Jump to content

New Ford engine discussion thread.


Recommended Posts

The beauty of PTWA I believe is it's adaptability to the process of refurbishing cylinder wall surfaces of worn engines.

 

In my opinion Ford had the best "remanufacturing" program in the business. I hope that this newish technology vaults them out front yet again. Winning!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

of course but perhaps frame of reference here is that while the 6.8 uses significant amounts of fuel,

it delivers a lot more low end torque - up to 100 lb ft more than the 6.2 in the 2,000-3,000 zone.

 

It's an engine brought back from the grave for a new purpose - easy gas sales in F650 and while it's more expensive

to build than a V8, that has to be taken in context of that larger V8 already in existence and paid for. If you're starting

from scratch funding development of a replacement V8, then there's a lot more expense to amortize than just the

parts and machining = especially if the expected volume is on the low side..

 

We know there's a new large V8 coming but also, it's taken ages to get here thanks to business case and up front cost

compared to rebirthing the 6,8 V10.

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 only reason that leaps to mind is the possible difficulty in getting a uniform spray on a damaged PTWA surface. If you do something to create local damage on a PTWA surface (eg, gouge it with a broken ring), can a process that is inherently designed to create a uniform surface deal with a significant imperfection in one area?

 

Or maybe it's just too difficult to machine out the PTWA "sleeve."

 

Then again, I'm not sure why manglement would care about an engine not being remanufacturable in the first place. IIRC, the sleeves in my LS's AJ V8 were cast into the block and couldn't be replaced...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SoonerLS, perhaps its a combination of what you said and there are references that Caterpillar is using PTWA to reclaim parts

so perhaps there's economy in re-manufacturing engines in the near future...which seems at odds with our disposable society.

Perhaps it's just PR to open people's minds to the possibilities...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find that hard to believe !

 

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

 

Truth be told a not of newer-design alloy block engines are not rebuildable, their cast-in iron liners cannot be removed and are just too thin to cut.

 

I suppose it's conceivable that the PTWA process can be re-applied to a used block provided the existing surface is not too worn or damaged.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is it "non-remanufacturable"?

 

The beauty of PTWA I believe is it's adaptability to the process of refurbishing cylinder wall surfaces of worn engines.

COST !

 

In my opinion Ford had the best "remanufacturing" program in the business. I hope that this newish technology vaults them out front yet again. Winning!

Engine re-manufacturing is 100% out sourced. Those folks are not about to spend the money on a PTWA machine !
Link to comment
Share on other sites

COST !Engine re-manufacturing is 100% out sourced. Those folks are not about to spend the money on a PTWA machine !

 

Yes they are called "FAR"s or Ford Authorized Remanufacturer.

 

There are some big players in this program.

 

I'm confident that if Ford says you need PTWA that they would step up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's how I think the 4.8L V8 rumour was started.

 

If you switch to the PTWA liners the aluminum block casting will need reduced bores compared to the cast iron liners to retain the same final displacement. So somebody saw a drawing for the new block casting with the reduced bores, did some math, and deduced a 4.8L Coyote was in the works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

PTWA is a "cousin" of Nikasil which is widely used as a way of re-plating the inside of hydraulic pump cylinders.

One is electroplating, one is welding using plasma transfer tecchnique.

 

They are only "cousins" in respect to their ability to reclaim a surface.

 

Engine re-manufacturing is 100% out sourced. Those folks are not about to spend the money on a PTWA machine !

Just like body shops are not going to invest in aluminum repair tools....

 

Technology moves on and I suspect the buy in cost is now factored into a guaranteed supply contract

so it probably makes sense to a limited number Ford's external contractors to sign up and earn profits.

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I worked in various Ford dealer parts departments for about 25 years so yes I have used them. In my opinion they were excellent.

 

I ask because I never used them (no opinion one way or the other) but I work with a guy that was a Ford dealer tech. for 25 or so years and he wouldn't touch them.

 

My low opinion of 5.4L 3 valves in F-250's came from all the practice I got changing them out prematurely. We get most of our remans from LKQ. I think they are one of Ford's authorized remanufacturers:

 

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1031357-lkq-remanufactured-engine.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We put a Ford Reman 4.6 in our company's Expedition in 2006. The truck had 142K on it (over heated when radiator hose blew and driver kept going). That 1999 Expedition now has 345K on it, and still running strong. No regrets from buying that engine.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey I thought this might be an interesting read on the subject.

 

http://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry.php?entry=FR009

Fred Jones rebuilt the Autolite 4100 "crackerbox" carb on my '66 Galaxie's 390. Literally--there weren't any available, so they had to take in mine as a core to be able to reman it, resulting in me the same carb back from them. (Before it went to Fred Jones I had a lot of trouble with it. I even tried replacing it with a Holley 4bbl, but that POS had a bad habit of dumping gasoline onto the manifold instead of into it...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason that leaps to mind is the possible difficulty in getting a uniform spray on a damaged PTWA surface. If you do something to create local damage on a PTWA surface (eg, gouge it with a broken ring), can a process that is inherently designed to create a uniform surface deal with a significant imperfection in one area?

 

 

 

I think the article sullynd referenced addresses that issue.

 

 

Truth be told a not of newer-design alloy block engines are not rebuildable, their cast-in iron liners cannot be removed and are just too thin to cut.

 

I suppose it's conceivable that the PTWA process can be re-applied to a used block provided the existing surface is not too worn or damaged.

 

Same answer.

 

To go one step further, there may be some misconception about how thick the PTWA "liner" can be made. So far on new aluminum block engines, Ford has purposely sprayed very thin liners as a means of overall engine weight reduction as compared to the same engine with a thicker traditional steel or iron liner. In a world where ounces matter in the effort to improve fuel economy, aluminum bodies and lighter engines make perfect sense.

 

However, if the goal is to refurbish an aluminum engine with a cast-in steel or iron liner or even an old cast iron muscle car block that has been bored to it's limit and the water jackets are too thin, who's to say you can't spray the liner as thick as whatever is necessary to save the block? In the restoration world, saving a "numbers matching" engine block adds considerably to the value of the car, especially on rare and collectible models.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Truth be told a not of newer-design alloy block engines are not rebuildable, their cast-in iron liners cannot be removed and are just too thin to cut.

I am not an expert by a long way, but I don't think liners are ever cut, but they are typically replaceable.

 

A few years ago, I met a gentlemen, friend of a friend, who had recently retired from Ford where he worked as the interface to most of the engine rebuilders who were under contract. They did not like the super-thin liners on the Coyote, but they replaced them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...