Jump to content

Sevensecondsuv

Member
  • Posts

    1,649
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

Sevensecondsuv last won the day on February 16 2021

Sevensecondsuv had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Sevensecondsuv's Achievements

369

Reputation

  1. No reason to put all the eggs in one basket. Also there's millions of ICE trucks to sell for many, many years before EV (and that's still a big IF) completely replaces ICE. So it makes sense to continue investing in ICE tech that has the potential to be a game changer. I am glad to hear it's an inline. No reason for V6 any more now that they aren't using six cylinders in FWD platforms. Inline is smoother and easier packaging turbos.
  2. I knew Jac Nasser was CEO when the decision was made and executed, I've just always wondered why. Why walk away from the business the company spent decades cultivating and had become a major player in? I understand many of the decisions Nasser made were unpopular at the time and didn't age well either.
  3. Ford did have their own "bullet proof" diesels - the 401/6.6 and 474/7.8 engines were used in those trucks alongside Cat/Cummins/DD diesel power and FE/385 gassers. Those Ford diesels started in 1965 ag tractors and continued in various forms through about 2008 in New Holland stuff before emissions finally mandated a switch to the current Fiat-supplied motors. Anyways, the 6.6 and 7.8 in trucks seem to be regarded as slow (but what wasn't back in the days of 200 hp Class 7 trucks?) but very reliable. I never understood why Ford just walked away from that business and that engine line specifically. Why was it the IH V8 diesel that went in pickups starting in the 80s instead of Ford's successful in-house 6.6L?
  4. The OHC engines I've assembled all turned over very easily (no wrench needed) when it was just the rotating assembly and no head / timing components in place. The need for wrenches came once the valvetrain, cam(s) and timing set were installed.
  5. My thoughts on the 6.8 is that it will essentially be a 7.3 intended for mustang/f150 performance applications. My guess is the 6.8L will feature an aluminum block and the displacement is the result of shortening the stroke a little to get a 7000 rpm powerband and possibly tightening the bore a little to get combustion efficient enough to pass emissions muster in a passenger vehicle class. Output of the 6.8 is going to be entirely dependent on heads/cam/intake. The 7.3 makes 435 hp with an inline valve head design and cam/intake designed for pulling stumps in a heavy truck. If they give the 6.8 a different head with splayed valves and a more aggressive cam and intake, then 600+ hp naturally aspirated is possible. I would think that'd be enough to stand out in the marketplace. Then again maybe the 6.8 is going to be overhead cam after all. It could be the long lost performance variant of the 6.2. Can you imagine coyote-style 4v heads with a 105 mm bore? That would be capable of 700+ hp !!!
  6. One major issue was the windmills were taken out by the ice storm. The second issue is texas has a LOT of natural gas fired generation. Those gas lines loose a lot of capacity when it gets cold. Compounding the issue, natural gas gets diverted to heating demand in the winter, especially when it's this cold. So there's a lot of natural gas generation offline in Texas on top of the windmills being down. It used to be natural gas was only used for "peaker plants" that came online during demand peaks only, with nuclear and coal carrying the base load (i.e. they run 'round the clock). As a result of the fracking revolution over the last decade, natural gas has gotten so cheap it's actually displacing coal and nuclear as a baseload source. The only trouble is the fuel supply infrastructure isn't really optimal for baseload reliability.
  7. Power generation is a real mess lately. Coal is under fire from all sides and plants are shutting down permanently left and right. Nuclear is having a hard time competing with natural gas plants on cost and are shutting down permanently despite being far better suited for baseload operation than gas is. Meanwhile the govt incentive money keeps flowing to wind and solar, even to the point of building it where it's not needed just to collect the incentive money. Then more nat gas plants are thrown up in the background, out of site and with no fanfare since they're not "clean", to make up for the gaps in wind/solar and to backfill the coal and nuke plants that have shut down. It all works well enough that consumers (voters) don't notice until a good cold spell hits deep into the midwest. Then the windmills freeze and all the gas is diverted to heating needs. Next thing you know it's rolling brownouts, people freezing, and entire industries shutting down due to lack of natural gas or electricty. But yeah, let's just throw a bunch of EV load in too. I'm sure it'll all work out great.
  8. Maybe they're testing the rumored 6.8L ? The camo could be for a new/extra bump in the hood or revised air intake for the big V8....
  9. Yep, EVs aren't ready for prime time (and that's more due to society/infrastructure than the actual EV products) but it appears that's the direction we're headed like it or not come 2025 and the Obama CAFE changes. This is pretty much exactly what it looks like when the govt tries to "fix problems". The main problems/unanswered questions with EVs in terms of mass adoption: 1) Where is all the electricity going to come from? Oil currently provides about as much energy as all of our current electricity generation does... 2) How are we going to charge them? Retrofit every home with one or more 240v chargers? What about non-residential charging? 3) Are people just going to be expected to accept that it takes a half hour to charge vs 3 minutes to fill an ICE car with gasoline? 4) What about the terrible heavy metal pollution involved in making EV batteries? 5) So far EVs have downright abysmal resale/residual value. Are consumers just supposed to eat that cost? I know I'll be stocking up on ICEs before we hit the 2025 cliff.....
  10. I only hope we don't end up disposing of electric cars like we do consumer electronics - namely paying to ship them to "developing" southeast asia nations where they have no fancies about environmental responsibility and are happy to either burn them in huge piles or dump them in the ocean. At least with traditional automobiles the typical disposal process is stripping for core parts at a junkyard and then recycling the raw material here at home.
  11. I agree with that except for the bit about resale value. How much resale value does a 3-year old laptop have? I think electric cars will fare more like consumer electronics than traditional automobiles because they're built and marketed more like consumer electronics than traditional automobiles. Once the manufacturer stops supporting the software and subscription and the batteries go weak, an electric car will be worth pretty close to zero, just like an old laptop. And I don't foresee the timeline being much different than other consumer electronics either, 8-10 years tops. Meanwhile traditional automobiles built 10, 20, 50, 100 years ago can still have substantial residual value depending on condition.
  12. No experience with 3v motors but I've had excellent service from several 2v motors in pickups, vans, and an excursion. The two problems are blowing out spark plugs (not applicable to 3V motors) and broken exhaust manifold studs. Other than that they'll just go. In my experience they run better at 300-400k miles than any other gas truck engine out there. I did read something about rocker arm failure in some of the 2011+ 3v motors.
  13. Well if they're going to come out with a bunch more bronco models, I'd like to see an expedition/suburban-length bronco with seating for 7 and space behind the 3rd row seat. Shouldn't be too hard to extend the wheelbase and add more rear overhang. The hard part would be more engine for what would obviously be a bigger, heavier vehicle. Call it the Bronco Max?
  14. I'm hoping for a six cylinder option in the US. I know the 2.3 turbo competes favorably in it's segment, but a V6 would really round out the offering. I also tend to think Ford has bigger plans for the 7-spd manual they spent good money developing than simply 10-20% of Bronco production. We'll see though.....
  15. This thing is for when a crown vic isn't "built Ford tough" enough for you lol !!!
×
×
  • Create New...