Jump to content
  • Custom Search


Recommended Posts

I read that piece as well and didn't like the way it was worded. I believe the V10 has been gone from the F-250 for many years and highly doubt the 7X is F-250 bound.

 

Based on all the inconsistencies in that article I doubt I would trust anything AutoForecast Solutions has to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The story I hear is that it will be related to the 6.2L 'Boss', displaces somewhere around 7L, and is designed to replace the V-10. That would seem to imply that it is going into cab and chassis trucks and motorhome chassis, and will likely be suitable for gaseous fuels. The V-10 needs to be replaced, and word is GM is also working on a large displacement gas V-8 for their commercial trucks (and maybe Navistar's too).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The story I hear is that it will be related to the 6.2L 'Boss', displaces somewhere around 7L, and is designed to replace the V-10. That would seem to imply that it is going into cab and chassis trucks and motorhome chassis, and will likely be suitable for gaseous fuels. The V-10 needs to be replaced, and word is GM is also working on a large displacement gas V-8 for their commercial trucks (and maybe Navistar's too).

Correct but you'd have to imagine that it has a role to play in F350 to say, F650 but really as we've been saying

(after you educating me ;)) that Ford really needs and even bigger gas engine in the Medium Duty trucks.

 

So, I wonder if a V10 is possible off either the 6.2 or 7.0 Liter as a way of getting a big gas engine on the cheap....

I can see Ford re-vsiting more of the original FE's dimensions with a possible high deck Boss (9.4" to 10.2")

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my opinion a V10 is not on the table. In the grand scheme of things, how could the low quantities, even if it was used in class 4 through 7 be justified? The current V10 soldiers on because its development was rolled up into the Mod motors, and very little development has been put into it since.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correct but you'd have to imagine that it has a role to play in F350 to say, F650 but really as we've been saying

(after you educating me ;)) that Ford really needs and even bigger gas engine in the Medium Duty trucks.

 

So, I wonder if a V10 is possible off either the 6.2 or 7.0 Liter as a way of getting a big gas engine on the cheap....

I can see Ford re-vsiting more of the original FE's dimensions with a possible high deck Boss (9.4" to 10.2")

 

 

In my opinion a V10 is not on the table. In the grand scheme of things, how could the low quantities, even if it was used in class 4 through 7 be justified? The current V10 soldiers on because its development was rolled up into the Mod motors, and very little development has been put into it since.

Well guys, assuming the new 7.0 has what is needed to address the duty cycle/issues associated with say GVW of 33,000 +/ gcw of say 55,000 (worst case P & D tractor) would not that negate the need for a V-10? (6.8L +) And I would hope the new 7.0 would be designed for future expansion.

 

Seems like the lesson here is who would have thought 5-10 years ago we would be talking about gasoline as being viable again in class 6 and 7-and perhaps even some class 8 vocational applications where you need the legal GVW/GCW ratings but don't have the miles hours/utilization to justify the diesel premium-like for example a boom/crane chassis or a Vactor chassis when the ten wheeler sits on a job site all day and the Vactor's diesel is sucking dirt around buried utilities.??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there's a good chance we see this in the pickups. Maybe not F250, but at least 350. Diesel just isn't as popular anymore with the latest emissions regs/equipment. Buyers are once again looking to the gas engine option. Right now the 6.2 works but is marginal for bigger loads. Plus you've got ram pushing the 410 hp 6.4l in their pickups. Ford needs something bigger if they're going to maintain their leadership in the segment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see a new V-10. The only reason there was a V-10 in the first place was because Ford couldn't grow the Triton past 5.4L and they needed more displacement if they were going to use the Mod. in larger trucks. Had to add a balance shaft to the right head to make it run right, and also needed 3 valve heads to make any power. I always looked at the 6.8L as a compromise with a lot of band-aids on it. Not a cheap engine to manufacture, high parts count though much of the fixed costs were spread out on other engines. I think this new V-8 will be a substantial improvement in all regards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and also needed 3 valve heads to make any power.

Keep in mind that the 310 hp 2 valve PI engine was a significant step up in power from the 260 hp 7.5 it replaced back in the day. However I do see your point with today's power levels.

