2019 Raptor to get 7.0 V8

[RadicalX]

I can't believe Ford is going to go back so far in a misjudged decision like that.

[blwnsmoke]

That would be Sharonville, yes?

 

Original word was that Sharonville would start with 8F57 (Job 1 February) and 10R80 (Job 1 October)

production this year to supplement Livonia and slowly introduce 10R140 over the next year or so..

 

Job 1 for 10R140 was originally slated for August 2019, so they must have sped things up a lot..

I wasn't expecting them to produce it so quickly especially with two other Job #1s this year......

 

Test engines from the 7x plant are expected by the end of the year

but the plant will still be a long way from full production........:LINK

I wonder if they're going to just use the current 10 speed transmission that is in the F154 the raptor with the new motor. That makes sense now that I think about it.. no need to upgrade to the 10r140 in a f150 platform.

[Kev-Mo]

Why? Now that the 10 spd is out, equivalent 5.0L and 3.5eb trucks are neck and neck in most drag race videos. Take the 5.0 and multiply displacement by approx 1.45. I don't think it's very hard to imagine how that would stack up...

Which one wins the race pulling 5000lb trailer up a 7mile 7% grade to 11,000 ft above sea level?

[Sevensecondsuv]

Which one wins the race pulling 5000lb trailer up a 7mile 7% grade to 11,000 ft above sea level?

Probably the ecoboost due to the turbo making up for lost density in the atmosphere. Although if the tune allows 5.0L to run at its peak hp rpm, the 5.0 makes 20 additional hp, so maybe it wouldn't be too far behind. HP is what determines the speed at which a load can be moved up a hill. The benefit with the ecoboost is it would be running 1000-1500 less rpm to make the same power.

 

That said, the exhaust manifolds and hotside of the turbo castings would be glowing red by the time you reached the top of a 7 mile grade with 5000 in tow. Obviously Ford warranties it to be able to do that, but that idea gives me a bad case of the heebie-jeebies! That's well within the creep regime for the materials they're using...

Edited April 27, 2018 by Sevensecondsuv

[bzcat]

Why? Now that the 10 spd is out, equivalent 5.0L and 3.5eb trucks are neck and neck in most drag race videos. Take the 5.0 and multiply displacement by approx 1.45. I don't think it's very hard to imagine how that would stack up...

 

That's not how it works. The relationship between performance and displacement is not linear.

 

Plus there is no way you get the kind of flat torque curve like you get from a turbo charged engine.

[LSchicago]

 

That's not how it works. The relationship between performance and displacement is not linear.

 

Plus there is no way you get the kind of flat torque curve like you get from a turbo charged engine.

The 18 5.0 has a really nice torque curve compared to the older models. Once you boost the 5.0, the Ecoboosts fall back like potatoes anyway......

[fordmantpw]

The 18 5.0 has a really nice torque curve compared to the older models. Once you boost the 5.0, the Ecoboosts fall back like potatoes anyway......

 

You're right, it does make perfect sense to compare stock to non-stock vehicles...

[Sevensecondsuv]

 

That's not how it works. The relationship between performance and displacement is not linear.

 

Plus there is no way you get the kind of flat torque curve like you get from a turbo charged engine.

No, it's not exactly linear but it's a good starting point for a guess. The raptor spec 3.5 is all of 450 hp. The 5.0 in mustang tune is 460. Getting 500 or more out of a 7.3L should be like stink on a pig.

 

And yes, the 3.5eb has a great torque curve due to early onset of boost. The thing is, displacement also makes for a great torque curve. After all, a 3.5 running at twice atmospheric pressure pretty much acts like an equivalent 7.0L. I don't know when the last time you rode in a Ford 460 was, but those came on hard and strong too. And that was in the dark days off carbs and early EFI. A 7.3L in 2020 is going to be a veritable monster. I really see it having no trouble at all beating the current 3.5 in every parameter except gas mileage.

