Comments 1 - 11 of 11 Search these comments
Real Americans drive push-rod 7.3L engines.
5.0L are for cheapskate tree-huggers who don't need to tow a house once in a while.
kt1652 saysReal Americans drive push-rod 7.3L engines.
5.0L are for cheapskate tree-huggers who don't need to tow a house once in a while.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Didn't read the article ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Which is a shame, because it's very short and says it all right there:
"If you used [the 7.3-liter] in an F-150 or something, it would not return the kind of fuel economy at light load as some of our other engine offerings that we deploy in that vehicle," Beltramo said. "There would be a hit for the displacement. But when you start talking about running day-in day-out, at high weights...the displacement brings a big fuel-economy benefit."
Translation: Push rod is old as dirt engine tech. Therefore it is way cheaper to manufacture than them overhead camshafts and multi-valve designs Mercedes or Volvo truck engines.
... My car doesn't even come equipped with a trailer hitch and it's max payload including passengers is something like 550 pounds. (Yes, 2 obese people would overload it.) With a modest size turbo engine, you would only run hard for 5 seconds (after that you'd be at lose-your-license speeds).
"If you used [the 7.3-liter] in an F-150 or something, it would not return the kind of fuel economy at light load as some of our other engine offerings that we deploy in that vehicle," Beltramo said. "There would be a hit for the displacement. But when you start talking about running day-in day-out, at high weights...the displacement brings a big fuel-economy benefit."
'Automakers talk about fuel-economy and how it impacts engine design a lot, but what's interesting here is that at least in the US, trucks like the Super Duty don't have any standards to meet. The EPA doesn't require automakers to report fuel-economy figures for pickups with a GWVR of over 8500 pounds, so these trucks can be as efficient or inefficient as the automakers like.'
Real Americans drive push-rod 7.3L engines.
5.0L are for cheapskate tree-huggers who don't need to tow a house once in a while.
This was common practice and knowledge 50 years ago when the trend was toward bigger and bigger engines turning more slowly in cars that weighed only 4,300 lbs. Big Pontiacs used 400 and 428 engines driving through 2.41 axle ratios--the low speed torque was effortless and the engine loafed at all highway speeds. Oldsmobile took it a step further when they designed a package for the 1967 Cutlass Supreme coupes and convertibles called the Turnpike Cruising option for $300. Featured the 442 heavy duty suspension, 400 engine with a two barrel carb and 2.41 or 2.56 axle ratio depending on which magazine you read along with the three speed Turbo-Hydramatic 400 with switch-pitch stator. The same principle was applied to the '68 big cars when the 455 was used first in Oldsmobile's Delta 88 and 98 models using a 2.56 axle. Of course, all this power went away during the 70's with emission controls and use of smaller engines to meet better mileage due to gas shortages, so maybe the good 'ol ...
5.0L are for cheapskate tree-huggers who don't need to tow a house once in a while.
We waited for the announcement, Holley Dominator 4barrel carburetor's return, with bated breath!
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/why-ford-made-7-3-211700404.html