Posted on 08/20/2010 7:25:36 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd
Are U.S. pickup truck buyers prepared to set aside their love affair with V-8 engines and climb into more fuel-efficient models instead? Ford Motor Co. is about to run a high-stakes test of this by promoting a high-tech, six-cylinder engine in its best-selling vehicle.
This fall, Ford will introduce a 300 horsepower V-6 engine and a new six-speed transmission in its F-150 pickups—the No. 1 seller in a market where eight cylinders now rule. And for the first time, Ford will offer a V-6 in its popular crew cab model, which accounts for 60% of all F-150 sales, says F-150 marketing manager Mark Grueber.
Ford will also sell F-150s with a new 5.0 liter V-8 engine. Early next year, the company plans to start marketing F-150s with a 3.5 liter "Ecoboost" V-6 potent enough to tow an 11,300 pound trailer—big enough to haul a rodeo bull or two—that get up to 20% better fuel economy than a V-8 with comparable power.
Why is Ford pushing this strategy? The company is hedging the risk that its highly profitable vehicle line could get battered by another run-up in gasoline prices. It also must meet federal fuel economy rules that will steadily ratchet up the minimum mileage required for all vehicles.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
From the article..... Now, the government is pushing auto makers to make even big pickups more efficient, the better to cut greenhouse gas emissions. Truck buyers, however, are not prepared to go back to the 1950s, when a Ford F-100 truck came with six-cylinder engines that only offered 115 horsepower.
I love V-8’s.
I’ve been in plenty of full size trucks with a V6. No power - no guts.
Although I have been in a 2009 Toyota Tundra with a 4.0 litre V6. It was OK. Don’t know about hauling or towing anything with a V6, however.
But here’s the deal. If you think truck buyers will pay more for a V6, then you have rocks in your head. Especially when you consider a V6 might save you only 2-3 miles per gallon over a V8.
A 3.5 liter 300hp V-6? I suspect it develops the 300hp at a very high rpm and also suspect the torque numbers to be low. You just can’t produce stump pulling torque with a 3.5 liter V-6.
Ford can make their F 150 more fuel efficient by dropping a 300ci 4 or 6 cylinder Diesel in it.
I have not problem with 6 bangers.
Gearing is everything.
Actually, I never could understand the need for 300 hp to begin with.
Hopefully most of you know that over the road trucks are mainly 6 cyclinder diesels in the 300 - 400hp range.
Think you need that in your pickup?
300 HP is a lot, considering my old pre-Magnum Dakota only supplies 125. It does okay everywhere except the freeway, where it is an anemic dog. Now if they could make a 6 that sounds like an 8......
Have you seen all the claptrap on the 2010 emission compliant diesels? Unbelievable cost and complexity.
And likely a bunch of reliability issues down the road.
I remember back in the 80s when Ford and Chevy both put 4s in some of their full size models. Pathetic, weak machines.
I went to a demolition derby at the county fair last weekend and they had 4, 6, and 8 cylinder classes. In the end I’d say the entertainment factor was inversely proportional to the size of the engines.
Or was that the 70s. Probably, the 70s.
Both of my F150s are 6 cyclinders and they’re fine for driving and hauling a load.
A V6 with 300 Horsepower.I’ll take one of those.Especially if it gets better fuel economy in the process.
My pickup has a little over 500 RWHP, 1000 ft/lbs of torque and gets 24MPG running empty on the interstate. (Duramax Diesel.)
I could fumigate the intake with CNG and get as high as 60MPG on the diesel fuel, which can also be replaced with biofuel.
Economy, power and clean emissions can all co-exist in a diesel.
Sure.
But, really, how many pickup owners are pulling stumps?
or towing?
Or doing much more than driving around in a truck?
You’re right. Gearing is everything. And IF I was gonna have a 6 banger; then I would want a 5 speed manual.
But... maybe I could be impressed with a 6 speed automatic.
Why do truck buyers love V8s?
