

Edited April 20, 2017 by RichardJensen

[akirby]

I always ask 'why do you do that?' Once they know why, understanding is so much easier.

 

I had a logical data modeler early in my career who said everything always had to be 3NF but she had no clue why things needed to be 3NF. Therefore she could not reason when it was ok to violate 3NF and when it wasn't, so she just blindly followed the rule for years.

 

Same with my wife and traffic laws. Like changing lanes in an intersection. Yes it's against the law but the reason is you might have someone turning right into what they think is an open lane but you change lanes at the same time and cause an accident. So if there is nobody at the intersection it's really not a safety issue. But every time I do it she yells at me.

[RichardJensen]

 

I had a logical data modeler early in my career who said everything always had to be 3NF but she had no clue why things needed to be 3NF.

 

I had this guy once insisting that I build my database in 3NF, and I was like, 'look. This is a small database that serves a small number of websites. There will be no performance lag because I'm not using 3NF, and as I'm writing all the functions, I don't have to worry about someone else horsing up the update or insert code, and I don't want to write a query with half a million joins on it.'

[akirby]

 

I had this guy once insisting that I build my database in 3NF, and I was like, 'look. This is a small database that serves a small number of websites. There will be no performance lag because I'm not using 3NF, and as I'm writing all the functions, I don't have to worry about someone else horsing up the update or insert code, and I don't want to write a query with half a million joins on it.'

 

Exactly! As long as you know where you're creating data anomalies and you've handled them denormalization is fine, and usually an absolute requirement for decent performance on very large databases.

[Gnostic]

 

BTW: Know how I came across that GIF?

 

I was looking for an explanation of why imaginary numbers are used so often in electrical engineering, and I found a GIF that explained this exactly: If you put the unit circle on a complex plane, then the cosine function moves along the imaginary axis and the sine function moves along the real axis, and that it is much easier to work with current functions when you taken them as unit vectors with both real and imaginary parts.

 

The article went on to explain that this is a reasonable model of what actually happens in a generator, if you view the magnetic field generated as being the imaginary component.

 

And I was like, 'why didn't anyone ever explain any of this to me? It's so simple!!'

 

 

Ah good old polar to imaginary conversion.. HP 15C for the win

[StevenCaylor]

When I went to college, I wanted to be a Software Engineer. Back in the olden days, that degree didn't exist. The closest that Loyola University of Los Angeles had was Electrical Engineering with a Computer Science option. I had to take calc classes that were totally useless. Still have a great career in software, especially due to my TS/SCI clearance from when I was in the military.

[fordmantpw]

 

Crazy huh? Not only does it make sense, it's not even particularly difficult to grasp.

 

https://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~www_pa/Scots_Guide/info/signals/complex/cmplx.html

 

Also:

https://cnx.org/contents/ef2A4oPY@6/Complex-Numbers-An-Electric-Fi

Awesome reading...good stuff!

[fordmantpw]

 

I had a logical data modeler early in my career who said everything always had to be 3NF but she had no clue why things needed to be 3NF. Therefore she could not reason when it was ok to violate 3NF and when it wasn't, so she just blindly followed the rule for years.

 

Same with my wife and traffic laws. Like changing lanes in an intersection. Yes it's against the law but the reason is you might have someone turning right into what they think is an open lane but you change lanes at the same time and cause an accident. So if there is nobody at the intersection it's really not a safety issue. But every time I do it she yells at me.

I don't even know all the normalization factors. I understand normalization and just build what fits for the situation at hand.

[akirby]

I don't even know all the normalization factors. I understand normalization and just build what fits for the situation at hand.

 

All you need to know is if you repeat the same data in multiple places you have to make sure you can update/delete it in all those places. It's not rocket surgery....

[fordmantpw]

 

All you need to know is if you repeat the same data in multiple places you have to make sure you can update/delete it in all those places. It's not rocket surgery....

Exactly! Most DBAs don't get that and just want things completely normalized. Plus, foreign key constraints keep everything in check.

[Stray Kat]

Well you math guru's succeeded in doing to things. Killing this thread and making mortals feel just a little dumber.

 

I don't even know what the heck you guys are talking about! Seriously?

 

Now back to the subject at hand.

 

FORD NEEDS A WORLD CLASS ENGINE IN EVERY CATEGORY!!!

 

No more just good enough stuff. I mean leadership and nothing less.

 

This is a world where second best is the first loser.

 

Having said that this 7.0 is a class 3 to 6 replacement for the V10. Class 7's still is a primarily diesel category, no?

 

The 7.0, if indeed based on the 6.2 WILL DOMINATE any LS based Gm engine and everything else currently on the horizon. It simply has the best basic design to start with.

 

It has a larger bore spacing than both the Gm and FCA V8. Therefore it has the greatest potential for displacement growth.

 

There is no camshaft in the block to interfere with a long stroke crankshaft and/or larger connecting rod big ends.

 

This constant droning and defeatism that the 6.2 is incapable of doing this job is really just poor attitude.

 

The engine block can certainly be tweaked to accommodate heavy truck use. Most of the good stuff is already in place.

 

C'mon guys what's so mysterious about this?

[Bob Rosadini]

Well you math guru's succeeded in doing to things. Killing this thread and making mortals feel just a little dumber.

 

I don't even know what the heck you guys are talking about! Seriously?

 

Now back to the subject at hand.

 

FORD NEEDS A WORLD CLASS ENGINE IN EVERY CATEGORY!!!

 

No more just good enough stuff. I mean leadership and nothing less.

 

This is a world where second best is the first loser.

 

Having said that this 7.0 is a class 3 to 6 replacement for the V10. Class 7's still is a primarily diesel category, no?