[Kev-Mo]

Probably the ecoboost due to the turbo making up for lost density in the atmosphere. Although if the tune allows 5.0L to run at its peak hp rpm, the 5.0 makes 20 additional hp, so maybe it wouldn't be too far behind. HP is what determines the speed at which a load can be moved up a hill. The benefit with the ecoboost is it would be running 1000-1500 less rpm to make the same power.

 

That said, the exhaust manifolds and hotside of the turbo castings would be glowing red by the time you reached the top of a 7 mile grade with 5000 in tow. Obviously Ford warranties it to be able to do that, but that idea gives me a bad case of the heebie-jeebies! That's well within the creep regime for the materials they're using...

Watch for yourself with 10,000 lbs, It hardly broke a sweat (ground rules of the test say they can't break the 60mph speed limit, but the Ecoboost is the only truck that actually can). The GM 6.2 can't even come close to uphill towing of the Ecoboost

 

Edited April 27, 2018 by Kev-Mo

[Sevensecondsuv]

I have no doubt it performed. But I guarantee you the exhaust upstream of the turbos was emitting light by the end of it. Personally, I'm not comfortable with that.

[fordmantpw]

I have no doubt it performed. But I guarantee you the exhaust upstream of the turbos was emitting light by the end of it. Personally, I'm not comfortable with that.

 

If it is designed to do that and withstand it, then there are no issues with it.

[Kev-Mo]

I have no doubt it performed. But I guarantee you the exhaust upstream of the turbos was emitting light by the end of it. Personally, I'm not comfortable with that.

The good news is; its always pretty cold at 11,000 ft so they cool down quickly

[akirby]

An emotional bias is a distortion in cognition and decision making due to emotional factors. That is, a person will be usually inclined. to believe something that has a positive emotional effect, that gives a pleasant feeling, even if there is evidence to the contrary.

Emotional bias - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotional_bias

[Sevensecondsuv]

Oh please. I'm a mechanical engineer and capable of making my own decisions on such things.

 

Believe it or not, I actually run some turbocharged vehicles myself. I'm not at all adverse to the technology. But I've also witnessed the exhaust manifolds glow when you run them under heavy boost/load for more than a minute or so. And if the exhaust is glowing, you know what else is glowing? The exhaust valves. Yeah, the pieces that get pounded into the exhaust valve seats a couple thousand times per minute. Creep is something that happens to all metals past a certain temperature (about 700 F for typical steel, higher for speciality alloys). It basically means the structure bonding the atoms together lose some of their rigidity, which allows the material to change shape my a very small amount with each load cycle well before the plastic stress range is reached. In reality, this means that loads that would otherwise be easily tolerated by a piece/part without resulting in plastic strain can now change the shape of the part once the temperature exceeds the creep threshold.

 

Again, Ford is willing to slap a warranty on it. That's enough for most people. But also notice that Ford doesn't use this engine in the f250 on up. We all know Ford would love to consolidate the 6.2L applications to the 3.5 if they could get away with it. Since they haven't done that, it indicates that the 3.5 can't take the heavier duty cycle and remain warrantable. Most guys don't drag 5000 lbs up the Ike guantlet with their F-150s, so Fords warranty costs on it remain under control. I certainly wouldn't want a used 3.5 truck that someone did that to though.

 

That said, I'd love to sit down with the Ford powertrain engineers and discuss the details of the truck-app ecoboost engines.

Edited April 27, 2018 by Sevensecondsuv

[Hemiman]

Doesn't the ECM monitor EGT and back off boost and throttle when over temp occurs?

[Sevensecondsuv]

Doesn't the ECM monitor EGT and back off boost and throttle when over temp occurs?

Obviously not to a great extent seeing as how it was able to maintain 60 mph. A 3.5L V6 running low boost would not produce that level of output.

[fordmantpw]

I'm pretty sure Ford's engineers understand this, and that's why they engineer the alloys for those parts to withstand the heat.

