E-Series gets new V8 for 2017

[bevedfelker]

Jamie/Chance -- thanks. I missed that in the chart.

[Chance]

Update on 2017 Model Year 6.2L V8 in E-Series:

On December 5th, Ford updated incomplete vehicle information that affects emissions certifications, and the newest information in draft form includes frontal area and vehicle weight limits with the new 6.2L V8.


I'm no RV engineer, and not even 100% certain these limitations apply to motorhomes, but it seems on the surface that the 6.2L V8 will be limited to frontal areas of 72 square feet.

In US where motorhomes are large, it'd be interesting to know how many Class Cs (or Class As like Axis/Vegas) would fall under 72 square feet.

[JamieGeek]

Should be simple to guesstimate: our Axis is 94" wide w/o mirrors and 11' 3" tall (including A/C). Take off about a foot for the A/C and the guesstimate of the frontal area is 7.83333 X 10.25 = ~80 Square Feet.

[Oneilkeys]

Originally Posted by Chance

Update on 2017 Model Year 6.2L V8 in E-Series:

On December 5th, Ford updated incomplete vehicle information that affects emissions certifications, and the newest information in draft form includes frontal area and vehicle weight limits with the new 6.2L V8.


I'm no RV engineer, and not even 100% certain these limitations apply to motorhomes, but it seems on the surface that the 6.2L V8 will be limited to frontal areas of 72 square feet.

In US where motorhomes are large, it'd be interesting to know how many Class Cs (or Class As like Axis/Vegas) would fall under 72 square feet.

Interesting... Do you have the weight limit chart too?

[Chance]

Originally Posted by Oneilkeys

Interesting... Do you have the weight limit chart too?

Both the E-350 and E-450 with V8 are rated in this draft at 12,500 pounds for finished vehicle curb weight regardless of whether it has 4.10 or 4.56 gears.

The E-350 with V10 is rated 11,500 pounds.

The E-450 with V10 has no emissions-related limits.


My initial thought (assuming these restrictions apply to motorhomes) is that the very largest Class Cs will have to remain built on E-450 with V10. Manufacturers may be able to keep curb weight below 12,500 pounds, but it seems to me that staying below 72 square feet of frontal area will be tough when many of the largest Class Cs are wide body in design.

On slightly smaller Class Cs, if they can stay below 72 square feet, then the V8 with standard 4.10 gears should be more fuel efficient than we've seen from Ford in a while.

[EA37TS]

Originally Posted by JamieGeek

Should be simple to guesstimate: our Axis is 94" wide w/o mirrors and 11' 3" tall (including A/C). Take off about a foot for the A/C and the guesstimate of the frontal area is 7.83333 X 10.25 = ~80 Square Feet.

I think you should also subtract the distance from the bottom of the bumper to the road surface. If that is 1 foot the frontal area would be reduced by 7.83 feet.

It all depends on the definition of "Frontal Area".

[Stan fowler]

Yep-official frontal area is just the "hard parts". Includes exposed tires, but only the a/c unit itself, not the whole effect on height. I think a Vegas would be close.

But the data infers Ford not planning on replacing V10 totally with the V8 , which has been assumption in some quarters, myself included. Seems like Ford would want to get rid of an older, low volume engine......

[JamieGeek]

Ah but the Axis/Vegas units sit really low; I'd say there is less than 6" of ground clearance below the front bumper. (Can't measure mine because its sitting in about 9" of snow, or more if they plowed up to it.)

[Chance]

Originally Posted by Stan fowler

....cut...

But the data infers Ford not planning on replacing V10 totally with the V8 , which has been assumption in some quarters, myself included. Seems like Ford would want to get rid of an older, low volume engine......

Have you seen rumors of a 7-liter V8 to replace V10? If there is any truth to it, it'd be interesting to know if it's an all-new engine or a 6.2-L V8 that has been stroked, and maybe bored out a little too.

[Chance]

Originally Posted by dstankov

I think you should also subtract the distance from the bottom of the bumper to the road surface. If that is 1 foot the frontal area would be reduced by 7.83 feet.

It all depends on the definition of "Frontal Area".

Dave, you are correct in that the frontal area has to be adjusted for open space under the bumper.

In the case of the Cutaway, the data is very specific as one would expect from government regulations. Fortunately Ford has already done the hard work.

Using these guidelines, one can add an 8-foot-wide by 7-foot-high body and end up around 67 square feet. That leaves another 5 square feet for AC, vents, awning, etc. The 72-square-foot cutoff should be close for many existing Class C motorhomes. Unfortunately a 7-foot high box would be too low for 80 ~ 84 inch ceiling height buyers are getting.

Manufacturers may have to come out with new floorplans based on slightly narrower and lower bodies, much like they do with Sprinter, ProMaster, and Transit chassis.

[Stan fowler]

Originally Posted by Chance

Have you seen rumors of a 7-liter V8 to replace V10? If there is any truth to it, it'd be interesting to know if it's an all-new engine or a 6.2-L V8 that has been stroked, and maybe bored out a little too.

I have not - but makes sense. Especially if it is the same family as the 6.2 liter.

[Oneilkeys]

Originally Posted by Chance

Both the E-350 and E-450 with V8 are rated in this draft at 12,500 pounds for finished vehicle curb weight regardless of whether it has 4.10 or 4.56 gears.

The E-350 with V10 is rated 11,500 pounds.

