Jump to content
  • Custom Search


Stray Kat

New Ford engine discussion thread.

Recommended Posts

Guys I realize it's late summer and news comes slow this time of year, but I am chomping at the bit to see what's next in Ford's engine arsenal.

 

Several months ago we got teased with news of a 4.8 V8 engine and later a 7.0 V8 truck engine.

 

More recently the 3.0 Lion diesel has been brought to the fore as the next big thing in light truck power.

 

My question is, is there any news on these fronts? Do we know any more than just displacement on the two gasser V8's? Have we heard of the applications for these new engines?

 

Sorry if I am jumping the gun but to tell you the truth, for my own satisfaction I am stirring the pot and hopefully creating a spot to place information about these exciting new engines.

 

Love to hear from ya....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? You don't like any 3-valvers? Gosh you get the breathing of a 4 valve with the simplicity of a 2 valve.

 

I think Ford delivers those engines with a VERY soft tune. The drive by wire gas pedal is a major culprit in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 4.8 V8 was a misread of the slight change to bore / stroke of the upgraded 5.0 Coyote.

 

A 3-valve head done properly on the 6.2 would add significantly to power and torque especially considering the bigger bore

of the 6.2 timmediately allowing much larger valves than used on the small biore MOD motors.

 

Any aversion people. have to 3-valve mods was overcome with the delivery of the 2008 4.6 Mustang and spark plug issue cure.

Some have long memories regarding stuck,broken spark plugs in early 5.4 3V F150s but that issue was overcome years ago.

The current 6.8 3V is a gem of and engine and doing well in Medium Duty.

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the spark plug issue cast a pall on that engine from the start but that's been overcome.

 

Three valve SOHC engines make sense to my simple mind in high volume applications.

 

Remember the research Jim Feuling did with 3 valve heads and their combustion chambers?

 

If I remember correctly he built some heads for the BBC block and he came up with diesel like torque and very good fuel efficiency.

 

This bears out on the Ford 3 valve V10 that has earned a pretty darn good reputation in medium truck applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys I realize it's late summer and news comes slow this time of year, but I am chomping at the bit to see what's next in Ford's engine arsenal.

 

Several months ago we got teased with news of a 4.8 V8 engine and later a 7.0 V8 truck engine.

 

More recently the 3.0 Lion diesel has been brought to the fore as the next big thing in light truck power.

 

My question is, is there any news on these fronts? Do we know any more than just displacement on the two gasser V8's? Have we heard of the applications for these new engines?

 

Sorry if I am jumping the gun but to tell you the truth, for my own satisfaction I am stirring the pot and hopefully creating a spot to place information about these exciting new engines.

 

Love to hear from ya....

 

Job #1 for the 3.0 diesel is February 26th 2018. It will only be built in Dearborn. I wouldn't expect to see them on the lots until April at the earliest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 4.8 V8 was a misread of the slight change to bore / stroke of the upgraded 5.0 Coyote.

 

 

 

What seems to have been lost in the shuffle is the fact that the 2018 5.0L Coyote is now using the PTWA technology on the cylinder bores. IMO this is a major step in that Ford now has a relatively high volume engine using PTWA. It would be interesting to know the internal history behind why it has taken this long to incorporate PTWA into engines destined for something more than just low volume, niche performance cars. After all, it was first introduced on the 2011 5.4L aluminum block V8 in the GT500 Mustang. This SAE article was written in 2010.

 

http://articles.sae.org/7624/

 

What were the issues? Was it all about controlling the cost of the application process or was there more to it than that? The first engine blocks were outsourced from casting supplier Honsel before the process was brought in-house to Essex for the 2015 GT350 5.2L Voodoo V8.

 

http://wardsauto.com/technology/real-secret-behind-ford-s-gt350-mustang-engine

 

I assume Essex is doing the spray bore process on the 2018 F-150 and Mustang GT 5.0L V8s.

 

What other engines, if any, does Ford plan to use this technology on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That PTWA tech is amazing to me. As a Ford Flathead enthusiast I can imagine that technology saving some otherwise junk blocks.

 

I have heard PTWA is starting to enter the remanufacturing side of things.

