Electric F-150 in the works

[Ranger850]

"In God we trust. All other bring data."...

 

[pjtoledo]

On paper.

Any ecoboost/5.0 owner wants to find a big load and a steep hill, oh, and a stop watch.....ill have the 460 warmed up.

and an extra can of gas??

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Actually, if you REALLY wanted to make it fair....

Manually select whatever gear on that 6/8/10sp whatever that is closest in ratio to my E4ODs 1st (2.46:1 IIRC), and force it to take off, with say, 10,000lbs, up a good grade.

You take the lower gearing in the trans out of the equation, compare engine to engine...bet that little bitty EB or 5.0 wont look so impressive

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Actually, if you REALLY wanted to make it fair....

Manually select whatever gear on that 6/8/10sp whatever that is closest in ratio to my E4ODs 1st (2.46:1 IIRC), and force it to take off, with say, 10,000lbs, up a good grade.

You take the lower gearing in the trans out of the equation, compare engine to engine...bet that little bitty EB or 5.0 wont look so impressive

This isn't a manual, torque converters are like magical devices that convert torque into more torque. First gear isn't that critical and the 3.5 is no stranger to low end torque.

You are only taking away the EB's first gear, big deal. 2nd is 2.98 to your 2.71.

You really need to drive one before talking smack about them.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Last EB torque chart i looked at showed it not making anywhere near the amount of torque below 2500 that a late model 460 makes (410@2200rpm).

I got 365ftlbs at frickin idle.

Ive driven the 5.0 trucks, in a drag race empty. Id lose, and truthfully my next truck might be a 5.0, but ive come to terms that any gasser i get isnt gonna have that low, smooth powerband like a 460.

However, besides that powerband, i dont like much else about them.

 

[Jim Oaks]

Ford's 1997 7.5-liter V-8 generated 245 horsepower at 4,000 rpm and 400 foot-pounds of torque at 2,200 rpm.

3.5L EcoBoost is 375 horsepower @ 5,000 and 470 lb-ft at 2,500 rpm

I love the old V8's. I know there are people that aren't crazy about the turbo motors and complexity of the newer drivetrains, but look at the power ratings over the years. Even the 4-cylinder turbo motors and supercharged 3.8's. The performance of today's motors are pretty impressive with a lot of potential. The 3.5 in the Ford GT puts out 900 HP.

 

[rusty ol ranger]

Ford's 1997 7.5-liter V-8 generated 245 horsepower at 4,000 rpm and 400 foot-pounds of torque at 2,200 rpm.

3.5L EcoBoost is 375 horsepower @ 5,000 and 470 lb-ft at 2,500 rpm

I love the old V8's. I know there are people that aren't crazy about the turbo motors and complexity of the newer drivetrains, but look at the power ratings over the years. Even the 4-cylinder turbo motors and supercharged 3.8's. The performance of today's motors are pretty impressive with a lot of potential. The 3.5 in the Ford GT puts out 900 HP.

Ive seen 3 different torque ratings for 95-97 460s, ranging from 395-410. But im not gonna argue over a 1/4 in drive ratchets amount of torque.

Im not saying they arnt impressive, but untill i see a fair, impartial, 3rd party (as in not TFL truck or any other idiot youtube warriors) do a FAIR, head to head test between the two with a real load, i wont buy into the hype.

Call it ignorance, stubborness, skepticism, whatever. But you know and i know its really hard to beat a good stout big block with anything thats got spark plugs.

 

[Ranger850]

Todays motors are impressive, but how much potential is up to question. A 3.5 v6 @ 900 hp. I think they squeezed all the potential out of it. IDK if a 1,000 hp v6 is gonna hold together. A 300 hp I4 just sounds like an explosion waiting to happen, to me. The power these EB motors make is ridiculous for sure, but I think in about 5 years we will see some other new engine wizadry that will replace them.. Nissan has an engine that can alter the displacement, depending on the power needed from the engine, so there's that. Mazda has been electrifying there turbos for some years now, instead of waiting on the turbo to spool up.

 

[fastpakr]

Todays motors are impressive, but how much potential is up to question. A 3.5 v6 @ 900 hp. I think they squeezed all the potential out of it. IDK if a 1,000 hp v6 is gonna hold together. A 300 hp I4 just sounds like an explosion waiting to happen, to me. The power these EB motors make is ridiculous for sure, but I think in about 5 years we will see some other new engine wizadry that will replace them..

The output of the Ecoboost series engines has steadily increased for the ten years they've been in production, with very limited failures outside initial teething issues. This isn't exactly bleeding edge tech anymore.

Nissan has an engine that can alter the displacement, depending on the power needed from the engine, so there's that.

They have a variable -compression- engine. Not at all the same.

Mazda has been electrifying there turbos for some years now, instead of waiting on the turbo to spool up.

Volvo has an electric compressor to pressurize an air tank to minimize turbo lag.
Mercedes has some kind of electric supercharger system on a vehicle that doesn't exist in the US.
To my knowledge, Mazda has produced nothing relating to an electric turbo or supercharger.

 

[Ranger850]

I read an article years ago about mazda developing an electric turbo, I assumed it was in production by now, oopsie

The Nissan that changes compression, changes displacement as well,


"The ingenuity of VC-T engine technology lies in its ability to transform itself and seamlessly raise or lower the height the pistons reach. As a consequence, the displacement of the engine changes and the compression ratio can vary anywhere between 8:1 (for high performance) and 14:1 (for high efficiency). The sophisticated engine control logic automatically applies the optimum ratio, depending on what the driving situation demands."

Here is the link to the article that I quoted.

https://jalopnik.com/worlds-first-variable-compression-ratio-engine-could-ki-1785295848

 

[fastpakr]

Link to that quote? Unless the piston is being raised and lowered constantly through the crank rotation, that's not possible. Adjusting height would certainly change compression, but not displacement.

 

[Ranger850]

Link to that quote? Unless the piston is being raised and lowered constantly through the crank rotation, that's not possible. Adjusting height would certainly change compression, but not displacement.

Link is there now.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

Link to that quote? Unless the piston is being raised and lowered constantly through the crank rotation, that's not possible. Adjusting height would certainly change compression, but not displacement.

Theoretically if it varies on the fly it could simulate shorter stroke.

If you want to talk about a rube goldberg contraption of a time bomb...

 

[91stranger]

Boy would it be nice to see a complete Rube Goldberg vehicle. I could just see it now.... a car powered by a hamster running in the wheel which moves 8 million levers and other off the wall things to make it function. I have never towed with a big block or an eco boost but based off everyone's reactions going from the old big blocks to the new motors, I would say the new motors out perform the old ones in every way. I know a guy who has had every combination of f250's and 350's and he says his new f150 out does them all in towing. Plus you get twice the gas mileage. You can read on f150 forums about people talking about this same topic and most agree the new motors tow better than the old big blocks.

 

[19Walt93]

We had a customer who tows a trailer every day filled with welding supplies he sells to shops. He's had EcoBoost F150's since they came out in 2011 and says they tow much better than the 5.0 F150 we loaned him when his truck was down for a couple of days. Our sales manager said the same thing though all he towed was a boat trailer and a snowmobile trailer. He also routinely got mid 20's for gas mileage, if my 11 Ranger 4.0 got mid 20's I'd turn a cart wheel- assuming I was 20 years younger or half in the bag.