I’m not an automotive engineer, but I am an enthusiast. My simplistic understanding is that torque is generated by displacement and compression ratio. Therefore, you’ll never get as much torque from a V6 as you do a V8. You can get good HP numbers but HP, (again, a simplification), is how fast you apply the torque, that is, RPM.
That’s why rice burners quote high HP numbers. Their rotating mass weighs about 12 ounces, (exaggeration), so they can spin it at 7000 RPM.
A truck needs to make a lot of torque at low RPM... that’s where a V8 can shine. V6s can be nice, and if you get a big enough displacement, (bore size x stroke), it can do the job, but V8s rule.
I’ve got an F-150 with a 6 cylinder. Bought it because it was cheap. Doesn’t tow worth squat - has <4000 lb limit on towing - but will carry 1000+ lb in the bed OK. Works fine for the work I do, but I wouldn’t consider it for heavy work.
These sound like they have power but I would question torque and the RPM where it is delivered.
just sold my 90 bronco with the 351 W in it and kept the F150 with the inline 6...
Look at the new Camaro V6 - 300 horse at 20+ mpg. Six cylinders doesn’t mean sacrificing power anymore.
Because the federal government is about to impose extreme mileage standards on trucks (while they simultaneously place potential oil fields off limits). Of course, the government won't admit that trucks are 33% heavier than they were 20 years ago due to other government regulations on safety equipment.
I prefer a 6 cyl for getting around in snow and ice.
don’t have that issue in FL...unless we get another bout of global warming this winter...
I’ve got an ‘89 with the 300 six and it’s got 289,000 miles on it. One of Ford’s all-time great engines, IMO.
do you know how FAT those little kids are for those obama voting divorce leftist man hating women. Those fat kids are heavier and denser than any stump. just like their dense mom.
(/s)
My 2 liter, 197 HP Honda Civic Si engine redlines at 8000 RPM! It's a blast to drive, but it would be a horrible engine in a truck. It doesn't really come alive until around 5500 RPM.
What year is your truck and did you make any modifications?
I have a 2005 crew cab short bed Duramax and am getting 20MPG highway empty and 16MPG towing.
Of course, it only has 28K original miles so it might not be broke in yet. ;-)
I LOVE MY SILVERADO!
It would depend on how big the six is. A 5.7 liter V-6 would probably do just as well against a 5.7 liter V-8. No replacement for displacement and number of cylinders really doesn’t matter, beyond how smooth the engine runs.
5.7 liters seems to be the right size for most pick-up trucks and if the six is the same displacement then why not. If they are looking to go below 5 liters with a six it’s pointless and people won’t buy it in a half ton pick-up.
I had an '88 F-250 4X4 with an inline 6 producing about 190HP. It was great off road and very good at highway speeds. I don't know about a V-6 though.
How can you be polluting if you burn fry grease
I’d guess the big six might have been too smoggy to meet tighter clean air regs.
I don’t think it was capable of pulling a big horse trailer or boat but for getting in and out of big holes in the ground, it was tops
“My 2 liter, 197 HP Honda Civic Si engine redlines at 8000 RPM! It’s a blast to drive, but it would be a horrible engine in a truck. It doesn’t really come alive until around 5500 RPM.”
If you tried to spin a V8 at 8000 RPM you’d be picking up rods and pistons off the road. The problem for the Civic is that it makes about 110 ft-lbs of torque. That gives you a terrible launch, and not a lot of power at low RPM. But once you get rolling... you’re right, it’s a blast.
I have an old Corvette. It only makes about 250HP, but it has 350 ft-lbs of torque. We joke that it has a truck motor. Stoplight to stoplight, your Civic would only see my tail lights, and you’d swear I had 400HP. But that old V8 was kneecapped so that after about 5000 RPM, it starts to run out of steam. But the potential is there. With some tweaks, it could spin useful power up to about 6000 RPM. It would take major modifications to get a rotating mass as big as a 350 V8 to spin above 6000 RPM.
“My 2 liter, 197 HP Honda Civic Si engine redlines at 8000 RPM! It’s a blast to drive, but it would be a horrible engine in a truck. It doesn’t really come alive until around 5500 RPM.”