 

And that's also likely why they limit which vehicles they put the engines in. The know the capabilities and limits of the engines, and only offer the engines where they feel it can safely meet the usage of the customers. If there's one thing I trust Ford to do right, it's design their truck engines to withstand the abuse any owner can dish out (outside of simple spark plugs of the 3V mods).

[fordmantpw]

Doesn't the ECM monitor EGT and back off boost and throttle when over temp occurs?

 

Yes, it does.

 

Obviously not to a great extent seeing as how it was able to maintain 60 mph. A 3.5L V6 running low boost would not produce that level of output.

 

It does to the extent it is necessary. We don't know what boost that engine was running up the hill, nor how much the boost and throttle were backed off by ECM. We know the ECM will protect the engine, and we know the truck climbed the hill at 60MPH without drama, so conclusions are that the engine can safely tow 9500 lbs up one of the worst hills in the country.

[Sevensecondsuv]

I agree. My point is that dragging a 5000 # trailer up the gauntlet is pretty much the 99th percentile of the 1/2 ton duty cycle design envelope. Since the next step up in duty cycle design (f-250) can't use the 3.5L, operating the 1/2 ton there is really asking a lot of it.

 

Basically, do you really want to be operating at the extreme edge of what the truck was designed for?

 

Of course the naturally aspirated V8s have limitations too that are reflective of their intended application. But the turbo bottling up heat in the exhaust is a unique issue to the 2.7 and 3.5 that the 5.0 doesn't have to worry about.

[Kev-Mo]

Obviously not to a great extent seeing as how it was able to maintain 60 mph. A 3.5L V6 running low boost would not produce that level of output.

 

The operators held it at 60 (test ground rules). It could have gone 75.

Not one V8 has held the speed limit in that test. You can watch all the videos.

 

I live in Colorado I am quite familiar with that hill - I am in awe of that engine. I am sure if it was glowing red they might have mentioned something in the video - to me they were laughing at how easily it was pulling 10K lbs.

Edited April 30, 2018 by Kev-Mo

[Sevensecondsuv]

Somewhere on youtube there is a video of a guy pulling a 13000# camper up that pass in an '02 F250 with the 2v V10. It stayed at 4000 rpm in 2nd gear most of the video but never dropped below 55 mph.

 

My point is, don't dismiss something as big as this new 7.x. The pickup truck world hasn't yet seen a 7+ litre engine with overhead cams and all the latest tech. The closest thing is the old V10 and despite having the same impediments to making power as the 1st gen 4.6/5.4 modulars, it was a pulling machine. The reason for this is displacement.

 

All I'm saying is don't bet against this upcoming 7.x. Especially in raptor spec, it's got all the right ingredients to be a real monster. There's no technical reason it couldn't blow the doors off a 3.5L truck. Just from a marketing standpoint, it doesn't make sense to offer it in the raptor unless it's a substantial upgrade. We aren't going to be disappointed!

[snooter]

Oh please. I'm a mechanical engineer and capable of making my own decisions on such things.

Believe it or not, I actually run some turbocharged vehicles myself. I'm not at all adverse to the technology. But I've also witnessed the exhaust manifolds glow when you run them under heavy boost/load for more than a minute or so. And if the exhaust is glowing, you know what else is glowing? The exhaust valves. Yeah, the pieces that get pounded into the exhaust valve seats a couple thousand times per minute. Creep is something that happens to all metals past a certain temperature (about 700 F for typical steel, higher for speciality alloys). It basically means the structure bonding the atoms together lose some of their rigidity, which allows the material to change shape my a very small amount with each load cycle well before the plastic stress range is reached. In reality, this means that loads that would otherwise be easily tolerated by a piece/part without resulting in plastic strain can now change the shape of the part once the temperature exceeds the creep threshold.

