Ford Investing in V10 Replacement

[Bob Denman]

Originally Posted by Chance

Higher compression ratio can certainly improve fuel economy, which is why everyone has been trying to do that for so long. What I'm really curious about is how "state-of-the-art" the new V8 that replaces the V10 will be.
If we look at the very newest Ford naturally-aspirated engines tuned for pickups (the F-150s), they have 12:1 compression ratio, which is way higher than the 9.2:1 of the V10. They also have 4-valve DOHC, variable valve timing, direct injection plus port injection, and so on. All this yields 80 lb-ft of torque per liter, and a lot of HP per liter too.

All three of my Spyders put a 12:1 or better squeeze on the mix... and they needed to run 91 octane fuel.
Yes: modern electronics can compensate, when you feed them 87... but that can compromise fuel economy and power.

Leaving you right back where you started.

[Oneilkeys]

What Mazda has done with their Skyactive engine by heating the intake air has allowed them to use 87 vs 91 octane with the same horsepower output. The new engine they are supposed to come out with in 2019 that uses compression (like a diesel) instead of spark plugs for ignition, promises a 25% better fuel economy on the highway - when the engine does not use its spark plugs. Interesting - if it works as advertised and if it is robust enough to last 100,000 + miles - unlike the original Mazda Wrankel engine. Some neat stuff on the horizon for gas engines.

[Chance]

Originally Posted by Oneilkeys

It took several years for the 6 speed to move from the 5.7L V8 to the 6.8L V10. So it will probably be several years before we see it in the V10. You have to believe that FORD and Chevy (joint project) engineered it to eventually be used with their larger engines in their larger vehicles.

Do you really think the Ford V10 has "years" of service left, other than maybe as a cheap industrial engine?

I personally don't see it. The Ford schedule says new V8 to replace V10 should be in full production by May 2019 (a little over a year), just in time for 2020 Model Year applications.

The 10R80 transmission that is used on F-150 and other RWD applications doesn't have torque capacity for either the V10 or Power Stroke, so Ford is reportedly coming out with the 10R140. By the time that comes out, the V10 will be dead or have one foot in grave, so I seriously doubt we'll see a V10 connected to the heavy-duty 10-speed on larger trucks and RVs. Just an educated guess based on available information.

[Bob Denman]

Predicting what will happen is always a dicey game...

If our Crystal Balls were any good: we'd have retired years ago on our PowerBall winnings.

[rick kirby]

Originally Posted by Bob Denman

"Alternate facts": I think that I majored in them; in College!





...About a thousand years ago...

I told you ten million times you shouldn’t exaggerate.

[Oneilkeys]

Originally Posted by Chance

Do you really think the Ford V10 has "years" of service left, other than maybe as a cheap industrial engine?

I personally don't see it. The Ford schedule says new V8 to replace V10 should be in full production by May 2019 (a little over a year), just in time for 2020 Model Year applications.

The 10R80 transmission that is used on F-150 and other RWD applications doesn't have torque capacity for either the V10 or Power Stroke, so Ford is reportedly coming out with the 10R140. By the time that comes out, the V10 will be dead or have one foot in grave, so I seriously doubt we'll see a V10 connected to the heavy-duty 10-speed on larger trucks and RVs. Just an educated guess based on available information.

Your probably right Chance. If the new 7.0L V8 is successful in the Ford 150, since it supposedly has more torque and horsepower than the V-10, it probably will be the future large engine of choice. I wonder if they will eventually build a 3V model for the larger gas RVs of if the new V8 will be enough for them too.

[Chance]

Originally Posted by Bob Denman

All three of my Spyders put a 12:1 or better squeeze on the mix... and they needed to run 91 octane fuel.
Yes: modern electronics can compensate, when you feed them 87... but that can compromise fuel economy and power.

Leaving you right back where you started.

Apples and oranges. I would not compare directly.

Ford NA F-150 V6 and V8 are far more advanced, and EPA rated for regular fuel. And they both put out a lot more torque per liter of displacement than your Can Am Spyder on premium fuel. And speaking of fuel consumption, your 3-wheeler is rated at we'll under 40 MPG at constant 62 MPH, kind of low for a ~ 1,000-pound vehicle.

[Chance]

Originally Posted by Oneilkeys

Your probably right Chance. If the new 7.0L V8 is successful in the Ford 150, since it supposedly has more torque and horsepower than the V-10, it probably will be the future large engine of choice. I wonder if they will eventually build a 3V model for the larger gas RVs of if the new V8 will be enough for them too.

I certainly hope they don't have a 3V like the V10. That's such old technology.

With any luck Ford will make it a Double Over Head Cam engine from the onset with 4 valves per cylinder. That way they can use independent variable valve timing for both intake and exhaust. That's the way they are getting high torque, high power, high fuel efficiency, and lower emissions.

If they take shortcuts to save on cost, it will be disappointing.


By the way, the engine program was 7.xL, meaning anything from 7.0 to 7.9 liters in size. The press ran with 7.0 but there is no confirmation of that size. The previously disclosed 7.3 liters seems very possible to me based on likely bore and stroke dimensions.

