Jump to content

New Ford 7.0 L....?


Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, Sevensecondsuv said:

So GM finally has an answer to Ford's V10 torque of 457 ft-lbs it's been rated at since 2005. Only the V10 does it 750 RPM earlier.

I don't think this 6.6 is going to be much competition for the new 7.3. On paper the 6.6 LS looks like a V10 that pulls 40 hp harder at the expense of low-end grunt. Yawn.

I think the 7.3L will beat it power-wise, but the 6.6L will be a tough and reliable engine.  GM spent MUCH less to bring this engine to market.  And I'll bet GM Performance will have hi-po crate versions out in the next catalog.  Wonder how the 6.6L would do with a blower on it............

BTW- the 6.6L will use an improved version of the current 6L90 6 speed transmission.  LS's like to rev., probably doesn't need 10 gears. 

 

Edited by 7Mary3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

and with that, I think that GM just blinked.

While the 6.6 V8 and 6L90 is a good combination, a re-work of the 6.0 Vortec line and no 10-speed auto smacks of cost cutting. The equivalent would be Ford increasing bore and stroke on the 6.2 Boss to make a 6.8 V8 or 7.0 V8 and calling it job done, you just know that ford would get panned for doing that but GM gets a pass on just reworking its small block....

I don't mean to be overly harsh on GM, they may have more planned in the works if the 6.6 is successful in increasing  sales of gasoline HDs.

Ford's  7.3 V8 and 10-speed auto fills the long term void created when the 6.8 V10 was withdrawn for Super Duty, It will be interesting to see what happens with regards to possible sales bleed away from the 6.7 Powerstroke to the 7.3 gas engine and whether propane or natural gas prep kits are offered...If the new Ford 7.3 lifts sales, will Ford have enough production capacity to keep up supply?

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

and with that, I think that GM just blinked.

While the 6.6 V8 and 6L90 is a good combination, a re-work of the 6.0 Vortec line and no 10-speed auto smacks of cost cutting. The equivalent would be Ford increasing bore and stroke on the 6.2 Boss to make a 6.8 V8 or 7.0 V8 and calling it job done, you just know that ford would get panned for doing that but GM gets a pass on just reworking its small block....

I don't mean to be overly harsh on GM, they may have more planned in the works if the 6.6 is successful in increasing  sales of gasoline HDs.

Ford's  7.3 V8 and 10-speed auto fills the long term void created when the 6.8 V10 was withdrawn for Super Duty, It will be interesting to see what happens with regards to possible sales bleed away from the 6.7 Powerstroke to the 7.3 gas engine and whether propane or natural gas prep kits are offered...

Jp-Bottom line unless they blow it on pricing this thing will be a home run in class 5,6 and 7.  No doubt there will be loyal Ford customers who in any case would have bought a Ford so yes, I would guess no net sales gain.  But for those who are buying Hinos, Internationals, Paccars, and the new 5500, 6500 GM's here is a chance for them to get  the power they need without the up front first cost premium that goes with the diesels  as well as the maintenance savings associated with higher oil change costs, as well all the BS associated with DEF issues.  

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/30/2019 at 10:11 AM, MY93SHO said:

the

All very interesting info and discussion on the new 7.3 V8 and the GM 6.6 V8.

The design looks like a bulked up 351 W with added technology of variable valve timing at much wider bore centers with GM LS heart shaped combustion chamber.

Mary you are right about machined slots between cylinders!  We did that on current Chrysler FCA 3.6 liter V6. 

Great way to have stronger block and H2O where you really need it!

Ford FE and original Chevy 2.8 V6 had narrow cylinder heads that had cooling issues because of lack of water passages in critical places. I’m sure ford would not make that mistake again in new engine. Actually ford went backwards when the Lincoln Y block was discontinued. 4.63” bore centers, and they tooled the FE andMEL!

also, expect a smaller version of the new ford 7.3 to eventually replace the 6.2 doc V8 some time in the future.

edselford

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, edselford said:

Ford FE and original Chevy 2.8 V6 had narrow cylinder heads that had cooling issues because of lack of water passages in critical places. I’m sure ford would not make that mistake again in new engine. Actually ford went backwards when the Lincoln Y block was discontinued. 4.63” bore centers, and they tooled the FE andMEL!

edselford

The 317 'Cargo King' and later 332 versions of the Lincoln Y-Block were excellent truck engines.  Very durable, good cooling, and a very tall block, they probably were better than the 'FT' truck engines that followed, and could have been developed further.  Ford found themselves at a disadvantage in the mid-70's, even the FT 391 was easily out-performed by the Chevy 427 and Dodge 413 in medium duty trucks.  Ford responded with a special '475' version of the Super Duty V-8 for medium duty trucks, it had power and durability but very poor fuel economy.  The fix didn't come until 1979 when Ford released the 370 and 429 'truck' versions of the Lima.  Interesting that the 429 Lima eventually outperformed the 534 Super Duty!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ford could of easily expand the 6.2 V8 to 7.3 liters.

