Is Ford Going the Pushrod Route With Its New V8?

Steph Willems
by Steph Willems
is ford going the pushrod route with its new v8

Ford’s upcoming heavy duty gasoline truck engine, codenamed “7X,” was believed to be a 7.0-liter V8 built with the express purpose of replacing the 6.8-liter Triton V10 and perhaps the 6.2-liter Boss V8.

While the program will indeed bear fruit at Ford’s Windsor Engine Plant next year, there’s a new report claiming the mill’s layout should stir memories of famous engines of yore. We’re talking a large displacement (7.3 liters), iron block, and pushrod valve actuation.

An administrator at the SVTPerformance.com forum, citing internal sources, claims the upcoming V8 is an overhead valve design displacing 7.3 liters. The mill is just one of a series of engines expected to be spawned from a large dumping of OEM ( and government) cash.

Ford’s Windsor engine plant, once home to the famous and beloved 255 Windsor (har, har), was in dire need of new product before the funding announcement. The old SOHC 6.8-liter, unceremoniously relegated to the E-Series cutaway, larger commercial trucks, and motorhomes, was on its last legs.

We’ve heard rumblings about a new 7.3-liter before. Earlier this year, a 2020 model year oil requirement document made the rounds on Ford forums, revealing a 7.3-liter gas engine and a disappeared 6.2-liter.

Scrapping overhead cams in favor of pushrods would create an engine with a smaller footprint, potentially widening the list of applications. Ford could save weight by utilizing a compacted graphite iron block, like that seen on the 6.7-liter Power Stroke diesel V8. There’s cash savings to be had by going the standard iron route.

We don’t have any specs for the alleged 7.3-liter, but power figures would obviously need to surpass the output of both the 6.2-liter and 6.8-liter. The largest gas V8 in the Ford stable makes a maximum of 385 hp and 430 lb-ft, while the V10 tops out at 320 hp and 460 lb-ft. Again, there could be a range of displacements coming from Windsor. While a 7.0-liter is the go-to speculation, there’s also wind of a project dubbed “ Godzilla.” Maybe they’re one and the same.

Time will tell what Ford brings us. Parts are expected to begin flowing into a retooled Windsor Engine in November.

[Image: Ford Motor Company]

Comments
Join the conversation
11 of 44 comments
  • Dal20402 Dal20402 on May 30, 2018

    If true, this seems like a gamble that future administrations will retain the no-enforcement, see-no-evil approach to fuel-economy standards of the current administration. That strikes me as a risky gamble. An updated 7.3 pushrod would make nice power-to-weight but would have absolutely terrible, horrible, no-good fuel economy. Think 10 mpg unladen and 5 mpg when towing.

    • See 8 previous
    • Bhtooefr Bhtooefr on May 31, 2018

      @ajla Heavy duty vehicles (including heavy duty (class 2a and 2b) pickups) are under a separate CAFE program from cars, light duty (class 1 and 2a) trucks, and medium duty passenger vehicles (class 2b): https://www.epa.gov/regulations-emissions-vehicles-and-engines/final-rule-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-fuel-efficiency

  • DenverMike DenverMike on May 31, 2018

    When a 6.2 pushrod V8 has the same over all characteristics of a DOHC 5.0, and in a smaller over all package, what's there to think about?

  • Wjtinfwb Over the years I've owned 3, one LH (a Concorde) a Gen 1 300 and a Gen 2 300C "John Varvatos". The Concorde was a very nice car for the time with immense room inside and decent power from the DOHC 3.5L. But quality was awful, it spent more time in the shop than the driveway. It gave way to a Gen 1 300, OK but the V6 was underwhelming in this car compared to the Concorde but did it's job. The Gen 1's letdown was the awful interior with acres of plastic, leather that did it's best imitation of vinyl and a featureless dashboard that looked lifted from a cheaper car. My last one was a '14 300C John Varvatos with the Pentastar. Great car, sufficient power and exceptional highway mileage. The interior was much better than the original as well. It was felled by a defective instrument cluster that took over 90 days to fix and was ultimately lemon law' d back to FCA. I'd love one of the 392 powered final edition 300s but understand they're already sold out and if I had an extra 60k available, would likely choose a CPO BMW 540i for comparable money.
  • Dukeisduke Thanks Cary. Folks need to make sure they buy the correct antifreeze, since there are so many OEM-specific ones out there nowadays (Dex-Cool, Ford gold, Toyota red and pink, etc.).And sorry to hear about your family situation - my wife and I have been dealing with her 88-yo mom, moving her into independent senior living, selling her house, etc. It's a lot to deal with.
  • FreedMike Always lusted after that first-gen 300 - particularly the "Heritage Edition," which had special 300 badging and a translucent plastic steering wheel (ala the '50s and '60s "letter cars").
  • Dave M. Although the effective takeover by Daimler is pooped upon, this is one they got right. I wasn't a fan of the LHs, mostly due to reported mechanical, NVH and build quality issues, but I though Chrysler hit it out of the park with the LXs. The other hyped release that year was the Ford Five Hundred, which, while a well-built car with superior interior space, couldn't hold a candle to the 300.
  • Art Vandelay I always liked those last FWD 300's. Been ages since I've seen one on the road though. Lots of time in the RWD ones as rentals. No complaints whatsoever.
Next