New Ford 7.3 l V8 gas with pushrods - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums

Go Back  Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Super Duty/Heavy Duty > 2017+ Super Duty
Reload this Page >

New Ford 7.3 l V8 gas with pushrods

Notices
2017+ Super Duty The 2017+ Ford F250, F350, F450 and F550 Super Duty Pickup and Chassis Cab

New Ford 7.3 l V8 gas with pushrods

  #1  
Old 06-16-2018, 05:08 AM
CGiron
CGiron is offline
Senior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 174
CGiron is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Thumbs up New Ford 7.3 l V8 gas with pushrods

New Engine with CGI in the block

Will it come at NAIAS ? Around 450 hp? It will be smaller in height than the current 7.3 as itīs a pushrod and smaller overall size as itīs CGI-block can be made with thinner walls. Opinions?
The tuners will love it.
CGI is used overall the NASCAR racing since long and Ford har currently four engines with block in CGI, The 6.7 l V8 PowerStroke, the 3 l V6 new diesel, the 2,7 l V6 EcoBoost and a 4.4 l V8 diesel just used in Land Rovers
 
  #2  
Old 06-16-2018, 06:42 AM
tseekins's Avatar
tseekins
tseekins is offline
Super Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Maine, Virginia
Posts: 28,552
tseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputationtseekins has a superb reputation
  #3  
Old 06-17-2018, 02:51 AM
Scorpion67
Scorpion67 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 451
Scorpion67 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
CGI would make sense, but Iím not betting on Ford doing something that makes sense. I will bet on the power and torque figures though. On Super Duty (not cab chassis), Iím going with 470/560.
 
  #4  
Old 06-17-2018, 12:04 PM
Tom's Avatar
Tom
Tom is offline
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Isanti, MN
Posts: 23,483
Tom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputation
Very interesting, this will be a good one to follow.

Originally Posted by Scorpion67
CGI would make sense, but I’m not betting on Ford doing something that makes sense.
What makes you say that? CGI has its benefits, but it's also more expensive. It seems to shine in applications making a high specific output under boost (think 2.7L EB and 6.7L PSD), but they've been using grey iron blocks for decades without longevity issues. What would be improved in an N/A engine to justify the cost of CGI? If it makes that much sense, why aren't other manufacturers using this for their truck engines?
 
  #5  
Old 06-17-2018, 02:25 PM
oklarado
oklarado is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 1,032
oklarado is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Originally Posted by Scorpion67 View Post
CGI would make sense, but Iím not betting on Ford doing something that makes sense. I will bet on the power and torque figures though. On Super Duty (not cab chassis), Iím going with 470/560.
Give me 470/560, and 15 hwy mpg and I will be done with diesel for good!
 
  #6  
Old 06-17-2018, 02:42 PM
troverman's Avatar
troverman
troverman is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: NH
Posts: 9,243
troverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud of
It would be interesting to see Ford return to an OHV engine (the 6.7L diesel already is) but it seems a very opposite design to current Ford strategy. Itís no secret that OHV engines tend to have more torque, and perhaps Ford sees the success GM is having with simple,
powerful and efficient OHV engines
 
  #7  
Old 06-17-2018, 04:41 PM
Tom's Avatar
Tom
Tom is offline
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Isanti, MN
Posts: 23,483
Tom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputation
Originally Posted by troverman View Post
Itís no secret that OHV engines tend to have more torque,


Wait...what?

What exactly does camshaft location have to do with torque? The Ford DOHC 5.0L V8 makes more torque than the GM 5.3L does...did nobody tell the 5.3L design team they did it wrong?

and perhaps Ford sees the success GM is having with simple,
powerful and efficient OHV engines
I'd completely agree with this. There's a lot to be said for the simplicity of OHV engines, and they seem to hold up quite well over the years with minor revisions.
[/QUOTE]
 
  #8  
Old 06-17-2018, 04:52 PM
Dentside
Dentside is offline
Freshman User
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 40
Dentside is starting off with a positive reputation.
Originally Posted by Scorpion67 View Post
CGI would make sense, but Iím not betting on Ford doing something that makes sense. I will bet on the power and torque figures though. On Super Duty (not cab chassis), Iím going with 470/560.
CGI in this application only makes sense from a weight savings perspective, and I'm not an engineer so I don't know the savings vs. the added expense.

The cynic in me still believes Ford won't offer a gas engine with more HP than the diesel. No way they're going to undercut a $9000 markup.

This is most likely going in chassis cabs and motorhome duty only.
 
