Jump to content

Another new V8 ?


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Stray Kat said:

What it it’s a DOHC 4V V8 based on the 6.2 Raptor engine? Can you imagine??

 

That ☝️would be the “doomsday” engine Ford could use to send a message heard ‘round the world. 

Fingers crossed.  It’s like waiting for Christmas to open presents as a kid.

I’m hoping that is what it is.  Specific output of the voodo V8 with more displacement.  700hp naturally aspirated.  Otherwise, I’d consider it redundant in the lineup.    The coyote has naturally aspirated up to 500hp covered and the predator and HO 3.5EB the 650hp to 750+ boosted.  The specific output of the 6.8L would need to be significantly greater than than what can be obtained with the 7.3L to offset the displacement deficit.  I’m thinking at least 85hp/L, based on the 6.4L hemi and 6.2L Corvette engines.  A 600+hp naturally aspirated motor would fit nicely between the Coyote (and 7.3L) and the predator.  Get the specific output up to  100+ (voodoo territory) and you have a naturally aspirated hellcat competitor.  Shouldn’t cost much more than the Coyote to build and be lighter weight than the predator or super charged 7.3L.  Aftermarket tuners could have a field day boosting that motor.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sevensecondsuv said:

The only thing better would be some sort of 4v V10 or V12 (with a proper 72 or 60 degree block, none of that split pin or odd-fire nonsense to fit it in a 90 degree block).  Ford has had the engineering 80% complete and the various pieces laying around thanks to the mod program for 25 years now.  Please Ford please give us one last pinnacle ICE!

Or 2 ecoboost v6s to make a 60 degree v12.  It’s not like Ford didn’t do that with the duratech for Aston Martin.  7L 1300+ Hp using two engines from a GT.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, fuzzymoomoo said:


In the unlikely event they do that there's a zero chance it would have more cylinders than 8. There's really nothing to put something bigger in that's not a truck. 

Ford makes something other than trucks? :) 

 

The inline 6 is making a comeback.  A v12 wouldn’t be that much longer.  The nano and coyote have narrow bore spacing which would facilitate it.  I think that would be a long shot.  A V8 sharing dimensions with either the outgoing 6.2 And/or 7.3L is what it will likely be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

If the new 6.8 V8 will stabilize volumes at Windsor Engine Plant, it would have to pick up the volumes lost on the current 5.0 V8 due to the 3.5 Ecoboost!

Just special Mustang and special F150 volumes on a 6.8 would be very low not enough to get past the bean counters.

Is Ford looking at an alternative to ecoboost engines on F150 and Expedition/Navigator vehicles?

I could see the 6.8 replacing the 3.5 ecoboost and a smaller 5.5 version replacing the 5.0 with great cost reduction opportunities!

what do you guys and gal think?

edselford

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, edselford said:

If the new 6.8 V8 will stabilize volumes at Windsor Engine Plant, it would have to pick up the volumes lost on the current 5.0 V8 due to the 3.5 Ecoboost!

Just special Mustang and special F150 volumes on a 6.8 would be very low not enough to get past the bean counters.

Is Ford looking at an alternative to ecoboost engines on F150 and Expedition/Navigator vehicles?

I could see the 6.8 replacing the 3.5 ecoboost and a smaller 5.5 version replacing the 5.0 with great cost reduction opportunities!

what do you guys and gal think?

edselford

Ford doesnt need a motor smaller than the 5.0 as far as v8s go.the 5.0 should be replaced with a new 351 motor.Kick that 6.8 up to a 7.0 then you havd a BOSS 429,2 valve,then you put 32v heads on it for the next GT500!!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, mustang let back said:

Ford doesnt need a motor smaller than the 5.0 as far as v8s go.the 5.0 should be replaced with a new 351 motor.Kick that 6.8 up to a 7.0 then you havd a BOSS 429,2 valve,then you put 32v heads on it for the next GT500!!

Fingers crossed the 6.8 is a Dohc 32v naturally aspirated monster.  Just use the 7.3 for low cost applications.

They do need a motor smaller than the 5.0.  Something around 4.0L with twin turbos and 8 cylinders.  That’s what should be in the top F150, expedition and navigator.  550-600+ hp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My company just bought a new f150 hybrid. After driving it for a day, i dont believe superduty needs large gas v8's. It is REALLY impressive.  The new 7.3 is fantastic, its my favorite truck engine for sure,  but i believe we will see hydrids in the future for both performance and fuel economy reasons. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, MGolden said:

My company just bought a new f150 hybrid. After driving it for a day, i dont believe superduty needs large gas v8's. It is REALLY impressive.  The new 7.3 is fantastic, its my favorite truck engine for sure,  but i believe we will see hydrids in the future for both performance and fuel economy reasons. 

