jpd80 Posted July 30, 2021 Share Posted July 30, 2021 On 7/28/2021 at 12:56 AM, Stray Kat said: Yes please don’t get me wrong. I’m mostly talking about the 2V version of the Mod family. I wonder if you’re familiar with the new short track phenomenon based around Crown Vic/Grand Marquis chassis? Its a very limited spec class that looks to be a whole lot of fun. The original 4.6 in an unmodified state is required so while the Panther chassis will get lots of love the 4.6 is slated to be just the workhorse that it was intended to be. I’d like to try this new class out though. From what I understand they’re at every short track now. Apparently the Panther cars make great short track stock cars. Are they allowed to use PI heads? Ive seen some good results with those heads, good cam and headers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stray Kat Posted July 30, 2021 Author Share Posted July 30, 2021 6 hours ago, jpd80 said: Are they allowed to use PI heads? Ive seen some good results with those heads, good cam and headers. Yes but almost everything must be bone stock. They run on street tires as well. Exhaust = no headers and no mufflers but must exit behind the driver. True entry level class. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stray Kat Posted July 30, 2021 Author Share Posted July 30, 2021 Here ya go. 2 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 What recent above posts have been addressing is that cylinder heads make the engine. That ties back in with what this thread is about with the 7.3 versus the unknown 6.8. Regardless of OHC or OHC, efficient valve positioning is essential for good flow and power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 The short track Panther phenomena is due to the fact that old Panthers are the only RWD V-8 cars that are still available cheaply in any numbers anymore. Once they are gone I don't know what those guys will do. Until then, have at it! BTW, the Chevy Performance announcement was for the 2022 Camaro COPO program. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stray Kat Posted July 31, 2021 Author Share Posted July 31, 2021 4 hours ago, 7Mary3 said: The short track Panther phenomena is due to the fact that old Panthers are the only RWD V-8 cars that are still available cheaply in any numbers anymore. Once they are gone I don't know what those guys will do. Until then, have at it! BTW, the Chevy Performance announcement was for the 2022 Camaro COPO program. Well not exactly but close. The Dodge Charger police cars are starting to get some age on them. They may be a candidate. The thing about the Panther chassis is it’s solid rear axle and coil springs all around. The mid size GM cars dominated this type of limited racing for years because of those same attributes. The problem is the GM stuff is all but used up. They are hard to find now. Virtually all the 4.6 powered Panther cars are eligible and they number in the millions still. The early cars are given some concessions because the later ones have the PI head and better front steering advantage. The good thing is that so far the tracks are keeping these things close to stock and thus affordable. I wouldn’t put it past GM to start lobbying the tracks to allow some cheeseball GM crate motor in some form of outlaw version of this class. That ☝️would instantly ruin the class for me. GM is always an engine looking for a chassis. This entry level class is the perfect training ground for up and comers who need to experience a heavy V8 powered stock car. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 That type of racing is a stroll down memory lane, the desire to keep engines stock will actually consign it to history. Adding something like the F150’s EB 35 V6 and using E85 would be a way to breathe new life into the class. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edselford Posted August 9, 2021 Share Posted August 9, 2021 The comment from SoonerLS about a hybrid 6.8 makes allot of sense. I just wonder if there will be much engine shuffling at ford during the next two years for both F150 and the Superduty 250/350/450? A hybrid 2.7 ecoboost could replace almost all current 3.5 ecoboost. The 6.8 NA could replace the high output 3.5 ecoboost on F150’s. With a 6.8 light duty hybrid as the up option. the heavy duty version of the 6.8NA engine could be the base F250/350 engine with a heavy duty 6.8 hybrid replacing the current 7.3NA V8. the 7.3NA and 7.3hybrid may go into the F450/550’s. We are in some very interesting times with dynamic cylinder deactivation and new electronic technologies edselford Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 10, 2021 Share Posted August 10, 2021 Last week, the Biden administration basically put Obama era fuel economy regulations back on track. I suspect that any wiggle room for big engines is now gone in CAFE controlled trucks and utilities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edselford Posted August 10, 2021 Share Posted August 10, 2021 Yes that is the pressure from the environmentalists. I lost track on regulations on vehicles above 8500# GVW??? Have those also been revised? Regulating carbon emissions is regulating fuel economy! A cost effective hybrid is probably the way to go as a interim solution to get to full electric! It might be similar to psi on fuel injection ie higher voltages for EV will help achieve range and shorter charging times, may become real short. After 50 years in the auto industry, it is still fascinating and interesting to see the small steps in technology be put together to make a significant contribution to humankind! When I started in the late 60’s we had two or three speed automatics, carburetors, 8 tracks. Look how far we have come. edselford 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
