Why would you need a bigger engine?

Whats actually tougher, a plane jane simple gas engine, with huge displacement, or a little engine, with beefier parts to handle the extra stress, and piston cooling jets like a diesel, to handle the heat ?

What year is you're v10, I bet the TQ curve is closer than you realise to the ecoboost.

 

There is nothing in the ecoboost technology to prevent it from being used as a heavy duty work engine right now. The basis of the ecoboost success is use and management of turbo boost. This is already in use in all modern diesel pickup applications. The only thing holding back ecoboost tech from being the gas alternate in the Super Duty is peoples mistrust and outdated belief in old school ideas about number of cylinders and "bigger-is-better".

 

Actually there is something holding back ecoboost style towing motors; the powerstroke.


There was talk a while ago, about how the new 5.0 had casting for holes for direct injection, and would probably be able to pump out 400-500 HP, and indeed would have higher TQ than the 6.7 diesel.

With the current ecoboost released, we know that the technology is not nearly expensive as a diesel, what would happen to the powerstroke sales? They just released a new engine, and I'm sure they want to sell as many as they can before introducing a cheaper product that will out perform.

 

The bigger engine would have to come with more horsepower and torque, obviously. It just seems to me to have a bigger engine is more simplistic and therefore easier to repair and work on, than a small engine with a turbo or supercharger.
My V10 is a '08.

 

Threads like this sure do bring out the myths. Good stuff though...

No disrespect intended, but this is an old myth that simply won't die, and is a result of not having an understanding of the relationship of torque and horsepower. IN a nutshell:

HP = (Torque x RPM)/5252

Horsepower is a measure of how fast the engine is doing work, while the torque is a very simple measurement of how hard the engine is applying a torsional force. If I were to build an engine with 1,000,000 ft-lbs of torque, but only at 1 RPM I would only be making 190 HP. Meaning my old 4.3L Blazer would pull just as hard at 4,500 RPM as this million foot-pound engine would at 1 RPM.

You can have torque without horsepower, but this ONLY exists at zero RPM. So when you're using a ratchet to free a stuck bolt you are applying torque without RPM, so you are creating no power. But a running engine can NEVER be making torque without horsepower because it's always spinning. Peak torque and torque curves tell you about how the engine makes power, but it is power output, or horsepower, that is the measure of an engine's output. For example I could say that it's the 800 ft-lbs available on the 6.7L PSD that can pull a heavy trailer up a hill in top gear without downshifting. But what I really mean is it's the 243.7 HP that's made at 1,600 RPM that provides an accurate baseline. Because I could make 800 ft-lbs at half those RPMs and end up making half the horsepower. Yup, I'm saying that if an engine made 800 ft-lbs at only 800 RPMs, my Fusion's little 2.5L 4-cylinder engine can pull harder!

I think this used to be true in the past. By that I mean years ago, like the 1960s and such. I've known lots of people with lots of different vehicles, and I have yet to meet any one of them who has burnt out the engine in their vehicle. And I'm not talking about tuning it and blowing it up, or running it out of oil. We have folks that tow with gas engines who constantly sing above 4,000 RPMs under full load, and they typically wear out the truck before the engine is ready to quit. Have you ever met someone who has simply worn out a gas engine before 200,000 miles?

Why do you think higher displacement will make the work easier? Hell, the 460 CI, 7.5L V8 that was used in the previous generation made a whopping peak 425 HP and a measly 245 HP. Yup, this engine that displaces a whole 45 CI more than your "small" V10 would have to work quite a bit harder to do the same work. Even the relatively gargantuan 496 CI Vortec 8.1L V8 that GM used up until a few years ago made less power and torque than your V10. So how is all this increased displacement making anything easier?

 

Forced induction basically adds "displacement" by ramming air (with added fuel) down the engines throat making produce more power. There is still only so much power you can get out of 1 cubic inch however. Thus all being equal more displacement has the advantage.

I think if Ford takes the 5.0l, adds DI and a forced induction system similar in design to the 3.5l EB it will be a force to reckoned with. The reliability just HAS to be impeccable.

 

I think it could go in the superduty, and be called "workboost" or "towboost"
or something.

 

Sorry to break it to you but the 6.2 already makes more hp than your v10. And what could be easier and more simplistic to work on than having 2 less cylinders? From my post earlier in this thread:

3v 6.8 413ci v10 = 362hp
6.2 379ci v8 = 385hp

I will grant that the v10 does have a bit more torque than the 6.2 does but I question whether it's enough that you would ever notice, especially w/ the 6sp transmission w/ the 6.2.

 

I know this might sound stupid to comment here, but I'd take the 6.2 just cause you can put sweet exhaust on it and it doesn't sound like a hornet.

 

Only time will tell on the F150's. I think a lot of F150's are not kept very long (leases or people trading up more frequently) so hard to see a one owner long term use vehicle. But A LOT of ecoboosts have been sold so the market will have a ton to base the longevity on.

As for the original topic it wasn't for comparing a 1994 460 to a 2011 6.2. I'd hope we would've been able to create more power today. But again the simple fact that since about 2003 the displacement of the SUPER DUTY diesel and V8 gas has increased along with each motor having a higher output. So for a simple observation it looks as though in the SuperDuty line, displacement has played a factor. 6.0 to 6.4 to 6.7, regardless who makes it, is an increase along with 5.4 to 6.2 each successor having an increase in output. If they decide to make an ecoboost version for the SuperDuty then great. But with the power hungry population how would you make it have more power. No one wants that V6 ecoboost in the SuperDuty platform but some want to see the 5.0 in ecoboost, which in theory, would creat more power that the F150 motor. Oh yea the 5.0 would be larger displacement and maybe the following 3 year power increase would be a 5.6. Just saying.