There are many reasons they did not. I think they needed a gas engine for the F450/550/650 that made the most sense ie lowest cost, lowest frictional losses, best low end torque and best fuel economy for intended duty cycle.

If someone wants a V8 at about 7.0 liters, for mustang, it would probably be a dual overhead cam version of the 6.2. The question always is can the financial results justify the investment and resources given the SC 5.2 V8 availability.

Also, both GM LS gen 1 through 5 and the new ford 7.3. Engineblock archetectures look allot like the old Buick 364/401 V8 engine block!

edselford

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2019 at 12:49 PM, 7Mary3 said:

The 317 'Cargo King' and later 332 versions of the Lincoln Y-Block were excellent truck engines.  Very durable, good cooling, and a very tall block, they probably were better than the 'FT' truck engines that followed, and could have been developed further.  Ford found themselves at a disadvantage in the mid-70's, even the FT 391 was easily out-performed by the Chevy 427 and Dodge 413 in medium duty trucks.  Ford responded with a special '475' version of the Super Duty V-8 for medium duty trucks, it had power and durability but very poor fuel economy.  The fix didn't come until 1979 when Ford released the 370 and 429 'truck' versions of the Lima.  Interesting that the 429 Lima eventually outperformed the 534 Super Duty!  

I don’t know if I agree with you on all of this. The 330 HD , 361 and 391 were fabulously successful in C, F and LN trucks. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/11/2019 at 12:49 PM, 7Mary3 said:

The 317 'Cargo King' and later 332 versions of the Lincoln Y-Block were excellent truck engines.  Very durable, good cooling, and a very tall block, they probably were better than the 'FT' truck engines that followed, and could have been developed further.  Ford found themselves at a disadvantage in the mid-70's, even the FT 391 was easily out-performed by the Chevy 427 and Dodge 413 in medium duty trucks.  Ford responded with a special '475' version of the Super Duty V-8 for medium duty trucks, it had power and durability but very poor fuel economy.  The fix didn't come until 1979 when Ford released the 370 and 429 'truck' versions of the Lima.  Interesting that the 429 Lima eventually outperformed the 534 Super Duty!  

Just curious-never heard that before about 429 vs. 534-or are you talking about fuel economy only?  And when the 429 came out in 800 series wasn't the Super Duty series out of production?

Also what WAS a 475?  I was of the belief it was NOT a Super Duty off shoot but an FE variant??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say the FT's were bad, it's just that they were down on power compared to the competition at the time (mid-70's).  We had a lot of F-series with 361 XD's (that basically meant 4 bbl. carb.), and a Chevy 366 would absolutely walk a 361.  So would a medium duty Dodge with the 360-3 or 361-3.  The 370 Lima was much better as well with a 4 bbl..  The FT's did tend to run not if worked hard.  I remember having a lot of radiators on those trucks rodded out, any blockage made things worse.  Didn't have to do too many major repairs to FT's, but I remember one 361XD we had that burned a bunch of valves.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Just curious-never heard that before about 429 vs. 534-or are you talking about fuel economy only?  And when the 429 came out in 800 series wasn't the Super Duty series out of production?

Also what WAS a 475?  I was of the belief it was NOT a Super Duty off shoot but an FE variant??

The '475' was a 477 used in medium duty F-800's and F-880's (yes, F-880) from 1974 to 1979.  It was supposed to be 'lighter duty' version of the 477 for medium duty trucks, but I think it was exactly the same engine.  Ford needed the 475 to compete with the Chevy 427, and that came from Ford truck engineer James Wagner (get a copy of his book 'Ford Trucks Since 1905' if you don't have one already, he covers this).  The 475 was dropped from the F series after 1979, but the 534 was actually built until 1981 for the C series.  I remember talking to another Ford Truck engineer once about the 534 and he told me that the 429 made more usable power and used a lot less gas doing it by the late 70's!  Maybe not a totally fair comparison, the old Super Duty didn't do well after they installed all the emission controls are retarded the timing.  The more modern Lima ran cleaner.  The Super Duty had a 'plank' head, like a Chevy 409 or MEL engine, not efficient.  Surprisingly. Ford did design a nice new intake manifold for all the Super Duty engines around 1977.  It was a one-piece design with smooth runners, the original Super Duty intake was a horrible 3 piece affair that had 3 90 degree turns from carb. to port!          