30 OTT 6 Posted August 10, 2021 Share Posted August 10, 2021 15 hours ago, edselford said: The comment from SoonerLS about a hybrid 6.8 makes allot of sense. I just wonder if there will be much engine shuffling at ford during the next two years for both F150 and the Superduty 250/350/450? A hybrid 2.7 ecoboost could replace almost all current 3.5 ecoboost. The 6.8 NA could replace the high output 3.5 ecoboost on F150’s. With a 6.8 light duty hybrid as the up option. the heavy duty version of the 6.8NA engine could be the base F250/350 engine with a heavy duty 6.8 hybrid replacing the current 7.3NA V8. the 7.3NA and 7.3hybrid may go into the F450/550’s. We are in some very interesting times with dynamic cylinder deactivation and new electronic technologies edselford The 3.5L Ecoboost is a strong candidate for replacement by a 6.8L V8. The 3.5L is powerful but with the two turbos, intercooler, and all associated piping, it has to be more costly to produce. All that extra equipment seems to kill any weight advantage of the V6. A 3.5L F-150 always seems to weight slightly more than a similarly configured 5.0L. Also, particulate emissions from GTDI engines seems to be the next environmental target. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard1 Posted August 10, 2021 Share Posted August 10, 2021 On 7/27/2021 at 10:56 AM, Stray Kat said: I wonder if you’re familiar with the new short track phenomenon based around Crown Vic/Grand Marquis chassis? Its a very limited spec class that looks to be a whole lot of fun. I’d like to try this new class out though. From what I understand they’re at every short track now. Apparently the Panther cars make great short track stock cars. There are am amazing amount of Panthers still driving around SE MI. I wonder how many there are in FL ? These are very stout cars and can take quite a bit of bashing ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard1 Posted August 10, 2021 Share Posted August 10, 2021 (edited) 4 hours ago, 30 OTT 6 said: The 3.5L Ecoboost is a strong candidate for replacement by a 6.8L V8. The 3.5L is powerful but with the two turbos, intercooler, and all associated piping, it has to be more costly to produce. All that extra equipment seems to kill any weight advantage of the V6. The NA 3.7L always got good reviews in Mustangs, especially when equipped with a manual. It worked reasonably well in a base F150. The 6.8L would be great in a T450 (T350 CC/CA with a beefed up frame and rear axle if they ever build it). Maybe even replace the detuned 7.3L in the E350. Quote A 3.5L F-150 always seems to weight slightly more than a similarly configured 5.0L. Also, particulate emissions from GTDI engines seems to be the next environmental target. I am out of the loop on emission standards, but that is why some engines have both PFI and DI (they run on PFI most of the time). This is a very $$$ solution ! Edited August 10, 2021 by theoldwizard1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 18 hours ago, theoldwizard1 said: The NA 3.7L always got good reviews in Mustangs, especially when equipped with a manual. It worked reasonably well in a base F150. The 6.8L would be great in a T450 (T350 CC/CA with a beefed up frame and rear axle if they ever build it). Maybe even replace the detuned 7.3L in the E350. I am out of the loop on emission standards, but that is why some engines have both PFI and DI (they run on PFI most of the time). This is a very $$$ solution ! Ford has been passing those additional tech costs onto customers for years, twin turbos and DI to begin with and then the addition of port injection with DI, I get that it’s not cheap but Ford left low cost solutions years ago and buyers seem happy to pay a premium for those engines. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
30 OTT 6 Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 14 minutes ago, jpd80 said: Ford has been passing those additional tech costs onto customers for years, twin turbos and DI to begin with and then the addition of port injection with DI, I get that it’s not cheap but Ford left low cost solutions years ago and buyers seem happy to pay a premium for those engines. Ford Management would love to build a cheaper engine and continue to charge that premium. I'm sure one of them has already calculated their bonus. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 11, 2021 Share Posted August 11, 2021 (edited) 6 hours ago, 30 OTT 6 said: Ford Management would love to build a cheaper engine and continue to charge that premium. I'm sure one of them has already calculated their bonus. And that would be true for replacing the 5.2 in restricted high performance applications, I just don’t see Ford pursuing that on wider applications where big engines with cylinder deactivation struggle with fitting under CAFE due to thirstier highway mileage than the encumbant turbo sixes. I’m also glad to be proven wrong on this…….. Edited August 11, 2021 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slemke Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 In order to charge a premium, the customer has to have perceived value of the added technologies. People are used to having all the technology and expect it. Ford would not be able to charge a premium over GM or Ram for a pushrod engine, but they are likely charging more of a premium for Coyotes and ecoboosts than what the additional costs to mfg are. Same with the aluminum body. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 1 hour ago, slemke said: In order to charge a premium, the customer has to have perceived value of the added technologies. People are used to having all the technology and expect it. Ford would not be able to charge a premium over GM or Ram for a pushrod engine, but they are likely charging more of a premium for Coyotes and ecoboosts than what the additional costs to mfg are. Same with the aluminum body. At one point aluminum was cost neutral because of less weight but I guess price rises have changed that. I remember when skeptics dismissed the thought of a V6 truck being a challenger to the mostly V8 competition and yet here we are. Introducing Lightning BEVs so maybe the impact of gasoline trucks will wain over the four or five years, those V8 are gonna get harder and harder to fit under CAFE, competition may be in a pickle if their V8 sales remain strong…. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelyD Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 Ford GT production may be extended. Possibly with the 7.3. https://www.autoblog.com/2021/08/11/ford-gt-test-mule-spied/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 12, 2021 Share Posted August 12, 2021 10 hours ago, SteelyD said: Ford GT production may be extended. Possibly with the 7.3. https://www.autoblog.com/2021/08/11/ford-gt-test-mule-spied/ Or the other thing is the SC 5.2 that’s currently available Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stray Kat Posted August 14, 2021 Author Share Posted August 14, 2021 Okay gang back to the subject at hand. As we enter the twilight phase of ICE engines as the most common motive force for consumer vehicles I say a new big inch V8 hot on the heels of an even bigger inch brand new V8 is quite amazing. Surely these two engines will serve truck duty. How else could their existence be justified? Anyhow word on the street is that the 6.8 is related to the 7.3 in design. That’s really a no brainer anyhow. I think Ford realizes that the truck buying public doesn’t really care how their valves are actuated. I have no way of knowing, so I can only speculate that some test pours and test runs of this new size engine are beginning. They must be based on the timeline of information that has been shared with the public so far. My own personal feelings are that both the 6.8 and 7.3 will serve primarily in trucks and vans with the 6.8 possibly being used in a Mustang and F150. I think the 6.8 will be an aluminum block and I wouldn’t doubt a slightly bigger sleeve for the Mustang bringing it to 429 cubic inches to coincide with the launch of the S650 Mustang. That ☝️one feat will suck all the oxygen away from the Corvette and the aging Challenger Hellcats. Americans love muscle cars and many people will see a 429” Mustang as their last chance to buy one. If I’m correct I predict that Ford will not be able to keep up with demand. It almost surely would be a sales mega success. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelyD Posted August 14, 2021 Share Posted August 14, 2021 On 8/12/2021 at 5:40 PM, jpd80 said: Or the other thing is the SC 5.2 that’s currently available Many on the GT engineering team like the 7.3 over the 5.2 because it is a narrower engine is easier to package. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteelyD Posted August 14, 2021 Share Posted August 14, 2021 On 6/22/2021 at 8:54 AM, ESP08 said: Ford has been running Eaton TVS superchargers since 2013 which is a roots style rotor with notable durability and slight efficiency advantages over twin screw rotors of similar displacement. They sure have. Powertrain engineers like the screw rotor design too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 14, 2021 Share Posted August 14, 2021 (edited) 10 hours ago, SteelyD said: Many on the GT engineering team like the 7.3 over the 5.2 because it is a narrower engine is easier to package. That’s true 7.3 is 4.5” narrower than a Coyote, the TTV6 is also tricky to package. What Ford GT buyer wouldn’t want to own a modern version of the 427 GT40, you could literally charge anything….. the reason I suggested the SC 5.2 is because it’s with us for about a year but I can understand someone wanting to use another engine that evokes a visceral desire that can only be quenched by offering a big capacity engine. Edited August 14, 2021 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ESP08 Posted August 16, 2021 Share Posted August 16, 2021 (edited) On 8/14/2021 at 5:40 AM, SteelyD said: They sure have. Powertrain engineers like the screw rotor design too. Chrysler is the only manufacturer I'm aware of that uses twin screw superchargers in a production capacity (today). The fact that twin screws have one rotor that must spin much faster than the other reduces the durability, service life and blower speed capability of the TS. The TVS design is inherently superior and only hindered by Eaton's limited rotor size selection. Edited August 16, 2021 by ESP08 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.