Again, Ford is willing to slap a warranty on it. That's enough for most people. But also notice that Ford doesn't use this engine in the f250 on up. We all know Ford would love to consolidate the 6.2L applications to the 3.5 if they could get away with it. Since they haven't done that, it indicates that the 3.5 can't take the heavier duty cycle and remain warrantable. Most guys don't drag 5000 lbs up the Ike guantlet with their F-150s, so Fords warranty costs on it remain under control. I certainly wouldn't want a used 3.5 truck that someone did that to though.

That said, I'd love to sit down with the Ford powertrain engineers and discuss the details of the truck-app ecoboost engines.

This

[jpd80]

I agree. My point is that dragging a 5000 # trailer up the gauntlet is pretty much the 99th percentile of the 1/2 ton duty cycle design envelope. Since the next step up in duty cycle design (f-250) can't use the 3.5L, operating the 1/2 ton there is really asking a lot of it.

 

Basically, do you really want to be operating at the extreme edge of what the truck was designed for?

 

Of course the naturally aspirated V8s have limitations too that are reflective of their intended application. But the turbo bottling up heat in the exhaust is a unique issue to the 2.7 and 3.5 that the 5.0 doesn't have to worry about.

Some of the videos ive seen of the EB35 towing up Ike Gauntlet, they were actually backing out of the throttle

even the EB27 made a good showing and surprised them how well it towed, Ram Ecodiesel was a long way back

and unable to reach the posted speed limit most of the way.

 

What this comes down to is the available horse power which is actually more torque at higher rpms,

that's why the 5.0 shines in F150, reducing the gear step and increasing HP only made it better.

 

I think there's some videos of max F150 towing that can compare with the F250 6.2 and 6.7 tests,

made me realize that the big fellas are just more comfortable way to go...10R140 in a 6.2 would

make a heck of a difference let alone what's coming with 7x.

 

Re Creep damage to materials used on hot side of the engine, manufacturers have been working

with temperatures under full load of 1200-1300F for years and it exactly due to the duty cycle you

mentioned - Ecoboost is part time power for getting over long hills, not to tow continually under

heavier Class 3 loads - ti's a matter of fuel efficiency as a bigger capacity uses leaner mixtures

for better economy...i know I'm all over the map with this as it's probably a discussion better

left to another thread. Under sustained boost, the EGT is lower than atmo because Ford

uses richer mixtures to avoid detonation, especially those who persist with 87......

 

Final thought, instead of 7x Raptor, what about S/C 5.2...would that be an even better solution?

Edited April 27, 2018 by jpd80

[jpd80]

Somewhere on youtube there is a video of a guy pulling a 13000# camper up that pass in an '02 F250 with the 2v V10. It stayed at 4000 rpm in 2nd gear most of the video but never dropped below 55 mph.

That would be the point of peak horsepower, no?

 

My point is, don't dismiss something as big as this new 7.x. The pickup truck world hasn't yet seen a 7+ litre engine with overhead cams and all the latest tech. The closest thing is the old V10 and despite having the same impediments to making power as the 1st gen 4.6/5.4 modulars, it was a pulling machine. The reason for this is displacement.

Do we know that the 7x will in fact be a DOHC or will it be SOHC in either 2V or 3V?

Also, latest 3.5 EB with PFDI approximates 6.8 3V's low end torque curve but not

fuel efficiency under sustained load.

 

All I'm saying is don't bet against this upcoming 7.x. Especially in raptor spec, it's got all the right ingredients to be a real monster. There's no technical reason it couldn't blow the doors off a 3.5L truck. Just from a marketing standpoint, it doesn't make sense to offer it in the raptor unless it's a substantial upgrade. We aren't going to be disappointed!

It would be nice to see - awesome actually but see what eventuates, ther's been a change of leadership

so maybe Hackett is more on board with this rather than a S/C 5.0...I guess that's more of a Lightning

 

While there's cause to be optimistic, I think it's also important to remain grounded

and understand why Ford does some things but not others that look logical to others..

[RPF]

10R140 has a Job 1 date of August 2019 not 2018.