New 6.8L V8 for F150/Mustang?

DougNuts

'18 F150
Established Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2006
Messages
223
Location
Lexington, KY
And as far as the Ecoboost..... Mine was lucky to get 15mpg on the highway and towing my enclosed car trailer it wouldn't ever get 10mpg. So a direct injection, computer controlled 6.8 would easily match or better the Ecoboost.

That has not been my experience. On the highway or in daily driving, my 2018 gets good fuel economy.

914630.png
 

Jus Cruisin

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
134
Location
Metro Detroit
That has not been my experience. On the highway or in daily driving, my 2018 gets good fuel economy.

View attachment 1670178
Head on over to the F150 forum. There's hundreds of posts that complain about lousy ecoboost mpg. But if you get great mileage, good for you.. Now the "lie-o-meter" would always show 17 or 18 on mine. Hand-calc was always in the 14's around town and 15 something mostly highway.

Now, I haven't been hanging out over there for couple of years now because I traded my King Ranch 3.5l Ecoboost for a Limited 1500 Ram. I get better highway mpg with the Ram. I've gotten 20+mpg hand-calc highway with the Ram.
 

fearthesnake

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Feb 25, 2006
Messages
1,676
Location
Belton, S.C.
First off,

I've been saying for a while now, on good account that Ford is not happy with the 5.0 Coyote in both production cost and in warranty cost.

It's not a bad engine, but face it, you have 4x the cams, twice the machine work and any type of warranty claim is going to take more time because the engines are crammed in there...

The engine is also a dead end, with no real room to grow in displacement or way to modularize it across other engines or configurations.

GM and Dodge have both shown that VVT, Cylinder Deactivation, Direct Injection, etc help OHV engines achieve comparable emissions, power and fuel economy.

Their engines also are able to support 4.8 - 6.6L of displacement while staying the same physical size.

Ford has also been struggling in the HD gas game because the 5.4 and 6.2 are turds, so it made sense to make a new engine and they went OHV for cost, maintenance and service. Only makes sense they'd trickle that development down into the Mustang and F150.


For those that can't grasp that "displacement" has zero to do with physical size.
View attachment 1670105

View attachment 1670106
Corbin,
Your 1st sentence is spot on. I've seen alotbof issues with the Bore work on the Gen3 5.0 motor. Basically they are out of round and causing alotbof warranty work issues.

So yea, sign me up for this new Engine on a Mustang.
 

q6543

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2014
Messages
1,970
Location
midwest
I am ROCK HARD for this!!
If were talking around 550rwhp N/A with aftermaket H/C/I setup.. sold sold sold.
Base model 40gs.. whatever.. it's goin in the garage.
 

andymarkv

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Mar 19, 2010
Messages
949
Location
Upstate NY
I am ROCK HARD for this!!
If were talking around 550rwhp N/A with aftermaket H/C/I setup.. sold sold sold.
Base model 40gs.. whatever.. it's goin in the garage.
The thing is...if they use the technology from the 7.3...you shouldn't need heads.

If the current 5.0/305CI can hit 500rwhp with bolt-ons + corn...I would expect the 6.8/415CI with just cam + intake would be close to the 550rwhp.
36% increase in displacement over the 5 liter is HUGE!

Hopefully they learned from the small bore 5.4...a large bore this time around will help unshroud the valves in a standard 2V configuration, if they go pushrod.
 
Last edited:

me32

BEASTLY SHELBY GT500 TVS
Moderator
Premium Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
18,457
Location
CA,NorCal
Head on over to the F150 forum. There's hundreds of posts that complain about lousy ecoboost mpg. But if you get great mileage, good for you.. Now the "lie-o-meter" would always show 17 or 18 on mine. Hand-calc was always in the 14's around town and 15 something mostly highway.

Now, I haven't been hanging out over there for couple of years now because I traded my King Ranch 3.5l Ecoboost for a Limited 1500 Ram. I get better highway mpg with the Ram. I've gotten 20+mpg hand-calc highway with the Ram.

Which motor did you get?
 

me32

BEASTLY SHELBY GT500 TVS
Moderator
Premium Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
18,457
Location
CA,NorCal
In the Ram? 5.4l eTorque. The eTorque doesn't really help highway mpg. Supposedly helps city but it doesn't seem to be much different than the regular hemi.