If you tried to spin a V8 at 8000 RPM you’d be picking up rods and pistons off the road. The problem for the Civic is that it makes about 110 ft-lbs of torque. That gives you a terrible launch, and not a lot of power at low RPM. But once you get rolling... you’re right, it’s a blast.
I have an old Corvette. It only makes about 250HP, but it has 350 ft-lbs of torque. We joke that it has a truck motor. Stoplight to stoplight, your Civic would only see my tail lights, and you’d swear I had 400HP. But that old V8 was kneecapped so that after about 5000 RPM, it starts to run out of steam. But the potential is there. With some tweaks, it could spin useful power up to about 6000 RPM. It would take major modifications to get a rotating mass as big as a 350 V8 to spin above 6000 RPM.
“Have you seen all the claptrap on the 2010 emission compliant diesels? Unbelievable cost and complexity.”
And their fuel economy has suffered, too. Take a look at the fuel economy ratings on a current Volkswagen Golf TDI? Pretty poor compared to earlier versions.
I used to tow with f150 6 cyl....she had loads of torque, but not much getup. always did fine for me!
NISSAN are experts at extracting HP from 6-cyl. VQ 35 engine series has been in WARD’s Top 10 engines for 13 or 14 straight years now. The VQ 40 (4.0) puts out approx. 265 HP, but will easily top 300 HP with addition of Cat back and Cold Air Intake.
The Frontier has been running this engine for years now.
getting to the ultra low NOX numbers has really hurt the efficiency and driven up the cost
assuming these emission levels stay in place, I don’t see much future for diesels below 1 ton pickups
direct injection gassers will be the most cost effective
Well, I don't know for sure, but I can tell you why I would think it will be a market winner.
I and most small businessmen have our companies buy and own our pickup trucks. The reason that I drive a Toyota Tundra V8, is that it had the best gas mileage and ride for any pickup truck I tested that was over the minimum weight requirement where I could write it totally off (full year's depreciation) in a single year.
This allowed me in a year of profits to buy a truck and get to fully depreciate it against those profits.
At the end of this year the accelerated depreciation provision of the tax code is set to expire. That means that any future truck my company purchases will need to be depreciated over 5 years. That sucks!
In future truck purchases, initial cost and fuel mileage will be much bigger considerations in my company vehicle purchase. Ford may be anticipating this change and positioning itself for several markets:
(1) business vehicle purchases of pickup trucks
(2) individuals who value high gas mileage (gas where I live is $3+per gallon
(3) people who want to be more “green.”
I think Ford is doing a smart thing based on where the tax code and gasoline prices are headed.
While I really like the V8 in my pickup, I rarely need the towing or HP it provides. I would have purchased a V6, but decided against it as I couldn't make the weight cut off in the Toyota Tundra unless I got the V8.
Big government.
They keep making it harder and harder to sell diesel engines in this country. The new federal rules are bad enough, but now a bunch of states have basically forfeited their sovereignty to California, and are letting CARB set their emission rules, which are unrealistic, and specifically tailored to make diesels unaffordable/unavailable.
Ah, the old 300 inline 6. It's torque peak was at something like 1200 RPM. Pulling stumps at idle!
Tell me about it.
I love my 2005 Xterra and my 2006 Frontier with the 4 litre V6.
My neighbor has a Dodge Dakota with the small V8. He does not like the fact I have more HP and get better gas mileage than he does.
Too bad.
Actually, I average 20MPG in the city and 24MPG on the highway. You are assuming my truck is stock and it is not.
My comment about the CNG was more emissions related. Dollars and cents wise, it cuts your overall fuel costs per mile in half (if you fill at home.)
Sounds like the 1970s with gas-engine emissions controls all over again.
I question the ability of a 1/2 pickup of any make being able to safely tow 11,000 pounds. IMO, the truck itself lacks the sturdiness, and most probably the braking.
And besides, inches matter.
Them inline 6’s will pull stumps out the ground.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.