Another new V8 ?

[theoldwizard]

On 10/31/2020 at 5:40 PM, Broncofan7 said:

One big question in my mind:

 

What happens to the Coyote?

It is going to die, or at least only live on in the "limited production" versions (Voodoo, Predator).  Two valve pushrod is all about cost savings.  As long as it make the power required for the F150/F250, who cares.

 

Everyone has forgotten the history behind the Coyote.  The 6.2L Boss was supposed to be the first of a new family of V8 engines, but the design failed in two areas.  It could not take the heat when tested for Medium Duty trucks and the fuel economy (more specifically, the fuel economy on the little brother) and horsepower did not meet their goals either.  Ford was in a bind as the old 4.6L just wasn't going to "cut the mustard" any longer with the Mustang crowd.  Plus all of this was happening just before the Recession.  The "urban legend" is that a bunch of engine guys convinced management to "give them a shot" at improving the Modular.  With the requirements that they reuse as much of the tooling as possible (so same bore spacing and roughly the same bore) they were given the green light.

 

Most of the improvements came from things racer has already tried and were proven.  Tens of thousands of hours of computer time using Ford proprietary "flow modeling" software were used for designing a new "clean sheet" head.  We all know the results !

[theoldwizard]

11 minutes ago, theoldwizard said:

It is going to die, or at least only live on in the "limited production" versions (Voodoo, Predator).  Two valve pushrod is all about cost savings.  As long as it make the power required for the F150/F250, who cares.

How could I forget !  The Coyote now has 16 injectors !!  Getting rid of 8 injectors and that high pressure fuel pump will mean $100s of dollars in production cost savings.  (That should be over $1000 at retail.)

Edited November 2, 2020 by theoldwizard

[brucelinc]

I will never say never but using the 6.8 in the Mustang would surprise me...a lot.    Where would it fit in the line-up....between Ecoboost and Predator....or would it ultimately replace the Predator?

[silvrsvt]

14 minutes ago, brucelinc said:

I will never say never but using the 6.8 in the Mustang would surprise me...a lot.    Where would it fit in the line-up....between Ecoboost and Predator....or would it ultimately replace the Predator?

 

If anything it would replace the 5.2L in the lineup

[Trader 10]

50 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

If anything it would replace the 5.2L in the lineup

It would be smaller than the 5.0 and about the same weight and the cost to Ford would be significantly lower. I think there’s a strong possibility that it will replace the 5.0 in the Mustang and F150.

[edselford]

Maybe, if you cost three extra camshafts, two long chains and two short chains, 8 extra injectors, plasma spray bores, 16 extra valves rockers and two turbos.  Ford might be leaving More than $1250/ unit on the table on each F150 or about $1 billion in profits each year. Also, F150 more costly than Ram or GM because of aluminium body compounding the profit problem and affecting the ford stock price!

edsel ford

[bzcat]

3 hours ago, Sevensecondsuv said:

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...

 

CO2 emission is largely driven by displacement. Larger the engine, the more air it sucks in, and more CO2 results after combustion.

 

Turbo charging with smaller engine reduces the CO2 emission. 

 

Something like 6.8 in a high volume F-150 build will significantly increase the model's carbon footprint. 

 

These type of engine can only exist in an regulatory environment that doesn't have carbon tax. 

[Flying68]

2 hours ago, bzcat said:

 

CO2 emission is largely driven by displacement. Larger the engine, the more air it sucks in, and more CO2 results after combustion.

 

Turbo charging with smaller engine reduces the CO2 emission. 

 

Something like 6.8 in a high volume F-150 build will significantly increase the model's carbon footprint. 

 

These type of engine can only exist in an regulatory environment that doesn't have carbon tax. 

 

This is not correct.  Just from a physics standpoint, volume is not the important component, mass flow rate is.  A turbocharged engine can produce equivalent power at lower displacement because of the increased pressure which results in equivalent mass flow rate.  The efficiency of the turbo engine comes when it is not under boost.  There is a reason the sensor on the air intake is a Mass Flow sensor and not a Volume sensor.  Pumping air does not result in increased CO2, burning fuel does.

[jpd80]

While a bigger "air pump" can make lots of easy torque and horsepower, the trade off is less fuel efficiency

under light cruise and the only way that is achieved is by reducing capacity either by cylinder deactivation

or by using a smaller displacement engine with or without forced induction or a hybrid electric motor.

 

So when it comes to fuel economy and emissions, less capacity or smaller displacement is key.

Edited November 2, 2020 by jpd80

[SteelyD]

A 6.8 version of the 7.3 Godzilla to built at the Windsor plant. This is on Fox news site. Union sourced information.

 

https://www.foxnews.com/auto/ford-mustang-f-150-getting-monster-v8

[probowler]

This is the beauty of free market competition right here! Dodge is doing really well with their large V8s and Ford seems to have taken notice.

Now if the we could just get rid of some of those pesky automotive regulations...

[jpd80]

2 hours ago, probowler said:

This is the beauty of free market competition right here! Dodge is doing really well with their large V8s and Ford seems to have taken notice.