 

My theory is that it's not so much the heads themselves. Stock un-ported 2 valve PI heads will make 300 HP all day long on a 4.6 with nothing more than headers and a tune. Multiply by 1.25 and that is 375 hp for the V10. The real constriction on the 2v V10s lies with the intake manifold and possibly the cams. I recently grabbed an intake manifold from the junkyard and plan to try acid porting it. If it works out good, I'll try it on my Excursion with a tune and see what kind of difference it'll make. I'm thinking with headers, a ported intake, tune, and possibly cams (which get kind of pricey for the V10), 400 hp should be possible while maintaining a fat enough low end for moving the 7000 lb tank off the line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was thinking today:

1.) 5.0L Coyote motor - small block Ford V8

 

2.) 7X L "new" motor - big block Ford V8

Edited by twintornados

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a good video that shows how much faith a major marine manufacturer has in Ford and the 6.2 engine.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see a new V-10. The only reason there was a V-10 in the first place was because Ford couldn't grow the Triton past 5.4L and they needed more displacement if they were going to use the Mod. in larger trucks. Had to add a balance shaft to the right head to make it run right, and also needed 3 valve heads to make any power. I always looked at the 6.8L as a compromise with a lot of band-aids on it. Not a cheap engine to manufacture, high parts count though much of the fixed costs were spread out on other engines. I think this new V-8 will be a substantial improvement in all regards.

I remember how the V10 was floated as cheap incremental extension of the 5.4 V8 but turned into a nightmare to

developed after the shared crank pins began cracking. It all got hard then with changes upon changes to correct

fundamental flaws n the design. IMO, a stronger engine like the 6.2 or 7.0 wouldn't have the cracking issue of

the 6.8 V10, avoid the need to splay the crank pins, keep primary balance, eliminate the balance shaft, allowing

use of VCT with SOHC and DOHC .... it depends if that's cheaper than doing a bigger bore longer stroke V8.

 

Yes, I agree that a V10 off these later Boss V10 is unlikely but will the new 7.0 V8 have room to grow if needed......

The question is whether Ford is even interested in larger (+7.0 liter) gasoline engine for F650 and F750.

Ford is able to develop the engine to any capacity it sees fit but are they thinking big enough?

 

A properly developed 7.0 V8 with full VCT on 3-valve or 4-valve heads including Ford's PFDI

might give the the power and efficiency increases needed to avoid a larger V8.. ..time will tell.

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of the short sighted view with large gasoline engines has come from fuel price spikes a decade ago and

Ford trying to maximize profit by encourage as many customers as possible into the +$8,000 Powerstroke option.

 

What we're left with is serious gaps in gasoline sales throughout the Super Duty and Medium Duty range.

The 6.2 is great in F250 but not great / terrible in F350 and just not there in F450-550 and then we see

the 6.8 very prominent in F650 but not in F750.

 

Perhaps this new 7.0 is intended for F 350 to F650 as a better way to fill in the gasoline product offerings?

But is Ford sill a little bit light on for engine capacity in the F650 and F750.....

Edited by jpd80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm wouldn't even call the 6.2 "great" in the f250. It makes a good base engine but not a whole lot else. Sure it was a big upgrade from the 5.4 but that's not saying much. I don't know if you've ever driven one, but they really need to rev to make power. It's kind of annoying to have rev your F250 to 5000 rpm to merge with a car on a flatbed trailer in tow. In contrast, the V10 trucks would move the same trailer with a lot less drama and revving.

 

Ford left a hole in the f250/350 lineup when they dropped the 6.8 for 2011 model year. I guess it was worth it getting the 6.7 to market but I would really like to see them plug that hole.

Edited by Sevensecondsuv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear what you say there.and those sewer pipe inlet ports on the 6.2 sure don't help the situation,

I think that's where a lot of precious torque is being lost in the 1500 to 4000 zone and exactly where

the 6.8 V10 kicks butt.

 

Just looking at the torque curve of the 6.2, it seems to have 350 lb ft from 1500 to 3000 then it climbs to 405 lb ft at 4,000.

it's then that you see the 6.8 has another 107 lb ft on the 6.2 all the way through to 3250 rpm and then back to 400 lb ft at 4750 rpm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard the V-10 cranks were quite an issue during development but did prove satisfactory is service. Story was not only were there cracking issues but also excessive loading on the mains. An informal comparison between the 6.2L and the 3 valve Tritons reveals that the 'Boss' is a more robust design, and I particularly like the wider bearings and stronger timing chain tensioner assemblies. I do agree that up to this point the 6.2L seems to be a bit of an underperformer but I think at least part of the problem is the 6R140 is not an appropriate transmission for it. I am hearing the TorqShift G works better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well while I must admit I have not ever driven a V10 and a 6.2 back to back I do have one thing to say. This past week I worked on a 5.4 2V and got it running well. After that I drove a 250 with a 5.4 3V.

