6.8L V-10 Dropped For 2014???

[7Mary3]

There are reports over on ford-trucks.com that the V-10 is going to be dropped from the 2014 F-450 and F-550, with no word on availability for the 2014 F-650 and F-750. This is the first that I have heard of this, though I must admit I have not seen any 2014 order quides yet. Can't be true. I think we all agree recent sales surge of the F-650 and F-750 is mainly the result of the gas engine option.

[jpd80]

IIRC, it was kept as part of an agreement with the UAW for a set period of time.

I have a feeling that Ford will need to do more work on the 6.2 V8 to make it more acceptable for use in applications above F250.

[theoldwizard]

I have a feeling that Ford will need to do more work on the 6.2 V8 to make it more acceptable for use in applications above F250.

Absolutely !

 

I'll have to put on my deerstalker hat and sniff around !

[twintornados]

IIRC, it was kept as part of an agreement with the UAW for a set period of time.

I have a feeling that Ford will need to do more work on the 6.2 V8 to make it more acceptable for use in applications above F250.

Two things that will work would be to hog it out to 7-8 liters and make a cast iron (CGI??) version with proper cast iron exhaust manifolding to handle the heavy loading requirements...

[theoldwizard]

There are reports over on ford-trucks.com that the V-10 is going to be dropped from the 2014 F-450 and F-550, with no word on availability for the 2014 F-650 and F-750. This is the first that I have heard of this, though I must admit I have not seen any 2014 order quides yet. Can't be true. I think we all agree recent sales surge of the F-650 and F-750 is mainly the result of the gas engine option.

According to a source, "Highly unlikely", unless the only engine will be the diesel !

 

Ford has no other engine option on the E350/450 cutaway.

[Bob Rosadini]

According to a source, "Highly unlikely", unless the only engine will be the diesel !

 

Ford has no other engine option on the E350/450 cutaway.

Well 7M3's comment specified F-450/550. Might this be to balance increased sales of 650 with the V-10-as well as satisfying the E series issue??

[7Mary3]

It looks like there is an early order cutoff date for the V-10 in MY 2013 trucks, with no word on availability in 2014. We will know for sure when the 2014 information becomes available.I seem to remember that the V-10 did have a set 'expiration date' in a particular UAW contract, but I don't remember when it was supposed to be.

[NLPRacing]

Dropping the V10 for the F-450/F-550 and making it exclusive to the E-Series & F-650/F-750 makes sense.

[jpd80]

So should Ford be looking at a large capacity low stressed engine or develop a low pressure Ecoboost V8?

Picking an engine specifically for compressed Natural gas should be first and foremost consideration.

 

A V10 needs a 72 degree angle to balance right so building a larger engine that way still means a unique

engine line, that's why I thought a 7.0 Boss or maybe even the 6.2 fitted with a single turbo would fit the bill.

and a 7.0 V8 would have obvious applications as a Mustang special to keep Brand X in check...

Edited April 26, 2013 by jpd80

[Edstock]

Well Ford Otosan Turkey have a 9 liter 6-inline diesel. If it could fit, why not a 7-8 liter i-6 gas? With direct injection and VVT and 4-valve breathing and computerized engine management, might work very well, and a lot cheaper to cast and machine than a V-10.

[Joe771476]

Wait a minute. We're talking about Ford here. The V10 gas engine and its use with alternate fuel is the reason for increased sales for the F650 and it's used by the Blue Bird school bus mfr.. It's an asset to Ford right? Ford should not do away with it, right? Consider it dropped!

[theoldwizard]

I guess it is possible for just the F450/550 ! The 6.2L costs less to build, but it also produces less horsepower and torque than the 6.8L V10. It is further down rated for over 10,000 lbs GVWR, A bonus for Ford is the V8 is certified for E85. CAFE credits !!

 

 

[jpd80]

Is it more likely that Ford would increase the capacity of the 6.2 to say 6.8 or 7.0 liters

rather than correcting perceived deficiencies in the 6.8 V10 engine design?

 

A 6.8 V10 rebuilt with 72 degree V angle, stronger crank, better coyote head design

would be a powerful efficient engine but would it be any better than say, a 6.8 V8?