  #9  
Old 06-17-2018, 06:26 PM
troverman's Avatar
troverman
troverman is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: NH
Posts: 9,243
troverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud of
Originally Posted by Tom View Post
Wait...what?

What exactly does camshaft location have to do with torque? The Ford DOHC 5.0L V8 makes more torque than the GM 5.3L does...
Thatís one example. The GM 6.2 makes more power and torque than the Ford 6.2. OHC engines tend to rev higher and make their power up higher. Notice I say ďtendĒ because itís not always the case...but historically OHC engines produce less torque
 
  #10  
Old 06-17-2018, 07:10 PM
640 CI Aluminum FORD
640 CI Aluminum FORD is offline
Posting Guru
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,202
640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.640 CI Aluminum FORD has a great reputation on FTE.
This is almost enough to make me consider diving back into car payments.
 
  #11  
Old 06-17-2018, 08:21 PM
Tom's Avatar
Tom
Tom is offline
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Isanti, MN
Posts: 23,483
Tom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputationTom has a superb reputation
Originally Posted by Dentside View Post
The cynic in me still believes Ford won't offer a gas engine with more HP than the diesel. No way they're going to undercut a $9000 markup.
I dunno...the gas engines always had more power than the diesel option in the past. That changed in 2011, but PSDs were commanding an $8K markup for years prior to that.

Originally Posted by troverman View Post
Thatís one example. The GM 6.2 makes more power and torque than the Ford 6.2. OHC engines tend to rev higher and make their power up higher. Notice I say ďtendĒ because itís not always the case...but historically OHC engines produce less torque
The GM 6.2L is a different animal, though. It's got significantly higher compression than the 6.0L offered in their HD models, and has significantly more torque. I imagine the 6.0L mill they put into the GM HD models is nerfed down on power for durability reasons just like the Ford 6.2L is. Half-ton engines, in comparison, almost always have higher specific output.

BTW, the Ram HD's pushrod 6.4L Hemi makes 1 ft-lb less of peak torque than the Ford 6.2L. I suppose those engineers did it wrong as well.
 
  #12  
Old 06-17-2018, 09:07 PM
troverman's Avatar
troverman
troverman is offline
Post Fiend
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: NH
Posts: 9,243
troverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud oftroverman has much to be proud of
I knew youíd mention the 6.4 Hemi, Tom. But keep in mind the power output of this engine in the 392 Charger. And frankly, the 6.2L Ford still put out less than the 6.2L GM in the Raptor and F150.
 
  #13  
Old 06-21-2018, 03:32 AM
CGiron
CGiron is offline
Senior User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 174
CGiron is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Originally Posted by Dentside View Post
CGI in this application only makes sense from a weight savings perspective, and I'm not an engineer so I don't know the savings vs. the added expense.

The cynic in me still believes Ford won't offer a gas engine with more HP than the diesel. No way they're going to undercut a $9000 markup.

This is most likely going in chassis cabs and motorhome duty only.
I think it makes sence in overall weight and size as the cylinderwalls in a CGI-block can be thinner with the same strenght. A smaller engine may fit in smaller enginebays. By the way, Cummins will show their upgraded 6.7 l inline 6 diesel in a few months. With CGI in the block.

https://5thgenrams.com/community/thr...cgi-block.482/
 
  #14  
Old 06-22-2018, 03:28 AM
Scorpion67
Scorpion67 is offline
Senior User
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 451
Scorpion67 is gaining momentum as a positive member of FTE.
Originally Posted by Dentside View Post
CGI in this application only makes sense from a weight savings perspective, and I'm not an engineer so I don't know the savings vs. the added expense.

The cynic in me still believes Ford won't offer a gas engine with more HP than the diesel. No way they're going to undercut a $9000 markup.

This is most likely going in chassis cabs and motorhome duty only.
when it comes out in 2020, the diesel will also have nore hp than it does currently. Higher purchase price and markup are not even close to being the same thing.
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
CGiron
2017+ Super Duty
1
06-28-2018 02:43 AM
1TONfun
1980 - 1986 Bullnose F100, F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks
4
04-07-2018 06:47 PM
brinker88
Ford Truck Parts for Sale
1
07-13-2014 02:45 PM
lanec
Big Block V8 - 385 Series (6.1/370, 7.0/429, 7.5/460)
6
06-07-2006 03:41 PM
BBIGG_CCHILL
1948 - 1956 F1, F100 & Larger F-Series Trucks
2
03-23-2003 10:22 PM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: New Ford 7.3 l V8 gas with pushrods


Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

© 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.