 

My observation was that most of the doggieness in the 3 valver was due to the calibration of that damn electronic accelerator pedal.

 

I'll bet a quick recalibration of some basic throttle "tip in" parameters would do wonders for these vehicles.

 

My personal 2007 F150 with a 4.2 V6 has better throttle response than either on of those V8's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh that's definitely true. The factory tuning of the skinny pedal is atrocious. The 3v 5.4s and 6.8s are the worst. The first 3v 5.4 I got in seemed like a downgrade from the 2v but it was all in the gas pedal. A tune makes all the difference in the world. The 6.2s aren't as bad but still benefit from a tune.

Edited by Sevensecondsuv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do agree that up to this point the 6.2L seems to be a bit of an underperformer but I think at least part of the problem is the 6R140 is not an appropriate transmission for it. I am hearing the TorqShift G works better.

That's another good point. I haven't tried a 2017 f250 yet. They did revise the tune for better torque and like you say, an optimized transmission too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoot, switching from normal to Tow/Haul mode will wake up a late-model F-Series; they're heavily biased towards fuel economy in normal driving. Personally, I prefer staying in the 18-19MPG range, so I don't bother with the Tow/Haul mode unless I'm towing or hauling...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And thi is the other side to putting a bigger engine in F250, while CAFE doesn't extend to class 2B,

the EPA now has regs to improve fuel economy in these trucks by around 10%.

That may be the sticking point to offering any larger engines...

 

Also, I wonder if the 6,2 will eventually score the 10 AT, I think that may do wonders for keeping

the engine in the most desirable rev range, be that light running or towing/hauling a load.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that was part of the justification for the 6.2 replacing the 6.8 - they went from the 5R110 to the 6R140 picking ap an extra gear in the process. Still, they don't move a load quite the same as the V10s did. A 10 speed transmission would further equalize things. That said, I know id be happy to fork over an extra $1000 for a larger gas engine option if it were available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that the 310 hp 2 valve PI engine was a significant step up in power from the 260 hp 7.5 it replaced back in the day. However I do see your point with today's power levels.

 

My theory is that it's not so much the heads themselves. Stock un-ported 2 valve PI heads will make 300 HP all day long on a 4.6 with nothing more than headers and a tune. Multiply by 1.25 and that is 375 hp for the V10. The real constriction on the 2v V10s lies with the intake manifold and possibly the cams. I recently grabbed an intake manifold from the junkyard and plan to try acid porting it. If it works out good, I'll try it on my Excursion with a tune and see what kind of difference it'll make. I'm thinking with headers, a ported intake, tune, and possibly cams (which get kind of pricey for the V10), 400 hp should be possible while maintaining a fat enough low end for moving the 7000 lb tank off the line.

Stock PI 2V heads flow 170 cfm (peak @ 28") on the intake side, and they have a negative intake valve angle which causes air to overshoot the valve.

 

Sure, you can somewhat mask lack of head flow with aggressive cams, but the 2V's fundamental problem is lack of intake side flow.

 

The Trick Flow 4.6 2V address the the PI/NPI's negative intake valve angle problem, and subsequently flow and perform much better.

Edited by White99GT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An informal comparison between the 6.2L and the 3 valve Tritons reveals that the 'Boss' is a more robust design, and I particularly like the wider bearings and stronger timing chain tensioner assemblies.

The V10 has an extra main cap, it isn't suffering from a lack of main bearing surface area, the 6.2's timing chain drive is essentially identical to the Modulars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And thi is the other side to putting a bigger engine in F250, while CAFE doesn't extend to class 2B,

the EPA now has regs to improve fuel economy in these trucks by around 10%.

That may be the sticking point to offering any larger engines...

 

Also, I wonder if the 6,2 will eventually score the 10 AT, I think that may do wonders for keeping

the engine in the most desirable rev range, be that light running or towing/hauling a load.

Yes, that is the reason that I do not see a V10 off of the 7 l V8 as being an option. Also, I doubt very much that a 7 l V8 is a clean sheet design. I do not see Ford dumping alot of development time and money into an engine that will not be used below class 4.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×