Is Ford Going the Pushrod Route With Its New V8?

by Steph Willems

Published: May 30th, 2018

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]

#Engines #Ford #FordMotorCompany #ProductPlanning #Trucks #WindsorEnginePlant

Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments

Join the conversation

11 of 44 comments

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.

Like Reply
- See 8 previous
- Hummer on May 30, 2018
  
  I think that's a bit far, if they could do the same magic GM did with the 6.2L then I don't see how the 7.3L couldn't manage at 15 avg and possibly 18HWY. More displacement means more time in 4 cylinder mode.
  
  Like
- Ajla on May 30, 2018
  
  Despite my earlier comment I have zero expectation that this ends up in a car and *very* little hope it ends up in a 1/2-ton or BOF SUV. This will be the domain of 3/4-ton and up. I don't anticipate the '250/350' class being subject to CAFE (or whatever) under any likely future Dem administration and the 650/750/Class C Motorhome vehicles will almost certainly stay exempt as well.
  
  Like
- Hummer on May 30, 2018
  
  @ajla Ford already said it was meant for raptor and super duty, would be nice to see it in a passenger car as well but not holding my breath Ford pulls its head out of
  
  Like
- Jack4x on May 30, 2018
  
  @Dal, I get between 10-12 mpg with my 8.1, and it hardly matters city/highway, towing or not. This with an old school big block with its roots in the 1960s. An all new 7.3 with direct injection, modern engine controls, etc should be able to make a relatively unstressed 425-450 hp with better fuel economy than the old 496. Your comments about standards are on the money though, and why I have never for a second put any stock into the idea that this engine will end up in the Raptor or Mustang. Those vehicles are actually subject to the tougher regulations and already make similar power numbers with better fuel economy (at least on the sticker). It doesn’t make any sense to me to move away from hard earned Ecoboost/5.0 branding for a high torque, low revving truck engine in a performance vehicle.
  
  Like
- Thornmark 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.
  
  Like
- Dal20402 on May 30, 2018
  
  @thornmark I've seen no evidence of any enforcement at all that was not a continuation of an existing case brought by the prior administration.
  
  Like
- Scoutdude on May 31, 2018
  
  I don't see any gamble other than possibly being optional on the Raptor this is for F250 and up which has always been exempt from CAFE and was intended to stay so under the original 2025 rules.
  
  Like
- Scoutdude on May 31, 2018
  
  @Hummer Ford so far has not gone in for cylinder deactivation except as part of their fail safe cooling over temp operating strategy, so I wouldn't expect it on a application that won't be subject to CAFE rules.
  
  Like
- 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
  
  Like
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?

Like Reply