Notices
Manitoba / Saskatchewan Chapter Join Chapter, Leader: Fomoko1

Potential of Ford's 2010 turbo 4.2 V6

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 11, 2009 | 03:18 PM
  #1  
less's Avatar
less
Thread Starter
|
Posting Guru
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,301
Likes: 0
From: Winnipeg
Potential of Ford's 2010 turbo 4.2 V6

I know there has already been some talk on this engine, but I've been thinking about it's potential and ability to work hard with a turbo.

I think Ford's new (in 2010) 4.2 liter V6 (Turbo ?) is supposed to put out around 340 hp or so and 370 ft. lbs. of torque or so...but get's better mileage than the V8's. This will be a very interesting development.

I don't know if Ford also plans to put displacement on demand for thie 4.2 V6...but that would be great.

3 cylinders when puttering around...6 turbo'd cylinders for blowing the doors off chevies.

I'm still wondering if the turbo'd V6 would be able to keep cool and unstressed.. under load ....running hard and long at the high rpm end say towing a heavy trailer in the Rockies ?

I don't know if Ford has designed it for this, but I understand it's supposed to be an alternative to a healthy V8...so I think some will use it this way, just as they would a non aspirated V8. I wonder if a highly stressed (turbo) engine can handle this kind of loading....day after day with reliability and durability ?

Personally, I think it can...truck engineers I would imagine would design it for this kind of hard work.

Also, what are your thoughts on this engine....is this the future....why...if not...why not ?
 
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2009 | 05:33 PM
  #2  
skidooman's Avatar
skidooman
Posting Guru
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,114
Likes: 0
From: Langham, SK
It's got the same numbers as a V8 but I'm like you, I would like to see what it would do pulling a heavy trailer on a long trip!
 
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2009 | 06:03 PM
  #3  
96sherm's Avatar
96sherm
Post Fiend
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,099
Likes: 7
From: Yorkton Sask
i believe this is the ecoboost system... not looking forward to it really, can you imagine how strong the internals will have to be to put up with enough boost to produce that much power??? I say, GO DIESEL!!!!
 
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2009 | 08:31 PM
  #4  
skidooman's Avatar
skidooman
Posting Guru
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,114
Likes: 0
From: Langham, SK
Ya Sherm that is the ecoboost system. I think it would work good in car's and crossover's but not in trucks. Well maybe in trucks that don't get worked!
 
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2009 | 08:55 PM
  #5  
Fomoko1's Avatar
Fomoko1
Moderator
20 Year Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 96,953
Likes: 1,953
From: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Club FTE Gold Member
So far I don`t know much about it, sounds ok so far though if the fuel economy will be up there..
 
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2009 | 10:29 PM
  #6  
96sherm's Avatar
96sherm
Post Fiend
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,099
Likes: 7
From: Yorkton Sask
Originally Posted by skidooman
good in car's and crossover's but not in trucks. Well maybe in trucks that don't get worked!
i agree. it could be a good base for a new SVT lightning or something. I'd take that engine in a truck that i could keep pretty for sunday driving and highway trips... I think it'll be awesome for that!!
 
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2009 | 11:12 PM
  #7  
Snowking's Avatar
Snowking
Lead Driver
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,423
Likes: 0
From: Colonsay Sk. Canada
I dont think the 4.2 is the greatest motor in the world there just trying to push too much power through them... stuff blows up the technology isnt quite there IMO.
 
Reply
Old Feb 12, 2009 | 06:33 AM
  #8  
96sherm's Avatar
96sherm
Post Fiend
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,099
Likes: 7
From: Yorkton Sask
i wouldn't imagine they'll use the basic 4.2 like is in your truck Ryan... at least i hope not. i'd imagine they'll be building a better base than that, but who knows??
 
Reply
Old Feb 12, 2009 | 06:54 PM
  #9  
Snowking's Avatar
Snowking
Lead Driver
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,423
Likes: 0
From: Colonsay Sk. Canada
I was just assuming based on same displacement but mI to would hope not. With my truck empty it is a reasonable motor for a runabout but as any kind of hauler it is not a impressive unit.
 
Reply
Old Feb 12, 2009 | 07:52 PM
  #10  
Fomoko1's Avatar
Fomoko1
Moderator
20 Year Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 96,953
Likes: 1,953
From: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Club FTE Gold Member
What`s your truck like on fuel Ryan?
 
Reply
Old Feb 12, 2009 | 08:07 PM
  #11  
Snowking's Avatar
Snowking
Lead Driver
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 8,423
Likes: 0
From: Colonsay Sk. Canada
I have got between 26-28 driving it easy unloaded.when you push it though it plumits.
 
Reply
Old Feb 12, 2009 | 08:19 PM
  #12  
Fomoko1's Avatar
Fomoko1
Moderator
20 Year Member
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 96,953
Likes: 1,953
From: Saskatoon, Saskatchewan
Club FTE Gold Member
Awesome, as good or better than our Rangers.
 
Reply
Old Feb 12, 2009 | 09:15 PM
  #13  
skidooman's Avatar
skidooman
Posting Guru
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,114
Likes: 0
From: Langham, SK
That is real good mileage!
 
Reply
Old Feb 13, 2009 | 12:41 PM
  #14  
96sherm's Avatar
96sherm
Post Fiend
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,099
Likes: 7
From: Yorkton Sask
one of the previous techs at Royal Ford had a '00 regular cab/short box, 2wd, 4.2L, 5sp standard and he claimed 30mpg on the highway...
 
Reply
Old Feb 13, 2009 | 01:03 PM
  #15  
preppypyro's Avatar
preppypyro
FTE Legend
20 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 37,887
Likes: 20
From: North Central Rural Sask.
I believe I read somewhere that it was supposed to be a 3.5 liter ecoboost was it not?

Would be great for light duty applications, but Im not so sure about heavier use either.

I bet a 4.6 v8 in a reg cab shortbox, with a manual, and tall grears would get damn near, if not more, then a 4.3 v6.

Ive heard guys with crown vics, and those lincoln mark VIII's (with the 4.6l) claim around and over the 30mpg mark.
 
Reply



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:31 PM.