Yeah the ram. Notice an improvement in power off the line with the E torque?
 

Fastback

Baker
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Messages
1,152
Location
Washington
"Smaller than DOHC": So what, where ya trying to stuff this thing? I don't recall a big push to make cars narrower.

"700 hp": You do realize Ford was one of the companies that wants to uphold the Obama admins. CAFE standards.
Four Automakers Stand Firm With California Against a Trump Administration Rollback

I get 18+ combined and 20+ mpgs with a 2019 CC 6.5 4x4 Platinum (Heaviest) with the max tow pkg.
It does suck towing but it much better than a comparable Hemi or 6.2 LS. What would a 6.8 get, 7 mpg's?.
My buddy has am Ecoboost F150 2017. 20ft enclosed trailer he pulled from WA to Montana he got 9mpg, I tow with an 1989 quad cab 3500 Chevy. It has a 19ft dovetail car deck. 454, turbo 400, 9mpg. Unless you are diesel, towing jacks your mpg, in any decade of vehicle, or motor size.
 

GTSpartan

Yield right!!!!
Established Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2004
Messages
9,343
Location
The Woods
I’ll believe it when I see it.

Just another commercial engine offering, that will only be found in vehicles that don’t require fuel mileage reporting. Ford is pushing hard in the fleet/commercial segments.
 

AltheaTheBoss

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
85
Location
Wappingers Falls ny
My buddy has am Ecoboost F150 2017. 20ft enclosed trailer he pulled from WA to Montana he got 9mpg, I tow with an 1989 quad cab 3500 Chevy. It has a 19ft dovetail car deck. 454, turbo 400, 9mpg. Unless you are diesel, towing jacks your mpg, in any decade of vehicle, or motor size.

For a real world apples to apples style comparison my buddy has a 22’ camper he tows with his 14 eco boost 150 and gets 8-9mpg. I towed the exact same camper with my 19 Jeep Grand Cherokee with a Hemi and got 11-12. Same camper, to the same location.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Fastback

Baker
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2006
Messages
1,152
Location
Washington
For a real world apples to apples style comparison my buddy has a 22’ camper he tows with his 14 eco boost 150 and gets 8-9mpg. I towed the exact same camper with my 19 Jeep Grand Cherokee with a Hemi and got 11-12. Same camper, to the same location.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SUV and truck are not apples to apples. I have also towed with a grand cherokee 2016 hemi, more balanced and the aero is slightly better. Also towed with chevy 2500HD with the 8.1 big block, around 9mpg too. Again, towing eats gas no matter what you are in. Mitigate it with a diesel is the only way out. And unless you are towing more than 2500 miles a season, it is a moot point. Extra few bucks for the season. Tow with what you are comfortable with, and has adequate brakes and tires for the job. IMO
 

gimmie11s

I Race Pontiacs
Established Member
Premium Member
Joined
Jun 1, 2004
Messages
18,488
Location
la la land
Corbin,
Your 1st sentence is spot on. I've seen alotbof issues with the Bore work on the Gen3 5.0 motor. Basically they are out of round and causing alotbof warranty work issues.

So yea, sign me up for this new Engine on a Mustang.

Ridiculous post...purely anecdotal. It is just as easy for me to say there are "a lot" of gen 3 cars making 7-800whp for 10s of thousands of miles running absolutely fantastic requiring 0 warranty work.

"bore work" lol. SMH
 

AustinSN

Well-Known Member
Established Member
Beer Money Bros.
Joined
Jan 29, 2014
Messages
6,408
Location
the plains
Head on over to the F150 forum. There's hundreds of posts that complain about lousy ecoboost mpg. But if you get great mileage, good for you.. Now the "lie-o-meter" would always show 17 or 18 on mine. Hand-calc was always in the 14's around town and 15 something mostly highway.

Now, I haven't been hanging out over there for couple of years now because I traded my King Ranch 3.5l Ecoboost for a Limited 1500 Ram. I get better highway mpg with the Ram. I've gotten 20+mpg hand-calc highway with the Ram.
Driving style and gear ratios really, really matter on the 3.5.

The 2.7 trucks do outrageously well though, one of my best friends drives a fleet of them for work. He texts me regularly about his hand calc highway mileage which hasn't been less than 26.
 

Users who are viewing this thread



Top