 

Anyways I am constantly amazed at how the Coyote engine just keeps getting better and better and taking the measure of the much larger displacement V8's from Gm Mopar and even the Japanese V8's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of the 3.0 Lion diesel I'm interested to know if they share bell housing flange patterns with other Ford engines.

 

Might not make a difference to the average person but myself I hope Ford has finally learned to standardize more hard points like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That PTWA tech is amazing to me. As a Ford Flathead enthusiast I can imagine that technology saving some otherwise junk blocks.

 

I have heard PTWA is starting to enter the remanufacturing side of things.

 

Anyways I am constantly amazed at how the Coyote engine just keeps getting better and better and taking the measure of the much larger displacement V8's from Gm Mopar and even the Japanese V8's.

 

Did you know that Nissan was actually the first manufacturer to use PTWA on a production engine? They used it on the twin-turbo V6 in the GT-R under the Ford/Flame Spray patents. I believe BMW is also using it on one their new 5-Series engines and Caterpillar is using it for repairing worn engine blocks.

 

http://capitalremanexchange.com/plasma-transferred-wire-arc-welding-technology/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Did you know that Nissan was actually the first manufacturer to use PTWA on a production engine? They used it on the twin-turbo V6 in the GT-R under the Ford/Flame Spray patents. I believe BMW is also using it on one their new 5-Series engines and Caterpillar is using it for repairing worn engine blocks.

 

http://capitalremanexchange.com/plasma-transferred-wire-arc-welding-technology/

Nissan was using PTWA in GTR at the time Ford was using it in the GT500, I don't know whether Nissan

kicked on and used it rlsewhere but Ford now uses it in all of its 5.0 V8s.for Mustang and F150.

 

and that's currently around 20,000 engines a month.

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Job #1 for the 3.0 diesel is February 26th 2018. It will only be built in Dearborn. I wouldn't expect to see them on the lots until April at the earliest.

.

What a coincidence...I am going to be in the market for a new vehicle by then....things that make you go, "Hmmmmmm."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, if the 4.8 liter V8 comes to be, it would mark the return of an old displacement - the 292.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What if the 4.8 turns out to be a SOHC 3 valve variant and becomes the F150 V8 option?

 

That would be something. Could be a much lower build cost engine if done correctly and challenge the 5.3 Gm choice in performance.

 

So what is it with the 4.8? Is that an unsubstantiated rumor, a misunderstanding or just a ploy to throw the competition off?

 

Is a 4.8 really coming to market or am I mistaken?

 

If this is real one must really wonder what the applications might be.

 

Base Mustang V8, V8 option for the F150 or the Expy and Navigator SUV's.

 

Or maybe just maybe (and I'm being salacious here) it's a Bronco/ Ranger "nano" V8 positioned to dominate the Gm mid sized trucks and the Jeep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt that we'll see another new variation of a base V8, the overwhelming acceptance

of Ecoboost engines and their torque rich bottom end has all but ended the need for V8s

in certain applications...could the next move for Ford be PTWA on I-4s and V6s?

 

I wonder if the strength of PTWA cylinders is now much stronger than those thin cast in liners

that Ford previously used in the 5.0 Coyote, maybe that's the key to increasing durability for

other applications like using alloy blocks in Super Duty (always seen as a no no)

 

Also,

I think 3V is done in F150 and other applications, now that Ford has 4V , TiVCT and PFDI

pretty much standard in F150 and Mustang

 

But while 3V may be done in most applications, I suspect the 6.2 could really profit from

the better low end port velocity and added torque that comes with it.

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think the main bearing webbing in the cylinder block would be a more important factor than the strength of the cylinder liners. Back in the day most high performance Ford V8 blocks had beefier main webs and/or bearing caps. The 427 FE was also one of the first engines to use cross-bolted main bearing caps. The weak link in the old pushrod 5.0L V8 was the main bearing webs which were prone to cracking and failure under high horsepower loads. Why did Ford go with a CGI block in conjunction with an aluminum skirt on the 2.7L Nano V6? I doubt it was for weight savings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think the main bearing webbing in the cylinder block would be a more important factor than the strength of the cylinder liners. Back in the day most high performance Ford V8 blocks had beefier main webs and/or bearing caps. The 427 FE was also one of the first engines to use cross-bolted main bearing caps. The weak link in the old pushrod 5.0L V8 was the main bearing webs which were prone to cracking and failure under high horsepower loads.