Edited April 29, 2013 by jpd80

[NLPRacing]

The F450 and F550 are only built in Kentucky, right? The E-Series is currently built in Ohio and the F53/F59, F650 & F750 are supposed to be going to Ohio as well, right? If that's all accurate, it makes sense to stop offering the V10 in the F450/F550 as it probably wasn't a big seller anyway and consolidate all the vehicles that get the V10 to one plant.

[Edstock]

A 6.8 V10 rebuilt with 72 degree V angle, stronger crank, better coyote head design

would be a powerful efficient engine but would it be any better than say, a 6.8 V8?

 

Considering the truck usage, keeping the 90° layout would probably be OK. But adding 4-valve VVT direct-injection cylinder heads and a new crank shouldn't break the bank, IMHO, and would make it a very good alternative to diesel.

[Bob Rosadini]

The F450 and F550 are only built in Kentucky, right? The E-Series is currently built in Ohio and the F53/F59, F650 & F750 are supposed to be going to Ohio as well, right? If that's all accurate, it makes sense to stop offering the V10 in the F450/F550 as it probably wasn't a big seller anyway and consolidate all the vehicles that get the V10 to one plant.

Good logic. But keep in mind as so many have pointed out, Ford needs cubic inches for CNG. Also Keep in mind the V-10 is only offered in the 650 and only with the Torqueshift trans. There will be a big market for a CNG/LNG class 7/8.

 

So if that is the case, is the V-10 marginal in terms of the range of trucks it can cover?

[jpd80]

Considering the truck usage, keeping the 90° layout would probably be OK. But adding 4-valve VVT direct-injection cylinder heads and a new crank shouldn't break the bank, IMHO, and would make it a very good alternative to diesel.

The difficulty with the 6.8 was that during design the 90 dgree shared pin odd fire exhibited vibration problems so the

pins on the crankshaft was offset ground 18 degrees to make it even fire and balance shafts applied to the top of the

cylinder heads, sitting above the OHCs....going to 72 degree V angle eliminates all of that..

 

Since Ford now has the Boss 6.2, perhaps increasing capacity on it is a far less resource consuming process

than revisiting the V10 design...

[7Mary3]

You guys brought of some interesting points. It is very unlikely that the V-10 will ever get VVT, and the reason in a roundabout way is because it is a 90 degree V-10. As was pointed out, the 90 degree V-10 requires a balance shaft, which Ford designed into the right hand cylinder head. It is driven off the right camshaft, and if Ford was to add VVT it would consequently throw off the balance shaft! Not possible unless they figure out another way to drive the balance shaft. It probably would have made more sense to design the balance shaft into the center of the 'V' between the cylinder banks and drive it with its own chain, but remember the Triton V-10 was a 'quick and dirty' way to get a large displacement Mod. engine. By sticking the balance shaft in the right head they kept a lot of parts commonality with the V-8 Mod. and didn't make a lot of changes to the machining process. The Mod. V-10's as designed have a lot of compromises, and I have always suspected that Ford would have been better off with a modernized Lima at least from a commercial standpoint. Unfortunately, the Lima fell victim to Ford corporate policy.

 

The 6.2L 'Boss' was an obvious successor to the V-10, and addressed many V-10 compromises. The 6.2L was more compact in external dimensions, far lower parts count, and the design can easily accommodate VVY and DI. Unfortunately, there appears to be some durability issue keeping it out of trucks larger than the F-350. I think that is kind of an embarrassment considering GM's iron block 6.0L LS is certified right up to 26,000#'s GVW (FCCC and Isuzu).

 

A 7.0L race version of the 'Boss' was shown shortly after the 6.2L debut, but that engine has mysteriously disappeared. I heard a rumor that going much beyond 6.2L required a substantially different block casting, but nonetheless you would think a 7.0L 'Boss' would have been a natural for the larger Super Duty trucks. That is, unless there really is something wrong with the 'Boss' design. I do not know of any service durability issues with the 6.2L, aside from some valve train issues in a few early production examples. Some say the 'Boss' is destined to be an orphan and that there will be no other versions or further development of the series. It will not be in the next generation F-150, not even the Raptor. I have heard that it will get DI in the not too distant future though. Kind of makes you wonder............

