F150 losing the V8 option?
05-11-2016, 07:09 PM
#11
Senior Member
Just another one of those media items. I bet it's as true as what I read in the Boston Globe back in the late 70's (yes I'm old). They claimed that the V-8 engine would be history by 1984.
Maintaining the 5.0 in the F150 is easy. If the were claiming the Mustang would no longer have the 5.0, then I might listen. Nah.....
Maintaining the 5.0 in the F150 is easy. If the were claiming the Mustang would no longer have the 5.0, then I might listen. Nah.....
05-11-2016, 07:13 PM
#12
I don't think it will be going anywhere anytime soon...
But just think of all the cars you used to be able to get with v8's. Crown Vic's and plenty of others. Nowadays a v8 in a car is taboo unless it's a sports/muscle/performance car.
I think the trucks may do what the cars have done...replaced the larger engines for more efficient, out performing, small engines.
But just think of all the cars you used to be able to get with v8's. Crown Vic's and plenty of others. Nowadays a v8 in a car is taboo unless it's a sports/muscle/performance car.
I think the trucks may do what the cars have done...replaced the larger engines for more efficient, out performing, small engines.
05-11-2016, 09:32 PM
#15
Senior Member
I think it is a very real possibility. The current 3.5 turbo is the 1st generation. The new 2.7 is doing more than most V-8's from just a few years ago. I keep reading where there are more improvements coming for the V-6 that may negate any need for a V-8 other than just sound.
Right now, when I compare the current 5.0 to the current 3.5 they are a LOT closer than many people think. Properly equipped the current 5.0 only tows about 800 lbs less than the 3.5 turbo. The 3.5 gets sightly better fuel mileage, but the 5.0 costs less. At todays fuel prices I'd have to drive the 3.5 over 200,000 miles to save enough on fuel to break even.
But if the V-6 turbos continue to improve and as the gap in performance widens I could see the V-8 being dropped. Especially if the price difference starts to favor the V-6.
Right now, when I compare the current 5.0 to the current 3.5 they are a LOT closer than many people think. Properly equipped the current 5.0 only tows about 800 lbs less than the 3.5 turbo. The 3.5 gets sightly better fuel mileage, but the 5.0 costs less. At todays fuel prices I'd have to drive the 3.5 over 200,000 miles to save enough on fuel to break even.
But if the V-6 turbos continue to improve and as the gap in performance widens I could see the V-8 being dropped. Especially if the price difference starts to favor the V-6.
05-11-2016, 10:07 PM
#16
Senior Member
Depends on who's elected president.
The following users liked this post:
tuflehundon (05-12-2016)
05-11-2016, 10:27 PM
#17
Senior Member
With all this transgender crap going on... now they're spreading rumors about removing ***** from trucks? Wtf.
The following users liked this post:
Blank102 (05-12-2016)
05-12-2016, 12:34 AM
#19
4Runner Driver
Sadly, the V8 engine may disappear from pickups in the next decade or two.
Food for thought: The 3.7L V6 in my F150 produces 302 horsepower and 278 ft/lbs of torque. The 4.7L V8 in my 2003 Ram 1500 produced 235 horsepower and 295 ft/lbs of torque. In real-world driving, the 4.7 got slightly better gas mileage, but to be honest, the 3.7 kicks it's *** in towing, hauling, and overall performance. A full liter less displacement, and two fewer cylinders for a tiny drop in torque and a huge increase in horsepower. The technology in these engines are less than 10 years apart (Chrysler 4.7 debuted in the 1999 Jeep Grand Cherokee, the Ford 3.7 in debuted in the 2008 Mazda CX7). In less than a decade, truck engine technology has come so far that a V6 is no longer a joke, and the V8 is no longer absolutely necessary. Chrysler has made the same jump with their own modern V6 mill (the 3.6 Pentastar is one hell of an engine, I was a Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep/Ram tech when it debuted), and GM has done some amazing things in every category but reliability with the 3.6 in their FWD/AWD SUVs and crossovers. It won't happen overnight, and it probably won't happen completely until fossil fuels are phased out completely, but we are looking at the beginning of the end of the V8 era outside of sports cars, luxury cars, and such.
Food for thought: The 3.7L V6 in my F150 produces 302 horsepower and 278 ft/lbs of torque. The 4.7L V8 in my 2003 Ram 1500 produced 235 horsepower and 295 ft/lbs of torque. In real-world driving, the 4.7 got slightly better gas mileage, but to be honest, the 3.7 kicks it's *** in towing, hauling, and overall performance. A full liter less displacement, and two fewer cylinders for a tiny drop in torque and a huge increase in horsepower. The technology in these engines are less than 10 years apart (Chrysler 4.7 debuted in the 1999 Jeep Grand Cherokee, the Ford 3.7 in debuted in the 2008 Mazda CX7). In less than a decade, truck engine technology has come so far that a V6 is no longer a joke, and the V8 is no longer absolutely necessary. Chrysler has made the same jump with their own modern V6 mill (the 3.6 Pentastar is one hell of an engine, I was a Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep/Ram tech when it debuted), and GM has done some amazing things in every category but reliability with the 3.6 in their FWD/AWD SUVs and crossovers. It won't happen overnight, and it probably won't happen completely until fossil fuels are phased out completely, but we are looking at the beginning of the end of the V8 era outside of sports cars, luxury cars, and such.
05-12-2016, 12:35 AM
#20
Mass Effect
Man I hope not. Glad I got one of the last ones if its the case. Hate to see such a legendary motor go by the wayside as far as trucks go. Im sure theyll offer them in the Mustang for several more years though.