Now if the we could just get rid of some of those pesky automotive regulations...

Yeah, it's like the Al Gore of the automotive world, an inconvenient truth....

[twintornados]

8 hours ago, probowler said:

This is the beauty of free market competition right here! Dodge is doing really well with their large V8s and Ford seems to have taken notice.

 

FCA can do that when they are buying Tesla's pollution credits....

 

FCA deal to buy CO2 credits from Tesla going ahead - electrive.com

[jpd80]

Random thought,

6.8 V8 with cylinder deactivation and hybrid power assist.

[SteelyD]

20 hours ago, probowler said:

This is the beauty of free market competition right here! Dodge is doing really well with their large V8s and Ford seems to have taken notice.

Now if the we could just get rid of some of those pesky automotive regulations...

Exactly! Ram has passed GMC/Chevy in sales. It is making a move on the cash cow F-150. 6.8 F-150 to compete against the Ram Hemi may be where Ford is going.

Edited November 3, 2020 by SteelyD

[edselford]

I’m surprised this engine is not 7 liters?

with cylinder deactivation, a larger displacement allows the system to be in cylinder deactivation mode longer

So maybe the 6.8 is the size where with cylinder deactivation, the carbon footprint is the same as the 3.5 ecoboost in an F150.

edselford

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, SteelyD said:

Exactly! Ram has passed GMC/Chevy in sales. It is making a move on the cash cow F-150. 6.8 F-150 to compete against the Ram Hemi may be where Ford is going.

Last Quarter, Ram truck sales were 60,000 behind Chevrolet/GMC trucks and 65,000 behind Ford F Series.

[edselford]

Yes

fca making what people want to buy! Also, the credits FCA is buying from Tesla is the only reason Tesla made money last quarter!

edselford

[blksn8k2]

If they truly are going with an all new aluminum block there is no reason for a 6.8L not to also have a lower deck height than the 7.3L due to the shorter stroke crank. That means it could be an even more compact package than the 7.3L which would probably put the overall width closer to that of the old 351W. Engine length would be about the same as the 7.3L since that is more or less dictated by the bore centers.

Edited November 4, 2020 by blksn8k2

[blksn8k2]

Also, the aluminum block opens the door for using PTWA spray bore cylinders which Ford claims has better cylinder bore wear characteristics, better piston ring life, better heat transfer and less weight than a steel liner.

[dave91gt]

Was reading about the 6.8 on Sloppy Mechanics FB page. One of the posters Is a trades worker and dropped some hints. Said there’s mules running around MI. And the press just leaked what they’ve known for a couple years. Got them all fired up saying “just wait and see” what’s coming for the Raptor. He could be messing with them because they were talking about the LS. I’m hoping the 6.8 is real. 

[probowler]

1 hour ago, dave91gt said:

Was reading about the 6.8 on Sloppy Mechanics FB page. One of the posters Is a trades worker and dropped some hints. Said there’s mules running around MI. And the press just leaked what they’ve known for a couple years. Got them all fired up saying “just wait and see” what’s coming for the Raptor. He could be messing with them because they were talking about the LS. I’m hoping the 6.8 is real. 

 A V8 Raptor would be huge for ford. You'd bring in new buyers, and you'd get some current owners trading in their old V6 Raptor to upgrade.

[theoldwizard]

14 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Random thought,

6.8 V8 with cylinder deactivation 

Believe it or not, I actually wrote software for Ford's "original" attempt at cylinder deactivation (on the old 300/4.9L I6 - dropped 3 cylinders) in about 1980 (?).  It was within one year of going into production when it and 4x8 version were cancelled.

 

Cadillac came out with a version a year later.  It was so bad, customers demanded that it be eliminated (cut one wire).

[CGIron]

12 hours ago, blksn8k2 said:

Also, the aluminum block opens the door for using PTWA spray bore cylinders which Ford claims has better cylinder bore wear characteristics, better piston ring life, better heat transfer and less weight than a steel liner.

With the block in aluminium it will be bigger than the current 7.3 l Godzilla  and that´s not the way to make it fit in many enginebays. Much better to have the engineblock in CGI as several Ford engines  like 6.7 PS, 2,7 and 3 l EcoBoost. In that way it can be made much smaller, stiffer , more silent and  lighter than an aluminium block, and the CGI can stand heavy trims. Used in Nascar för decades.  

[30 OTT 6]

My Colorado has cylinder deactivation and based on my experience it is a waste of money and adds mechanical complexity. I rarely see the V6 go into V4 mode and when it happens I'm virtually in a coasting condition on a low speed urban road. I never see V4 mode at highway speeds unless I'm going downhill (again, coasting conditions). The 3.6L V6 has 2.4L displacement in V4 mode. The Coyote will have 2.5L displacement in V4 mode. I can't see cylinder deactivation providing much benefit in a 5.0L V8 F-150 either.

 

A 6.8L V8 in V4 mode will have more displacement than the base V6 offered in the F-150 so maybe it will work well.