The E-450 with V10 has no emissions-related limits.


My initial thought (assuming these restrictions apply to motorhomes) is that the very largest Class Cs will have to remain built on E-450 with V10. Manufacturers may be able to keep curb weight below 12,500 pounds, but it seems to me that staying below 72 square feet of frontal area will be tough when many of the largest Class Cs are wide body in design.

On slightly smaller Class Cs, if they can stay below 72 square feet, then the V8 with standard 4.10 gears should be more fuel efficient than we've seen from Ford in a while.

My E-450 Axis is rated for 14,500 lbs. Most people who have weighed their Vegas/Axis and posted the weights on this forum have been right around 12,500 lbs fully loaded. Weight might be a problem for the V-8 in an Axis/Vegas - especially on an E450 chassis.

[Chance]

Originally Posted by Oneilkeys

My E-450 Axis is rated for 14,500 lbs. Most people who have weighed their Vegas/Axis and posted the weights on this forum have been right around 12,500 lbs fully loaded. Weight might be a problem for the V-8 in an Axis/Vegas - especially on an E450 chassis.

I don't know under what conditions they weigh a motorhome to determine the curb weight, but I kind of doubt it includes personal belongings.

Specs say it includes fluids but even then that should be limited to chassis, like fuel, oil, wiper fluid, etc. I'd expect holding tanks not to be included, but I'm only guessing.

If I recall correctly, some owners like Jamie reported well under 12,500 pounds loaded for his 24.1. Depending on how they obtain curb weight, it shouldn't be a problem for an E-350 Axis with 6.2L V8. The V8 shouldn't weigh more than V10.

The problem I see is getting area under 72 square feet. That may require a different motorhome design than the present Axis/Vegas.

[Oneilkeys]

Jamie's 350 Axis was at 11,400 or about 1000 lbs under last March. My 450 Axis was at 12,500. The 25 Axis/Vegas weigh a little more than the 24.1.

[JamieGeek]

Yeah ours was loaded with the 3 of us, full propane, full water, full gas and empty waste tanks (and loaded with our stuff) when we weighed it.

[Oneilkeys]

Interesting discussion. I was wondering what the performance difference is between the V8 and the V10 2V and V102V and V10 3V. While it seems that the V-8 may be marginal for the 12,500-14,500 E-350/450 at the present time, with a small improvement in the V-8, in the future, it might be cheaper for Ford to offer the V-8 as standard in the E-350/450 with the V-10 3V as an option in the 450 for those manufacturers that want to build larger motorhomes on the 450 chassis. That way they could do away with the V-10 2V and still have the V-10 3V for the F-53 chassis and larger E-450s. Just a thought.

[Chance]

This article may help shed some light on just how complicated and expensive these decisions are for Ford and other manufacturers.


Ford Canada labor deal investment mainly for engines-sources | Reuters


Regarding 6.2L V8 power, in Super Duty pickup trucks its rating is higher than the V10's. Maximum torque is a little higher too compared to 2-valve V10, although it comes in a little later in RPM range so at +/- 2,000 RPM cruise range it may be a little lower.

Ford may rate the V8 differently when installed in E-Series. That's a major piece of the puzzle still missing.


By the way, the Reuters report mentions a new large V8 for Super Duty applications. If report is accurate, that may be the engine that replaces all V10s. The present V10s seem to have too many emissions and noise issues to keep long term.

[Oneilkeys]

That is an interesting article. The sentence that says that large V-8 and V-10 motor production is expected to end in four years may be the key. Because of contract issues Ford might just hold on without major changes until 2021 or so and wait for the new motor or motors to be in full production. We'll have to wait and see.

[Chance]

Ford is starting to update information on the 6.2L V8 as tuned for E-Series. I had seen reports that the V8 would start production on 1/30/17, so it's probably not a coincidence this information is starting to come out now.

Power at 331 HP is higher than the V10's 305 HP. For those who care more about torque, it's rated at 356 lb-ft which is lower than the V10's 420 lb-ft.

A nice option is a 240-Amp alternator on the V8, which would fit right in on a motorhome.

The 6.2L V8 appears significantly detuned compared to its 385 HP and 430 lb-ft when installed in F-Series trucks. That's not surprising since Ford E-Series vans have never had more than 305 horsepower as far as I know. Emissions probably played a role in power and torque ratings.

It will be interesting to see what the cost difference ends up at.

[EA37TS]

Originally Posted by Chance

Ford is starting to update information on the 6.2L V8 as tuned for E-Series. I had seen reports that the V8 would start production on 1/30/17, so it's probably not a coincidence this information is starting to come out now.

Power at 331 HP is higher than the V10's 305 HP. For those who care more about torque, it's rated at 356 lb-ft which is lower than the V10's 420 lb-ft.

A nice option is a 240-Amp alternator on the V8, which would fit right in on a motorhome.

The 6.2L V8 appears significantly detuned compared to its 385 HP and 430 lb-ft when installed in F-Series trucks. That's not surprising since Ford E-Series vans have never had more than 305 horsepower as far as I know. Emissions probably played a role in power and torque ratings.

It will be interesting to see what the cost difference ends up at.

Research I had done in the past identified heat as the reason the 363 HP V10 was never used in the E series. It apparently produced more heat in the engine compartment that the 305 HP version. Might be the same issue between the E Series and F Series V8.