 

The 7.0, if indeed based on the 6.2 WILL DOMINATE any LS based Gm engine and everything else currently on the horizon. It simply has the best basic design to start with.

 

It has a larger bore spacing than both the Gm and FCA V8. Therefore it has the greatest potential for displacement growth.

 

There is no camshaft in the block to interfere with a long stroke crankshaft and/or larger connecting rod big ends.

 

This constant droning and defeatism that the 6.2 is incapable of doing this job is really just poor attitude.

 

The engine block can certainly be tweaked to accommodate heavy truck use. Most of the good stuff is already in place.

 

C'mon guys what's so mysterious about this?

Well Stray Kat, thx for getting back on track. IMO class 8 should not be ruled out. Keep in mind you can currently get a 750 at 37,000 lb GVW which is class 8. And as I've previously mentioned, before emissions controls killed gas engine every class 8 builder offered a gasoline option. Not everyone runs the miles to justify the diesel premium, so just keep in mind that some operators need a tandem rear axle for their application so a good gasoline -or gaseous fuel engine has a future,

 

So having said that, how comfortable are you with the 6.2 stretching into class 8? Again, I'm not talking about an 80,000 lb GCW 5 axle highway truck, I'm talking about say a 3 axle vocational truck that might be at 50,000- 60,000 GVW. And again, annual mileage does not support the typical benefit the diesel offers from fuel cost per mile.

[Stray Kat]

I don't think the 6.2 would be adequate all the way to class 8.

 

This is where Ford will have to do some serious soul searching if they want to play this game for real.

 

In a similar way that some presidential administrations gut the military to cook their books leaving the next administration to bite the bullet and rebuild.

 

Ford had this situation with Jack "the knife" Nasser taking out the heavy truck division.

 

If Ford wants this business the time is now but money has got to be spent.

 

My opinion: Cab, chassis and engine should bear the mark of the manufacturer selling them, especially Ford.

 

Ford built this country in many ways. They are an American original, time to act like it!

 

Build a super size gas engine based on the 6.2 design tenants.

[jpd80]

Clear that 6.8 V10 is doing the goods for Ford in Class 6 but defiantly out of puff in Class 7 and forget the Class 8 reach up...

even the 6,7 V8 diesel is a stretch in those classes. So what would Ford really need in Class 7, at least 8.5 or more liters?

[lfeg]

Well you math guru's succeeded in doing to things. Killing this thread and making mortals feel just a little dumber.

 

I don't even know what the heck you guys are talking about! Seriously?

 

Now back to the subject at hand.

 

FORD NEEDS A WORLD CLASS ENGINE IN EVERY CATEGORY!!!

 

No more just good enough stuff. I mean leadership and nothing less.

 

This is a world where second best is the first loser.

 

Having said that this 7.0 is a class 3 to 6 replacement for the V10. Class 7's still is a primarily diesel category, no?

 

The 7.0, if indeed based on the 6.2 WILL DOMINATE any LS based Gm engine and everything else currently on the horizon. It simply has the best basic design to start with.

 

It has a larger bore spacing than both the Gm and FCA V8. Therefore it has the greatest potential for displacement growth.

 

There is no camshaft in the block to interfere with a long stroke crankshaft and/or larger connecting rod big ends.

 

This constant droning and defeatism that the 6.2 is incapable of doing this job is really just poor attitude.

 

The engine block can certainly be tweaked to accommodate heavy truck use. Most of the good stuff is already in place.

 

C'mon guys what's so mysterious about this?

I agree ... to a point. First, any engine developed off of the 6.2 for use in classes 4 through 6 must pass the modern day equivalent of the old 1000 hour test. Commercial service is not just a series of short runs, but sometimes a long duration slog at full rated output. I have seen heads glowing dull red on the exhaust manifold side of the old FTs and SDs. The 6.8 performs well enough, the proposed 7.0 must exceed that. Now, for class 7 and 8, I do not know if the 6.2 architecture can be opened up to the 8 to 9 liter that looks to be the price of admission. And another thought - from the advent of the Ford and Lincoln Y blocks for truck service in the 50s through the SDs and FTs Ford had touted the advantage of "short stroke design" for heavy service - they had a point, especially in today's regulatory regime, better dynamics and lower losses.

[akirby]

FORD NEEDS A WORLD CLASS ENGINE IN EVERY CATEGORY!!!

 

Even if that category isn't profitable?

[Stray Kat]

Even if that category isn't profitable?

Correction, "every category that they choose to compete in".

 

Thanks for helping me make my point more clear.

[edselford]

Interesting discussion on gas engines for class 4/5/6/7 commercial trucks. Ford use to use the Lincoln Y block in their commercial trucks. I think they were 279, 302 and 332 cubic inches. These were replaced by the Ford Super Duty 401, 477 and 534 V8 gas engines. Many of these were replaced by the Ford FT series, which was a heavy duty truck version of the FE series on the class 6 and low end of the class 7. I think these were a 391, 361 cubic inches V8's.

 

I think the thing sparking interest in gas engine in class 4 thru 6 is alternative fuels like propane and LPG. But again as someone else has said, anything that happens has to be justified financially which is very difficult to do when you are talking about 165,000 units for the entire industry for class 6 and 7.

 

Yes the 6.2 archetecture at a manufacturing plant level could reach up to 7 liters and even to about 470 cubic inches (7.7 liters) if the cylinder block is redesigned to have about a 10" deck height and CGI is used for the block material instead of grey iron. Will Ford do both a 7.0 liter and a 7.7 liter? I guess we need to waite and see.

 

Edselford

[MGolden]

How big could the 6.7 scorpion block go?

[Stray Kat]

How big could the 6.7 scorpion block go?

Interesting thought.