 

 

For situations where the truck is constantly loaded or towing heavy trailers, a larger capacity engine is needed for greater fuel efficiency under those loaded situations. The turbos go rich and just drink fuel, even the 5.0 is a better tow engine than the 3.5 EB. However, if you’re in constant stop go situations then the hybrid will be better than the above

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 6.2 block machining line could be retooled to make an aluminum block 6.8! It’s easier to machine aluminum, increase machining speeds and less stress on equipment compared to cast iron or CGI.

I do remember the block was at a 239mm deck height 9.409”)

I estimate a bore of 105.1 mm and a stroke of 98 mm to allow for supercharging on some applications without deflection issues.

edselford

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/15/2020 at 12:21 PM, fuzzymoomoo said:

 


There's a video I saw of someone grenading their GT500 engine after adding a ton of boost but not touching the bottom end at all. I forgot the final power number but it was well into 4 figures. 

 

Stang Mode, connecting rod failure.   it didn't blow because of the engine's weakness though, marginal fuel system with major lean spikes on the upshifts and Palm Beach Dyno believes its a good idea to command 30* spark advance in the 4200 lb car that's making repeated long, high speed/high load back-to-back-to-back-to-back interstate pulls.  

 

The 5.2 has more than proven able to hold over 1000 rwhp reliably given a more conservative tune and a better/more technically informed owner. 

 

No engine is idiot proof @ 1000 rwhp

 

On pump E that car should not have had more than 18 degrees commanded and it should have been given some cool down periods between those long, sustained interstate pulls.  

 

This was a very obvious example of user error.

Edited by ESP08
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, blksn8k2 said:

I haven't read every post in this thread and maybe this has been discussed already but is the 6.8L being planned as a replacement for the 6.2L SOHC? That would probably make too much sense...

No, the 6.2 is expected to end sometime after 2022 when the plant closes.

It looks like the 7.3 gets similar economy as the 6.2 when unloaded cruise  much better when loaded,

the 7.3 is just a better engine all round for those truck applications.

The 6.8 is based on the 7.3 architecture but intended for HP including supercharged applications.

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I don't get is why they're decreasing displacement to make more power, unless the cylinder walls are too thin on the 7.3... why not make an aluminum block 7.3? We specialize in the older carbed engines at my shop and we've never seen a reason to not have more displacement in various dyno testing with different combinations (to a limit based on what you can fit in the block without hurting reliability). I'm sure it'll be badass either way, and plan on a 7.3 with some boost in one of my personal projects I'm starting on about mid summer. Guess it's still a wait and see for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Captainp4 said:

What I don't get is why they're decreasing displacement to make more power, unless the cylinder walls are too thin on the 7.3... why not make an aluminum block 7.3? We specialize in the older carbed engines at my shop and we've never seen a reason to not have more displacement in various dyno testing with different combinations (to a limit based on what you can fit in the block without hurting reliability). I'm sure it'll be badass either way, and plan on a 7.3 with some boost in one of my personal projects I'm starting on about mid summer. Guess it's still a wait and see for now.

If the are keeping the same bore and going to a shorter stroke it allows you to run higher RPM's with less stress on the rotational components. Adding forced induction makes up for the lower torque inherent in a shorter stroke.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, jpd80 said:

No, the 6.2 is expected to end sometime after 2022 when the plant closes.

It looks like the 7.3 gets similar economy as the 6.2 when unloaded cruise  much better when loaded,

the 7.3 is just a better engine all round for those truck applications.

The 6.8 is based on the 7.3 architecture but intended for HP including supercharged applications.

 

The reason I asked that is that it would seem the limited HP uses of the 6.8L would suggest that it would be a fairly low volume engine. Using a naturally aspirated version as the base engine in the Super Duty and perhaps even the higher trim models of the F-150 would kill at least two birds with one stone...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, jpd80 said:

No, the 6.2 is expected to end sometime after 2022 when the plant closes.

It looks like the 7.3 gets similar economy as the 6.2 when unloaded cruise  much better when loaded,

the 7.3 is just a better engine all round for those truck applications.

The 6.8 is based on the 7.3 architecture but intended for HP including supercharged applications.

I'm still wondering why the 7.3L is de-tuned so much for the E-Series.

 

That, and when are they going to bring back the E450 chassis ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Flying68 said:

If the are keeping the same bore and going to a shorter stroke it allows you to run higher RPM's with less stress on the rotational components. Adding forced induction makes up for the lower torque inherent in a shorter stroke.

One of the main design goals for the 7.3L was better low end torque/hp.  You are going backwards.

 

Modern engine machining lines can machine engines with different deck heights and bores.  The most important thing is to keep the bore spacing the same.

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...