Main bearing webs was one of the areas upgraded in Coyote, thin cylinder liners cannot withstand high boost without eventually cracking.

 

Why did Ford go with a CGI block in conjunction with an aluminum skirt on the 2.7L Nano V6? I doubt it was for weight savings.

You may as well ask, why did Ford go again with an alloy block for the new upgraded 3.5 Ecoboost,

Ford was trying out mew material like they did with the I.0 I-3 and possibly Dragon I-3 when it arrives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the boosted early Coyotes suffered cylinder wall cracking was due to the cast-in liner. That problem was more a result of a lack support in the deck area.

 

The Coyote is a partially "open deck" design. The later versions have cast in supports around the top of the cylinders. This has eliminated the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the boosted early Coyotes suffered cylinder wall cracking was due to the cast-in liner. That problem was more a result of a lack support in the deck area.

 

The Coyote is a partially "open deck" design. The later versions have cast in supports around the top of the cylinders. This has eliminated the problem.

Just to clarify, I meant more in terms of transition between the older Mod V8 and the Coyote, we saw companies like Koenisegg virtually re-engineer

their blocks because the deck face, main bearing webs and cylinder liners were too thin in early MOD blocks for the boost levels used..

 

If you look at the genesis, there were several paths of progression for the Ford Mods to later versions, the evolution went

basically as follows even though the engines did not necessarily get built in the originators production lines:

 

4.6 --> 5.0 Cammer --> Voodoo

4.6 --> 5.0 Coyote

5.4 -->Shelby Condor 5.4 --> Shelby Trinity 5.8

 

As a rough guide, the low deck was redesigned under two different projects while the high deck was upgraded for the Shelby GT500.

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this is interesting and possibly reveals the future.....

582 HP, 442 lb ft for the Ford racing 5.2 Coyote

There were emission issues with using the GT500 throttle body but
maybe adding PFDI can solve a few of those problems in the future.....

On the other side of that, let's assume that the GT350's throttle body makes both
of these engines 1) emission compliant and 2) around 40 HP less.
Then, we'd still have a 500 HP 5.0 and a 540 HP 5.2....Perfect for future HP Mustangs?

Link to story...

2015-12-12_16-26-27-640x427.jpg

This photo best illustrates exactly how well the GT350 cylinder heads paired with the Cobra Jet intake manifold work on a standard 5.0-liter Coyote engine. The additional 15 cubic inches and half a point of compression is what makes the additional 41 horsepower on the 5.2-liter.

 

2015-12-12_16-26-19-640x427.jpg

 

 

And imagine a similar package on either the 6.2 or that future 7.0 V8...

 

Mmmm I can dream. :)

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current 6.8 3V is a gem of and engine and doing well in Medium Duty.

Sure it is dependable, but fuel economy is not one of its high points.

 

Plus it is more expensive to build than a V8, even a larger displacement V8. Plus, it is simply "old". A lot of technology has gone by.

 

Compare the current 5.0L with one of the 4V 4.6L modular engines. Even though the 5.0L is a direct descendant, it makes a lot more power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What seems to have been lost in the shuffle is the fact that the 2018 5.0L Coyote is now using the PTWA technology on the cylinder bores.

.

.

.

What were the issues?

  • Cost was obviously #1.
  • Consistency of the process, in volume.
  • Possible changes in machining
  • Convincing management that that a non-remanufacturable block is a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have heard PTWA is starting to enter the remanufacturing side of things.

 

I find that hard to believe !

 

Most engine now a day have iron liners. They are easily and cheaply replaced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

  • Convincing management that that a non-remanufacturable block is a good idea.

 

 

Why is it "non-remanufacturable"? There are plenty of articles that state that the PTWA process can be used on many different types of blocks and I would imagine re-spraying a block that was originally sprayed would be one of the least complicated to re-manufacture.

 

The other factor would also seem to be the wear resistance of the cylinder surface. Testing has shown that high mileage PTWA blocks have minimal wear from piston ring contact. Other engine components such as bearings and camshaft drives may not last as long as the cylinder bore surface.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×