QOTD: Last Stand of the Great Eight?

by Steph Willems

Published: March 26th, 2020

Last year’s debut of a wonderfully throwback engine was just the early Christmas present many traditional truck fans needed. Sporting an iron block, pushrods, and 7.3 liters of displacement, Ford’s new heavy duty V8 felt like the 1970s were still upon us.

Rumor has it Mathew Guy has a blueprint of one adorning his bedroom ceiling.

While a delightful addition to the world of all things American and big, the engine carrying the codename Godzilla leads us to ponder how long it can all last.

Yesterday we received the latest hint that Toyota’s revamped Tundra, apparently due next year, will carry no V8 engine. A six-cylinder, with the assistance of turbochargers and an electric motor, will muster the needed oomph.

At least in full-size guise, Ford’s been headed towards that destination for years — the F-150’s V8 take rate declined steadily following the release of the 3.5- and 2.7-liter Ecoboosts. A hybrid and fully electric variant are on the way. It’s not hard to guess which member of the Detroit Three will be first to leave V8s behind. Over at General Motors, the Chevrolet Silverado offers a turbo four-cylinder on a range of trims. Good idea or not, the move showed that mindsets are changing in the full-size truck segment.

The orthodoxy that ruled the pickup field for decades is shifting, all thanks to environmental considerations. Thus far, the only major player not talking about electrics is Fiat Chrysler, purveyor of two Ram 1500s. Surely that will change. As a shifting product mix spurs the need to boost fuel economy in big vehicles, the automaker’s engine range could one day contain no trace of the word “Hemi.”

As for Nissan, one wonders how long the Titan nameplate will last, never mind the engine (which happens to be a standard V8).

Take your best guess, B&B — which automaker will be the last to offer a V8 engine in its full-size pickup lineup? We’ll keep heavy duty trucks off the table for now.

[Image: Ford, Fiat Chrysler]

#Engines #QOTD #QuestionOfTheDay #Trucks #V8

Steph Willems

More by Steph Willems

Comments

Join the conversation

11 of 57 comments

DenverMike on Mar 26, 2020

I don't recall consumers bugging automakers to lop off cylinders instead of proven engines and replace lost power with complexity, high pressures/temps and hopefully a short duration of teething problems for the sake of marginally improved real world economy. They're compliance engines, compliance transmissions, compliance all over. I'm fine with it, but clearly leasing is the way to go.

Like Reply
- See 8 previous
- Art Vandelay on Mar 26, 2020
  
  Oh stop...You could get Forced Induction on all manner of Auburn/Cord/Duesenberg products way on back in 1929 right along with 4 valve cylinder heads. Turbo/Supercharging is not new, nor is it rocket Science and I believe OHC is older than OHV and is arguably less complex since you don't need to design around a rod passing from the V to the top of the head.
  
  Like
- JimZ on Mar 26, 2020
  
  dude, the Ecoboost engines have been in trucks since 2010 (CY.) If they were some durability nightmare, it'd have become apparent in the DECADE they've been here. and nevermind the fact that diesels have been turbocharged with electronic direct injection for even longer. But I'm sure you'll sputter about how diesel is just so fundamentally different because reasons. But, but, I know. anything you don't like is *bad.*
  
  Like
- DenverMike on Mar 26, 2020
  
  @JimZ I didn't say turbos are anything new nor a reliability disaster. Do you see the little red car next to my name? Parts are parts. Except there's just more of them to make the thing go. I consider the engine a single part, unless I have to go inside. I've never had to since I buy right. But the turbo related hardware? Have you ever owned a "Turbo" long term? There's nothing romantic about turbos. They're just artificial displacement with added parts/complexity.
  
  Like
- Jack4x on Mar 26, 2020
  
  @JimZ When one of the Big 3 has enough confidence in an aluminum block, DI, turbocharged engine’s ability to do continuous work that they install it in an HD truck, that is the day I will give in and admit the turbo evangelists were right. Until then, the fact that Ford invested millions in a new bespoke pushrod V8 for Super Duty rather than develop a version of the existing Ecoboost tells me that they share my skepticism for those engines living a hard life over the long haul. For a daily driven half ton that doesn’t see anything heavier than a boat trailer or a yard of dirt, yeah no problem. For someone who uses their truck hard, they are still best off with a V8.
  
  Like
- JimZ on Mar 26, 2020
  
  @DenverMike "Do you see the little red car next to my name?" on my screen it's in a square about 5/16" by 5/16". So pardon the hell out of me if I don't know what that dozen pixels are supposed to be. "Have you ever owned a “Turbo” long term?" 10 years, 170,000 miles on a Dodge SRT-4. sold it, and last I checked (burned a Carfax out of curiosity) it had well over 200k. so stop being a presumptuous a$$.
  
  Like
- DenverMike on Mar 26, 2020
  
  @JimZ Awesome. We're all familiar with them. Except that wasn't the point. But nice way blow a lot of hot air to divert from the point.
  
  Like
- Dal20402 on Mar 26, 2020
  
  @jack4x The Ford turbos are iron-block.
  
  Like
- Jack4x on Mar 27, 2020
  
  @dal20402 The 2.7 is CGI, all versions of the 3.5 are aluminum.
  
  Like
- Art Vandelay on Mar 27, 2020
  
  @DenverMike Ohh, I want less moving parts...I know, I'll get a wankel. By your theory that should be the most reliable what with like 3 moving parts!
  
  Like
Art Vandelay on Mar 26, 2020

Wrong thread

Like Reply

Recent Comments

Mebgardner I owned 4 different Z cars beginning with a 1970 model. I could already row'em before buying the first one. They were light, fast, well powered, RWD, good suspenders, and I loved working on them myself when needed. Affordable and great styling, too. On the flip side, parts were expensive and mostly only available in a dealers parts dept. I could live with those same attributes today, but those days are gone long gone. Safety Regulations and Import Regulations, while good things, will not allow for these car attributes at the price point I bought them at.I think I will go shop a GT-R.
Lou_BC Honda plans on investing 15 billion CAD. It appears that the Ontario government and Federal government will provide tax breaks and infrastructure upgrades to the tune of 5 billion CAD. This will cover all manufacturing including a battery plant. Honda feels they'll save 20% on production costs having it all localized and in house.As @ Analoggrotto pointed out, another brilliant TTAC press release.
28-Cars-Later "Its cautious approach, which, along with Toyota’s, was criticized for being too slow, is now proving prescient"A little off topic, but where are these critics today and why aren't they being shamed? Why are their lunkheaded comments being memory holed? 'Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.' -Orwell, 1984
Tane94 A CVT is not the kiss of death but Nissan erred in putting CVTs in vehicles that should have had conventional automatics. Glad to see the Murano is FINALLY being redesigned. Nostalgia is great but please drop the Z car -- its ultra-low sales volume does not merit continued production. Redirect the $$$ into small and midsize CUVs/SUVs.
Analoggrotto Another brilliant press release.