Broncofan7 Posted October 31, 2020 Share Posted October 31, 2020 One big question in my mind: What happens to the Coyote? I picture the 6.8 being a more exclusive engine only in the Shelbies or Raptors, not replacing the 5.0 in the GT. I could see the F-150 losing the 5.0, but is there really enough volume to produce it solely for the Mustang? Interesting nonetheless... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted October 31, 2020 Share Posted October 31, 2020 41 minutes ago, Broncofan7 said: One big question in my mind: What happens to the Coyote? I picture the 6.8 being a more exclusive engine only in the Shelbies or Raptors, not replacing the 5.0 in the GT. I could see the F-150 losing the 5.0, but is there really enough volume to produce it solely for the Mustang? Interesting nonetheless... The '21 Coyote now has cylinder deactivation, so it's not going anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edselford Posted October 31, 2020 Share Posted October 31, 2020 Assume the 7.3 V8 bore centers are the same as the old 6.2? If so, Ford could use its forged crankshaft Of 95 mm and put it with a bore of 107 mm and get 6.833 liter V8 or 417 cubic inch. I don’t know if the would use the arc spray on iron or cylinder liners though edselford 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncofan7 Posted October 31, 2020 Share Posted October 31, 2020 1 hour ago, jpd80 said: The '21 Coyote now has cylinder deactivation, so it's not going anywhere. Forgot about that when writing that post. Yeah, the Coyote is staying. And the F-150 could have a bunch of V-8 engine options. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 1 hour ago, Broncofan7 said: Forgot about that when writing that post. Yeah, the Coyote is staying. And the F-150 could have a bunch of V-8 engine options. My bet is it replaces the 3.5eb as the top tier engine. DOHC, two turbos, an intercooler, and direct injection fuel system makes for an expensive engine for a mass market model. Ford probably realized they could deliver the same performance with a big pushrod engine at a fraction of the powertrain unit cost. And from what I hear about 3.5eb, a 6.8 would probably deliver the same fuel economy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broncofan7 Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 44 minutes ago, Sevensecondsuv said: My bet is it replaces the 3.5eb as the top tier engine. DOHC, two turbos, an intercooler, and direct injection fuel system makes for an expensive engine for a mass market model. Ford probably realized they could deliver the same performance with a big pushrod engine at a fraction of the powertrain unit cost. And from what I hear about 3.5eb, a 6.8 would probably deliver the same fuel economy. I thought about that, but I just do not see Ford leaving the 3.5L EB as a top engine because of how much time and effort they have spent with it over the past decade. But, I don't know for sure of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edselford Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 Some of this stuff does not make sense. If ford keeps the 3.5 ecoboost in the F150, the volumes would be so low on the 6.8 that ford could not justify the validation of the 6.8 V8 on the f150? It might be that the 6.8 is the new base engine on the F250/F350 with the 7.3 as an option? This would be a “stable volume” cylinder deactivation on a pushrod V8 is less expensive and less complicated than an overhead cam engine (6.2 boss versus 7.3 derivative) edselford Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 3 hours ago, edselford said: Some of this stuff does not make sense. If ford keeps the 3.5 ecoboost in the F150, the volumes would be so low on the 6.8 that ford could not justify the validation of the 6.8 V8 on the f150? It might be that the 6.8 is the new base engine on the F250/F350 with the 7.3 as an option? This would be a “stable volume” cylinder deactivation on a pushrod V8 is less expensive and less complicated than an overhead cam engine (6.2 boss versus 7.3 derivative) edselford The 6.8 is for specials like F-150 Raptor and Shelby Mustang 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 A possible 6.8L derivative of the Windsor big block would work in applications other than F-Series....E-Series, MD line, stripped chassis, stationary powerplant applications. etc, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 19 minutes ago, twintornados said: A possible 6.8L derivative of the Windsor big block would work in applications other than F-Series....E-Series, MD line, stripped chassis, stationary powerplant applications. etc, etc. I don't see the 6.8 and 7.3 going in the same product. 7.3 is a cast iron truck engine. I'm guessing the 6.8 will have an aluminum block and the reduced displacement will be entirely from a shorter stroke. This will move the powerband upwards by about 500 rpm while also letting it rev to 6500+. So two entirely different engines for different applications. My guess is the naturally aspirated 6.8 will be about 500 hp and will replace the 3.5eb above the coyote in F150. It'll also appear in the expedition and navigator (either standard or above coyote). It'll be the base engine in Raptor, with a 750-800 hp supercharged version optional. The naturally aspirated 6.8 will be limited to special editions of the mustang while the standard GT will get the improved coyote, and the GT500 will share the supercharged version from the raptor. I don't see the 6.8 going into F250/350. If ford does a smaller V8 in the 250/350 and E-series, I would think it's gotta be a de-bored / de-stroked iron block godzilla at about 5.5-6.0L displacement. A 5.5L (exactly 3/4 of a 7.3L) cast iron straight-6 or V6 version of godzilla would also make a ton of sense for a base engine in fleet F250s, E series, and larger Transits, but I'm not sure how high on Fords R&D priority list such an animal would be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slemke Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 4 minutes ago, Sevensecondsuv said: I don't see the 6.8 and 7.3 going in the same product. 