Edited April 29, 2013 by 7Mary3

[Stray Kat]

I spoke to Don Bowles about that 7.0 experimental engine and he had nothing but good to say about it. This was a big bore version of the 6.2 Ford v8. There were no durability problems that he spoke of at that power level (700+hp) in the drag racing application. In fact he spoke mainly of its untapped potential. Said it was a real good piece. I'd hate to see it go by the wayside. I envision a 7.0 to 7.5 liter truck and marine engine from this design.

 

 

Here is a link to the Don Dowles 7.0 experemental car. http://www.musclemustangfastfords.com/features/mmfp_0711_ford_mustang_roush_ethanol_fuel/viewall.html

Edited April 30, 2013 by Stray Kat

[Edstock]

From the link above.

[7Mary3]

I spoke to Don Bowles about that 7.0 experimental engine and he had nothing but good to say about it. This was a big bore version of the 6.2 Ford v8. There were no durability problems that he spoke of at that power level (700+hp) in the drag racing application. In fact he spoke mainly of its untapped potential. Said it was a real good piece. I'd hate to see it go by the wayside. I envision a 7.0 to 7.5 liter truck and marine engine from this design.

 

 

Here is a link to the Don Dowles 7.0 experemental car. http://www.musclemustangfastfords.com/features/mmfp_0711_ford_mustang_roush_ethanol_fuel/viewall.html

 

I am sure that's true, but a race engine and a truck engine are 2 different animals. If anything, medium and heavy truck service is a lot more like marine service, in that it is high load heavy throttle for extended periods of time. And the rumor was the 6.2L had trouble on the dyno while running medium duty truck duty cycles.

[jpd80]

Another possibility would possibly be, a 6.2 V10 off the 5.0 Coyote?

 

360 hp + 25% = 450 hp

380 lb ft + 25% = 485 lb ft...

[7Mary3]

Another possibility would possibly be, a 6.2 V10 off the 5.0 Coyote?

 

360 hp + 25% = 450 hp

380 lb ft + 25% = 485 lb ft...

 

Possibly, but it would be an expensive engine with a very high parts count and might not be too happy lugging at low R.P.M.'s. Long term durability in a large truck could be an issue as well. Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the Coyote have the same bore spacing as the Mod.? Would a 5.8L V-8 Coyote be a possible replacement for the 6.2L in the F-250 and F-350? Keep the V-10 around for the larger trucks?

[theoldwizard]

I would be absolutely SHOCKED to see another V10 come out of Ford !

 

The :logical" engine would be a 3 valve 7.0L+ off of the current 6.2L. The biggest issue is that Ford can not come up with a engineering cost/production volume cost analysis that shows that such an engine would be cost effective.

 

What make that equation even worse is that for the F650/750 they really need an engine over 8.0L so that it still puts out adequate power with LPG/CNG. At that size, the current 6.2L probably would not be a viable starting point. To get to that size, you would need a bore of about 4.400 - the 6.2L has a bore of 4.015

[Bob Rosadini]

I would be absolutely SHOCKED to see another V10 come out of Ford !

 

The :logical" engine would be a 3 valve 7.0L+ off of the current 6.2L. The biggest issue is that Ford can not come up with a engineering cost/production volume cost analysis that shows that such an engine would be cost effective.

 

What make that equation even worse is that for the F650/750 they really need an engine over 8.0L so that it still puts out adequate power with LPG/CNG. At that size, the current 6.2L probably would not be a viable starting point. To get to that size, you would need a bore of about 4.400 - the 6.2L has a bore of 4.015

Alot of knowledgeable posts here about merits of 6.2, V-10, "boss" etc. This has probably been explained before, but what is wrong with bringing back the 460? Recognizing that Ford has banished pushrods but they seem to be still working well for GM. Seems to me that the Mod motor has a lot of baggage for some of TODAY'S needs.

 

I completely buy into the need to have commonality of components, but reading all these posts, it seems to me that no one has come up with a better solution when it is apparent that the old .."can't beat cubic inches" clearly applies to gaseous fuel engines. When the decision was made 10/15 years ago that the big block (FE?) was history, was not the common thought that diesel would rule in the commercial world? Seems like back then, the price disparity between gasoline and ULSD was not an issue-diesel clearly was the cheaper fuel. Likewise neither was "fracking" on the horizon-at least with the planning guys.

 

Time to face the realities of today???