jpd80 Posted July 3, 2020 Share Posted July 3, 2020 50 minutes ago, Stray Kat said: Fair enough but an open slot won’t be filled by a crushed head gasket? There’s more to the story. Gotta be. No, the slot was easier for Ford to machine than trying to make an accurate void between the cylinders. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted July 3, 2020 Share Posted July 3, 2020 The slot appears to be about .5" deep, if you look at this video at 8:49 Brian Wolfe shows a 7.3L block sliced an inch down from the deck and the slot isn't there. Like I said, you ain't boring that thing! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted July 4, 2020 Share Posted July 4, 2020 5 hours ago, jpd80 said: When I said smaller, I meant a smaller capacity Godzilla to replace the 6.2 Boss, not a reduction in external size. Sorry for any confusion that may have caused. wrong assumption on my part? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 4, 2020 Share Posted July 4, 2020 5 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said: wrong assumption on my part? LOL and then I started thinking about a low deck version of Godzilla.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edselford Posted July 4, 2020 Share Posted July 4, 2020 The slot is probably for coolant flow to keep the top piston ring from failing in the 100 hour/ 100% load dyno test. the design has oil squirters for the underside of the pistons to cool them. In regard to a smaller unit, I could see a 6.3 liter aluminum block version with a deck of around 9” if ford wants to throw everything at it for F150/ Raptor but I doubt it because ecoboost reduces CO2 on average by 15% for a given level of performance and this by itself is very important to ford. Im sure an ecoboost 3.5 is more expensive to manufacture than a 6.2 LT V8 from GM! edselford Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stray Kat Posted July 4, 2020 Share Posted July 4, 2020 20 hours ago, jpd80 said: No, the slot was easier for Ford to machine than trying to make an accurate void between the cylinders. Okay so how does coolant flow through this slot? I’m having a hard time picturing this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 4, 2020 Share Posted July 4, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Stray Kat said: Okay so how does coolant flow through this slot? I’m having a hard time picturing this. From what I gather it doesn't flow through, it's just there to increase the surface area for the coolant to pick up the heat in that area. Edited July 4, 2020 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted July 4, 2020 Share Posted July 4, 2020 (edited) https://performanceparts.ford.com/part/M-6007-73 it would fit nicely in a Corvette, a '57 Belair, a Camaro.... ?? Edited July 4, 2020 by twintornados 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 5, 2020 Share Posted July 5, 2020 3 hours ago, twintornados said: https://performanceparts.ford.com/part/M-6007-73 it would fit nicely in a Corvette, a '57 Belair, a Camaro.... ?? Are you poking the bear or saying it looks like a Chebbie? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted July 5, 2020 Share Posted July 5, 2020 6 hours ago, jpd80 said: Are you poking the bear or saying it looks like a Chebbie? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted July 6, 2020 Share Posted July 6, 2020 On 7/4/2020 at 1:46 PM, jpd80 said: From what I gather it doesn't flow through, it's just there to increase the surface area for the coolant to pick up the heat in that area. I think coolant does actually flow through that slot. It's open to the block water passage on the inboard side, and lines up with a coolant hole in the head on the outboard side. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 9 hours ago, 7Mary3 said: I think coolant does actually flow through that slot. It's open to the block water passage on the inboard side, and lines up with a coolant hole in the head on the outboard side. Good pickup, I think Stray Kat was confused about water flowing "through" as in one side of the block to the other. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edselford Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 Maybe the way ford did the slot, one side open and the other end closed, makes the design more robust and avoids the mess they have with the 2.0 ecoboost. The recent reprogramming of my wife’s 2017 escape, I assume either reduces boost or reduces boost after a short period of time, ie cant really fix the problematic design. I think that 2 liter comes from fords England engine plant. There is a slot machined into the Chrysler/FCA 3.6 V6 all the way across but this engine has not been turbocharged! edselford Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
70 Stang Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 18 minutes ago, edselford said: Maybe the way ford did the slot, one side open and the other end closed, makes the design more robust and avoids the mess they have with the 2.0 ecoboost. The recent reprogramming of my wife’s 2017 escape, I assume either reduces boost or reduces boost after a short period of time, ie cant really fix the problematic design. I think that 2 liter comes from fords England engine plant. There is a slot machined into the Chrysler/FCA 3.6 V6 all the way across but this engine has not been turbocharged! edselford Did you receive a recall for the reprogramming on your Escape? We have a 2017 2.0 Escape also.....don't remember getting anything on this.....don't want to miss anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edselford Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 Yes i think it was build date specific! My wife drives very easily, no wot’s not too much boost on acceleration, easy on the vehicle. It probably never fail with her driving! Me, well that’s another story! edselford 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coupe3w Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 How come the slots weren't needed in cylinder blocks till pretty recently? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 28 minutes ago, coupe3w said: How come the slots weren't needed in cylinder blocks till pretty recently? Obviously they were needed otherwise they wouldn’t be failing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 45 minutes ago, akirby said: Obviously they were needed otherwise they wouldn’t be failing. I thought the slots were the cause of the failures, and revised blocks had drilled coolant passages that were not exposed to the block deck (4 cylinders).. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 1 hour ago, 7Mary3 said: I thought the slots were the cause of the failures, and revised blocks had drilled coolant passages that were not exposed to the block deck (4 cylinders).. To be honest I lost track of the actual issue and resolution. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 I am not 100% sure either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESP08 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 On 7/3/2020 at 4:57 AM, twintornados said: if they were to make a smaller "Godzilla" motor, adjust the stroke and the bore to come out to 5.8L...make it a range topper in F150 and base motor in Super Duty. 7.3L Godzilla bore 4.22 X stroke 3.98 5.8L Windsor bore 4.00 X stroke 3.50 5.8L Godzilla suggested bore 3.75 X stroke 3.75 That would make little sense, since the 6.2 has much better cylinder heads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESP08 Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 On 7/1/2020 at 11:15 AM, 30 OTT 6 said: The canted valve heads are a nice tip of the hat to the Cleveland heads. I'm surprised the el cheapo Ford accountants let that one slide. 7.3 Godzilla has run of the mill inline valve wedge heads. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotRunrGuy Posted July 7, 2020 Share Posted July 7, 2020 5 hours ago, 7Mary3 said: I thought the slots were the cause of the failures, and revised blocks had drilled coolant passages that were not exposed to the block deck (4 cylinders).. Mary, jump to page 3, to see pics of the slot vs the drilled hole. https://blueovalforums.com/forums/index.php?/topic/68329-2018-25k-15l-eb-coolant-loss/&page=3 HRG 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 2 hours ago, HotRunrGuy said: Mary, jump to page 3, to see pics of the slot vs the drilled hole. https://blueovalforums.com/forums/index.php?/topic/68329-2018-25k-15l-eb-coolant-loss/&page=3 HRG Got it, thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 4 hours ago, ESP08 said: That would make little sense, since the 6.2 has much better cylinder heads. The 6.2 is ending in a year or so, Originally, we were shooting the breeze possibilities of a smaller Godzilla, although I suspect that with three power levels, the 7.3 can probably cover all needs. 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.