[Bob Denman]

Originally Posted by Chance

Apples and oranges. I would not compare directly.

Ford NA F-150 V6 and V8 are far more advanced, and EPA rated for regular fuel. And they both put out a lot more torque per liter of displacement than your Can Am Spyder on premium fuel. And speaking of fuel consumption, your 3-wheeler is rated at we'll under 40 MPG at constant 62 MPH, kind of low for a ~ 1,000-pound vehicle.

Granted: the 1330 triple is already in it's 5th year of production...
But I'd hardly call it prehistoric.
As far as their estimates for fuel economy: anybody that rides can tell you that it's the aero-package that kills the economy.
But I do get as high as 43 mpg with mine, and average 39,5 mpg (Not bad: considering the 36.5 mpg estimate!)

[bigben]

What a HOOT. Everyone of my fellow posters in this thread are Senior Members and we're having this Gas vs Diesel discussion - TOO FUNNY.

The replacement isn't as entertaining but it is more interesting.

[Bob Denman]

Would you like to discuss "Regular versus Synthetic" oils next?

[JamieGeek]

Most of the discussion hasn't been your typical gas vs Diesel flame wars, however.

Just remarking on how obvious the "finger on the scale" is in those Cummins videos.

Honestly I'm surprised at the fact that they thought they had to put the finger on the scale to begin with.

[Bob Denman]

Originally Posted by JamieGeek

Honestly I'm surprised at the fact that they thought they had to put the finger on the scale to begin with.

Most folks already have their minds made up anyway.
Nothing that is said or shown to them, will ever change their minds...



,,,no matter HOW wrong they are!

[Bob Denman]

Originally Posted by rick kirby

I told you ten million times you shouldn’t exaggerate.

Well played: Sir!

[Mustang46555]

Am pretty new to the forum but I just retired from a Tier 1 Ford supplier. We were also a supplier to CAT, Cummins and Deere so I do have a bit of in-site. Bluntly, Cummins is hurting right now. Their sales are way down so I take those videos as their moving into new markets. Of course they will play to every advantage they can. They are also doing some serious off-shore sourcing for forgings and castings as well as primary machining work to cut costs. Diesel vs gas is always a crazy debate, apples to oranges, you really can't 1 on 1 compare them. "Most folks already have their minds made up anyway. Nothing that is said or shown to them, will ever change their minds." Describes the debate perfectly.
As to Ford, as a company they are seriously looking at everything they make to constantly upgrade. Compared to the Coyote 5L in the F150's the current V10 is old tech to them. I would look for any large displacement V8 to be based on the Coyote framework. And brother if it runs like my 5L, I want one!! We were also tooling up to make parts for the 10R60 10spd automatic. No word on it's big brother yet.

[Wilsonjones]

Good comment mustang

[Chance]

Originally Posted by Mustang46555

.....cut.... Bluntly, Cummins is hurting right now. Their sales are way down so I take those videos as their moving into new markets. Of course they will play to every advantage they can. ....cut...

Thanks much for your insight into Cummins financial. While we all agree they make excellent engines, videos critical of Ford V10 seem a little too critical.

Originally Posted by Mustang46555

....cut.... As to Ford, as a company they are seriously looking at everything they make to constantly upgrade. Compared to the Coyote 5L in the F150's the current V10 is old tech to them. I would look for any large displacement V8 to be based on the Coyote framework. And brother if it runs like my 5L, I want one!! We were also tooling up to make parts for the 10R60 10spd automatic. No word on it's big brother yet.

Regarding the new large displacement V8 truck engine, I wouldn't be surprised if it's dimensionally related to the existing 6.2L V8 in the Super Duty and some E-Series. Newer Ford gas engines have been square, and since a 105 mm bore and stroke will yield a 7.3L V8, Ford may just keep the same 115 mm bore spacing from 6.2L V8 and only increase deck height to accommodate the longer stroke. I noticed they are keeping the 6.2L V8 in production, so it wouldn't be that different than what Ford did back in 1997 going from 4.6L to 5.4L with Modular V8. I could see the 6.2L V8 as standard engine, with 7.3L V8 as optional.

Agree also that if they go with Coyote 5L head design, and get anything close to 80 lb-ft of torque per liter, we will forget the V10 in a hurry. For truck use, a mere 550 lb-ft at 3,000 RPMs exceeds 300 HP. That kind of low-end power would be great in a motorhome so engine doesn't have to rev as much. Plus a V8 will be inherently better balanced and probably much quieter than the V10.

[Bob Denman]

In my little rig: I like the power output of the V-10.
It climbs the steepest hills around here easily (no small feat!), and the fuel mileage is actually not that bad at all. (Just under 10 mpg.)

This of course doesn't mean that they shouldn't try to come up with a better engine. I have no doubt that the larger gas-powered Class As could use a hand.

Perhaps the manufacturers should just look to expanding the use of diesel engines a little bit????