7.3 is a cast iron truck engine. I'm guessing the 6.8 will have an aluminum block and the reduced displacement will be entirely from a shorter stroke. This will move the powerband upwards by about 500 rpm while also letting it rev to 6500+. So two entirely different engines for different applications. My guess is the naturally aspirated 6.8 will be about 500 hp and will replace the 3.5eb above the coyote in F150. It'll also appear in the expedition and navigator (either standard or above coyote). It'll be the base engine in Raptor, with a 750-800 hp supercharged version optional. The naturally aspirated 6.8 will be limited to special editions of the mustang while the standard GT will get the improved coyote, and the GT500 will share the supercharged version from the raptor. I don't see the 6.8 going into F250/350. If ford does a smaller V8 in the 250/350 and E-series, I would think it's gotta be a de-bored / de-stroked iron block godzilla at about 5.5-6.0L displacement. A 5.5L (exactly 3/4 of a 7.3L) cast iron straight-6 or V6 version of godzilla would also make a ton of sense for a base engine in fleet F250s, E series, and larger Transits, but I'm not sure how high on Fords R&D priority list such an animal would be. While I agree that the 6.8 and 7.3 will be for different applications, I don’t see the 6.8 replacing the coyote or 3.5l eb. cafe is applicable for under 8500lbs. The 3.5l eb powerboost is the top engine in the Non-raptor F-150 and will likely remain so. As far as additional engines to cover the market, I think a ~4.0l ecoboost v8 would be a nice addition for Navigator and F-150. Something to line up with the Germans and above offerings from GM and Fca. I just don’t see it as a high enough priority to get the necessary development dollars. An in-line 6 hurricane/boss/Godzilla as mentioned is another candidate whenever Ford has some development dollars that need spending. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 (edited) I go back to what Jerry Dias said when asked what applications the 6.8 would be used in? His reply was derivatives of F150 and Mustang, that's code for Raptor and Shelby Mustang. Ford has already shown it's hand in E-Series with the 7.3 being available in different power levels, that's a lot easier and costs less to do than changing crank, rods and pistons. I think that the 6.8 as a HP crate engine would have a massive following, an engine that could be used in a lot of repower applications in lots of vehicles due to the compact external dimensions? Edited November 1, 2020 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, jpd80 said: I go back to what Jerry Dias said when asked what applications the 6.8 would be used in? His reply was derivatives of F150 and Mustang, that's code for Raptor and Shelby Mustang. Ford has already shown it's hand in E-Series with the 7.3 being available in different power levels, that's a lot easier and costs less to do than changing crank, rods and pistons. Anyone hear exactly how they do it? Short of a different cam, about the only thing I can think of is a much smaller throttle body or simply a spark/fuel cut at 4000 rpm. In either case, why bother? Edited November 1, 2020 by Sevensecondsuv Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Sevensecondsuv said: Anyone hear exactly how they do it? Short of a different cam, about the only thing I can think of is a much smaller throttle body or simply a spark/fuel cut at 4000 rpm. In either case, why bother? Giving up power and torque for greater fuel efficiency under load. It's basically an electronic tune that extends the 14.7:1 mixtures and clips the top end HP. Edited November 1, 2020 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 32 minutes ago, jpd80 said: Giving up power and torque for greater fuel efficiency under load. It's basically an electronic tune that extends the 14.7:1 mixtures and clips the top end HP. So it's probably a smaller throttle body or simply doesn't open it as far since everything is electronic throttle nowadays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 43 minutes ago, jpd80 said: I go back to what Jerry Dias said when asked what applications the 6.8 would be used in? His reply was derivatives of F150 and Mustang, that's code for Raptor and Shelby Mustang. Well a naturally aspirated 6.8 would barely move the needle from the current 3.5eb raptor. So clearly we'd be talking about a supercharged 6.8 in Raptor and Shelby. You may be right and that's the only 6.8 coming. I tend to think there'll be a naturally aspirated version too, if only to increase volume. This is where I see top level of F150 as a potential application. Also the expedition is screaming for this engine (and then also offer the electric F150 drivetrain as an option). Yes a small V8 ecoboost w/hybrid would be more correct for Navigator, but obviously that would be a ton of engineering with very little volume. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 1, 2020 Share Posted November 1, 2020 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Sevensecondsuv said: Well a naturally aspirated 6.8 would barely move the needle from the current 3.5eb raptor. So clearly we'd be talking about a supercharged 6.8 in Raptor and Shelby. You may be right and that's the only 6.8 coming. I tend to think there'll be a naturally aspirated version too, if only to increase volume. This is where I see top level of F150 as a potential application. Also the expedition is screaming for this engine (and then also offer the electric F150 drivetrain as an option). Yes a small V8 ecoboost w/hybrid would be more correct for Navigator, but obviously that would be a ton of engineering with very little volume. Think of the 6.8 this way, naturally aspirated it would be about 500 Up/500 lb ft and easy 750 HP Supercharged. They're ideal for Raptor and Shelby Mustang but CAFE prevents or disuades wider use than those specials. Edited November 1, 2020 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 2 hours ago, jpd80 said: Think of the 6.8 this way, naturally aspirated it would be about 500 Up/500 lb ft and easy 750 HP Supercharged. They're ideal for Raptor and Shelby Mustang but CAFE prevents or disuades wider use than those specials. How do the electric F150 and Mach E affect CAFE scores? Perhaps those are making room for a big atmo engine option in the CAFE formula? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 8 minutes ago, Sevensecondsuv said: How do the electric F150 and Mach E affect CAFE scores? Perhaps those are making room for a big atmo engine option in the CAFE formula? Possibly but the way they calculate the fleet average economy using the inverse mean (add all gallons/Mile and then average) stops manufacturers selling lots of thirsty engines and then trying to cover that with super cefficient versions. It is possible that the electric F150 can fully offset a 6.8 insider use but i don't think that Ford will do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 30 minutes ago, jpd80 said: Possibly but the way they calculate the fleet average economy using the inverse mean (add all gallons/Mile and then average) stops manufacturers selling lots of thirsty engines and then trying to cover that with super cefficient versions. It is possible that the electric F150 can fully offset a 6.8 insider use but i don't think that Ford will do that. And obviously we're talking CAFE numbers. Real world, the 3.5eb and 5.0 coyote are about even in fuel economy based on my non-scientific average of several dozen trucks. Properly engineered, a 6.8L powertrain would only be marginally worse. Again, CAFE numbers are different.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpvbs Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 (edited) Just thinking out loud. If Ford has decided a very large pushrod V8 is something they want for Mustang/F150, why would they decide to go with a smaller bore/destroked 7.3? If you were going to go big, why not just go with an alloy 7.3? Go big or go home. Was that extra .5l just a bridge too far? That makes me think the idea that the 6.8 being an upgraded 6.2 makes sense. I believe when the 6.2 was released the word was they engineered it to go up to 7.0l. A coyote-ized 6.8 could reasonably make 600+ hp NA. Edited November 2, 2020 by jpvbs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 1 hour ago, jpvbs said: Just thinking out loud. If Ford has decided a very large pushrod V8 is something they want for Mustang/F150, why would they decide to go with a smaller bore/destroked 7.3? If you were going to go big, why not just go with an alloy 7.3? Go big or go home. Was that extra .5l just a bridge too far? That makes me think the idea that the 6.8 being an upgraded 6.2 makes sense. I believe when the 6.2 was released the word was they engineered it to go up to 7.0l. A coyote-ized 6.8 could reasonably make 600+ hp NA. The 6.2 ends in about a years time, the 6.8 is Godzilla based with a shorter throw crank like the 6.2. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 I will go on record here and predict that you will never, ever see a 6.8L motor in the Mustang. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 2 minutes ago, twintornados said: I will go on record here and predict that you will never, ever see a 6.8L motor in the Mustang. I already said that but I think we're both wrong. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevensecondsuv Posted November 2, 2020 Share Posted November 2, 2020 (edited) I don't understand why everyone is so afraid of big displacement. Gas engines run in a very tight range of air/fuel ratio and BSFC (brake specific fuel consumption). I.e. it's going to take a relatively constant amount of fuel to make X horsepower whether you're using a 2.0L, 5.0L or 8.0L engine. In a lot of ways boost, rpm, and displacement all achieve the same thing: capability for more power. A smaller turbocharged engine has drawbacks in complication, unit cost, and requires a lower air-fuel ratio under boost. A larger displacement engine has higher pumping losses when running at low output. A medium engine like the 5.0 can make the same power as a 7.0L but is going to have to spin approximately 40% faster to move air (and therefore produce power) at the same rate and will have a softer torque curve down low as a result. However, with 10 speed transmissions, cylinder deactivation, variable valve timing, computational fluid dynamics-assisted design of combustion chambers, and electronic throttle-based ECM control strategies, the drawbacks to all three categories of engines can be minimized relative to the others. So to me, it really comes down to how to deliver the desired torque and power curves at the lowest unit cost and with acceptable fuel economy and emissions. It's possible Ford did the math and decided 6.8L was the best answer for upper levels of mustang, F150, and SUVs. We'll find out soon enough... Edited November 2, 2020 by Sevensecondsuv 2 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.