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

The '475' was a 477 used in medium duty F-800's and F-880's (yes, F-880) from 1974 to 1979.  It was supposed to be 'lighter duty' version of the 477 for medium duty trucks, but I think it was exactly the same engine.  Ford needed the 475 to compete with the Chevy 427, and that came from Ford truck engineer James Wagner (get a copy of his book 'Ford Trucks Since 1905' if you don't have one already, he covers this).  The 475 was dropped from the F series after 1979, but the 534 was actually built until 1981 for the C series.  I remember talking to another Ford Truck engineer once about the 534 and he told me that the 429 made more usable power and used a lot less gas doing it by the late 70's!  Maybe not a totally fair comparison, the old Super Duty didn't do well after they installed all the emission controls are retarded the timing.  The more modern Lima ran cleaner.  The Super Duty had a 'plank' head, like a Chevy 409 or MEL engine, not efficient.  Surprisingly. Ford did design a nice new intake manifold for all the Super Duty engines around 1977.  It was a one-piece design with smooth runners, the original Super Duty intake was a horrible 3 piece affair that had 3 90 degree turns from carb. to port!          

Thx-after I did my post I did a search.  found a lot of BS but also one post that said exact same block as 477.  Biggest difference was it did not carry the 100,000 mile warranty that the SD did.  And I do have Wagner's book but could not find any specifics on 475 -other than its availability in specific service.

One interesting thing I remember.  Boston Globe paper had a fleet of F-800's. I was on I-495 one night passing one, looked over and entire muffler was glowing red! No clue what motor they had in them-this was about '78-80.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/9/2019 at 4:38 PM, jpd80 said:

Yes, I've actually sonic tested a lot of blocks over the past 30 years,  ...

I am always AMAZED at how far casting technology has come in the past 30+ years !  UNBELIEVABLE !!  Look that those exhaust manifolds.  Cast stainless (?) and they look almost as good as tube headers.  (IIRC, the first time Ford put tube headers on a production car was the Escort GT EFI.)

Composite intake and who need aftermarket manifolds !  I'm sure the cylinder heads could use a bit of "port matching" bit certainly no "hogging out" !

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, theoldwizard said:

I am always AMAZED at how far casting technology has come in the past 30+ years !  UNBELIEVABLE !!  Look that those exhaust manifolds.  Cast stainless (?) and they look almost as good as tube headers.  (IIRC, the first time Ford put tube headers on a production car was the Escort GT EFI.)

Composite intake and who need aftermarket manifolds !  I'm sure the cylinder heads could use a bit of "port matching" bit certainly no "hogging out" !

 

Without a doubt, those exhaust manifolds are impressive.  Did you know some GM LT's have similar manifolds, and aftermarket headers actually flow WORSE than the stock manifolds!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Thx-after I did my post I did a search.  found a lot of BS but also one post that said exact same block as 477.  Biggest difference was it did not carry the 100,000 mile warranty that the SD did.  And I do have Wagner's book but could not find any specifics on 475 -other than its availability in specific service.

One interesting thing I remember.  Boston Globe paper had a fleet of F-800's. I was on I-495 one night passing one, looked over and entire muffler was glowing red! No clue what motor they had in them-this was about '78-80.

This whole engine  discussion thread has me thinking just how far engine development has come over the decades. Sure those old fellas were reliable but had lower compression and sometimes extra compression rings, lots of cooling water spaces and now here we are with a jumped up small block 6.6 and a Ford with slightly more comfortable dimensions and capacity. We’re in interesting times 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

Oh boy, one of the GM enthusiast website is reporting that GM is working on a V-8 over 8L.!  If true, it has to be for commercial trucks. 

Could it be the 8.1 Vortec but with, lessons learned with the small block LT, maybe some  DI and VCT along with up to date head design.

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Could it be the 8.1 Vortec but with, lessons learned with the small block LT, maybe some  DI and VCT along with up to date head design.

Maybe.  The 8.1L lives on as the PSI 8.8L, which is used in Navistar school buses, both gasoline and propane:

https://imt-technologie.de/file/2016/03/PSI 8.8L-INDUSTRIAL.pdf

But, GM also offers an 8.0L V-8 that is based on the older 7.4L Vortec:

  https://gmserviceinsights.com/2014/04/new-vortec-8-0l-expands-towing-ranges-to-new-extremes/

The 8.0L is used in Freightliner propane fuel medium trucks and school buses.

I have heard rumors that PSI may be planning some significant upgrades to the 8.8L.  If true, that might be the rumored new engine.  Just a guess on my part.   

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...