I'm still wondering why Ford hasn't gone to multiple-displacement ... It would be easy enough with the OHC.

 

Exactly! I give Dodge and GM some credit for exploring these technologies. With the HEMI...and GM with Hybrid trucks.

My issue with the "Eco-boost" with FORD is that most folks are going to use the twin turbo often. Which in the end...will result in less MPG's and higher maintenance costs. $$$ Having a smaller engine do what a larger displacement engine was designed for...just doesn't make sense in the long run. The components of the smaller "Eco" engine are going to be under more stress...and might result in more failed engines. I guess time will tell...


biz

 

It is actually more difficult to engineer multiple displacement into an OHC engine than an OHV engine. This is a major reason why GM has kept a lot of their engines OHV. If you look at a Chevy LS with DOD, the mechanism is in the valley under the intake manifold. They basically use an articulated valve lifter. In an OHC design, particularly a multi-valve, there is very little room to house the mechanism to disable the valve. It can be done, but it makes for a very large head. I would imagine it would be almost impossible to add variable displacement to the 3 valve Triton V-10, as the one head has a balance shaft in it.

 

So do it to the other head, and just remove the oil pressure from the lash adjusters, making them basically very weak springs.

 

Is it really worth it? I have not heard great improvments in mileage, at least on trucks. Would be interested to see how it lasts say 200k miles down the road.

You can call me closed minded but I honestly don't want that "technology" on one of my trucks. As of now I consider it a gimmick to sell more trucks. So many people buy trucks that don't really need them so they want to wring every mpg out of them so they don't pay so much. If you want a truck or larger vehicle you have to pay for it.

 

I wonder where you are getting your information from?

 

Ford has been running Eaton Root Style Blower in the Lightning F150's and Cobra Mustangs for quite a while. I have not heard of one problem. I am sure the Turbo's will be the same.

 

I hope you are right V10_Cougar.

We all remember the issues the 6.0L PSD has had with its turbo. Plus...folks that are not familiar with turbos are going to get a crash course learning the maintenance with them. Using FULL sync oil...and making sure to let the engine idle a few minutes after a hard run...so not to cause over heating of the twin turbos. I don't know...


biz

 

Biz,

I hope I am right too.

 

The Dodge system actually holds the valves closed in MDS mode to keep from losing power from pumping air in and out of the down cylinders. This way the force of one piston going up and compressing what air is in the cylinder is counteracted by a different deactivated cylinder being forced back down from the compressed air. This way the 4 deactivated cylinders cancel each other out.
I'm not sure how the GM version works.

I think this would be difficult to compact all od this into the OHC heads.

 

If the 6.2 is canceled I am certainly highly disappointed but yet not surprised. I'm hard core Ford and wouldn't have anything else but I believe Ford needs to root out the sissies in their development teams and grow some *****. Why can't they shove a 425 horse v8 into nearly everything they have like Dodge? They pull the plug on all of their best ideas. Always. The concept Lightning was bound to be the best yet! Canceled. The entire SVT team canceled. I understand they have to meet all these government and emissions bullspit, but Dodge still makes crazy stuff, why can't Ford? You can't buy a V8 pickup with over 300hp without spending 60 grand... Get with the program guys!

 

If you haven't noticed, Dodge ain't doing so well either... Could it be the cost of the high-power-output vehicles not selling? Hmm...

 

We need pneumatic valves like the honda moto GP bikes.... or solenoid actuated valves... more precise and selectable

 

IMO...FORD has canceled all this NEW development because it does not have the "cash" to get it done. I was just watching the DOW stock market...and this is what FORD is working with...

52 week high = $8.99/share
52 week low = $1.80/share
Today trading at $2.12/share

That is really low for a company that was doing so well just a few years ago. Currently they are listed as a "moderate sell". As is GM and Dodge...

The American or Big 3 auto industry is in turmoil and FORD is trying to save all the cash it can.


biz

 

This is a no brainer, only produce what you can sell. If you can only sell 100 rangers, then only build 100 rangers. Keep production inline with profit. It's when you have to eat vehicles you loose out. Also give americans what they want, be it escapes or rangers, the focus or F-150 and mustangs. Build on your success, make whats selling better and more interesting. Ford was just too big and crumbled under it's own weight. It needs to be a leaner, meaner company as they are doing. When you get a capable suv like the escape 4x4 with a 240 hp V-6 getting 26 mpg, your on the right track. We get 24-25 mpg highway with our 4x4 V-6 mariner with only a 4-speed automatic. I know the 6-speeds are getting 26 or better. We get 22.2 local and we just took it to W,Va and it was quit capable for a crossover in the mountains. It's not my jeep, but it wasn't bad at all, plus alot more comfortable. These are the things ford is doing right.