Ford Rethinks Big Block V8s

Mark Kovalsky · #1 (**permalink**) 06-23-2008, 01:53 PM

Ford rethinks big-block V8 plan - AutoWeek Magazine

boxcar1974 · #2 (**permalink**) 06-23-2008, 04:23 PM

Makes sence to me. Truck sales are way down and gas prices are way up. They should to the cheapest most efficient route. If that means a new V8 that has adequate power with a increase by 10-20% in fuel effeciency that is what they should do.

We have to supreme obligation to reduce our dependance on foriegn oil. I think the puffing your chest out engine wars is stupid. Do whats right for the situation at hand.

Krewat · #3 (**permalink**) 06-23-2008, 09:47 PM

I shoulda started a pool... Seriously, did I call this one, or WHAT?

If they add direct-injection to the 3-valve 4.6L heads, it'll work in the V10 too...

Raider50 · #4 (**permalink**) 06-23-2008, 10:56 PM

well them saying it will be "as fuel efficient as possible" says twin turbo direct injection ecoboost 5.4 to me. I am ok losing the 6.2 as long as a ecoboost 5.4 is available. However a ecoboost v10 would replace ever needing viagra in my book. This is just wishful thinking on my part, but maybe the ecoboost on the larger motors could be called boss just to make some of us happy to be able to say weve got a boss when the other guy says hes got a hemi.

tjthegreat · #5 (**permalink**) 06-24-2008, 10:16 AM

can some1 explain ecoboost to me?

jasongt06 · #6 (**permalink**) 06-24-2008, 10:18 AM

ecoboost is applying twin turbochargers to these engines to make up for lack of displacement.

Krewat · #7 (**permalink**) 06-24-2008, 11:20 AM

Along with direct injection.

fordtruckman · #8 (**permalink**) 06-25-2008, 11:37 PM

I'm thinking turbochargers are the way to go, most will complain that there is no replacement for displacement but i say there needs to be.

tjthegreat · #9 (**permalink**) 06-26-2008, 01:53 AM

o sounds pretty simple

Fosters · #10 (**permalink**) 06-27-2008, 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fordtruckman

I'm thinking turbochargers are the way to go, most will complain that there is no replacement for displacement but i say there needs to be.

turbochargers don't exactly create power out of just air either...

mustange70 · #11 (**permalink**) 07-04-2008, 10:23 PM

But the efficency of the engine goes way up, as turbos turn waste heat (ie energy) into power, ie. more power per gallon of gas with the similar mileage, more displacement will eat gas quicker then a turbo would as well (if everything is setup properly).

dkf · #12 (**permalink**) 07-06-2008, 06:21 PM

Turbos don't produce power from heat. They produce power from moving air/gases from the exhaust. Heat is the enemy of making power with any forced induction. Thats why intercoolers and water/meth injection can up the power significantly by reducing temps. All the turbo problems Ford has had in diesels makes me very warry of the turbos in the ecoboost. I guess we'll see how it turns out.

IMO Ford should drop the 4.4l diesel as well, even though many people think it will be the best thing in the world. I just think it would be a hard sell right now.

tjthegreat · #13 (**permalink**) 07-06-2008, 06:25 PM

they should just put a 4cyl diesel in the f150,it would be powerful enough and it would get really good mpgs

92f150I6 · #14 (**permalink**) 07-07-2008, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tjthegreat

they should just put a 4cyl diesel in the f150,it would be powerful enough and it would get really good mpgs

I really don't know if that is what should be done. Until Diesels respond like gassers, are cost competitive with gassers, and don't cost a bunch to maintain, then maybe they will take off. Right now with the cost of the diesel engine so high as well as cost of fuel, I'd never buy one.

tjthegreat · #15 (**permalink**) 07-08-2008, 10:39 AM

same with me i really dont think they should make one at all let alone the 4.4 v8 diesel