This is a question that has been burning in my mind ever since Ford got serious about putting the Ecoboost 3.5L in the F-150's. As an avid fan of the V8 engine I must admit I am skeptical of the Ecoboost, And my next truck I plan to buy next summer will be powered by the new 5.0L V8. The thing thats really making me wonder though is Ive seen alot of comment's by people on web sites that have tested the Ecoboost or give specs to it, claiming that the Ecoboost means the end of the V8 engine. But some people also seem to feel that the V8 will find life even after the 2016 regulation's kick in.

What do you think? Will C.A.F.E ultimately make it so only high end luxury automakers like BMW only offer V8's? Or do you think that with the modern technology available such as Direct Injection, The V8 will live on in the domestic automakers?

My personal thought's on it are, I don't think it will be going away (Hopefully) I think the worst or best (depending on how you look at it) could mean that V8' engines will become more of a base/midgrade engine offering in 1/2 ton's and Turbo'd 6's will become the new top-line engine offerings. But who know's I am curious as to see how many more MPG Ford could squeeze out of the new 5.0L and 6.2L I've heard most Superduty 6.2L owners claiming at least 16-17highway mpg unloaded. I would expect in a smaller more arodynamic F-150 it would be capable of even better. And the new 5.0L V8 is suposdly rated at 21mpg highway when equipped in the F-150. These engine's are still in their most basic form to. They have alot that can be done to them and I'm 90% sure that at some point in the next few years we will see Direct Injected versions of both the 6.2L and 5.0L. I would also like to see them Turbo and DI (Ecoboosting) both of these engine's, Perhaps their MPG's would increase even more in that instance.

Also I wonder if Ford is still working on the Bobcat duel fuel 5.0L That was a pretty impressive sounding engine to.

 

Interesting question.

 

The V8 may die in some models, but never completely! The 450/550 line you can't even buy a gas v8 in. The only gas engine for these trucks is a V10. Would I buy a 5.0 Ecoboost in a 550? Hell yes, as long as the Torque numbers are there. A 3.5 EB in a 550? Not a chance!

 

It's been said before...and I'll be happy to repeat it. There IS no REPLACEMENT for DISPLACEMENT. It is hard to get the bottom end torque out of any engine no matter how much boost you throw at it, without the extra displacement seen by a V8. Now, could they throw a wildly boosted 6cyl making 400hp and 280 ft/lb tq with a super steeply geared automatic transmission allowing for more applied torque, making it usable for a bigger truck? Sure. But at what cost to the transmission and drivetrain? Everything will need to be spinning much higher rpms to maintain the power to keep a heavy rig going, especially with a trailer. I cannot see the V8 going away anytime in the near future. Not in Superdutys, and not in Mustangs. There will of course be options for the 6er, but always have the 8 as the king. Just my two cents...

 

Actually, there is no replacement for volumetric efficiency. With a turbo making enough boost, you can put out the torque required for a truck application. If the engine itself (and turbo) are built for it, it's not a problem, longevity wise.

But, I still don't see the V8 going away any time soon.

 

VE only get's you so far when you need at least 3k RPMS to get to the beginning of the power band. If you aren't making boost...it's not going to matter. And you can't make boost without increased engine rpm right?

 

Yes, you can. 3K is not where an ecoboost starts making boost.

The Taurus SHO 3.5L ecoboost makes just about what look like 99% of it's peak torque at less than 2K RPM. Somewhere like 1700 or so.

That's exactly where a torque converter's stall speed is. So slam the go-pedal and get almost instantaneous instant peak torque.

Even a huge naturally aspirated engine will not do that.

 

Holy crap. I stand corrected. That is insane. I am flipping flabbergasted...I can not believe the power that thing is making....let alone how low it is making it. WTF? and that is a bone stock production engine too? Crimany...maybe we are going to see V8's get weeded out...

But again...the manufacturer has to assume the cost of forged internals that can take the boost for the same engine lifer interval as a NA engine. Reliability/longevity will be come key as you said. Crap. I cannot believe that torque curve...it's flatter than my blown ranger.

 

And that is electronically limited because of the FWD trans, it makes 420 lbft in the F150 - 95% available from 1700-5500 (may be off a little on the numbers, but it's impressive and close to that) This is a product of gas direct injection and twin turbos.

 

One of the key benefits of the EcoBoost engines is that they are smaller than their traditional naturally aspirated counterparts. This is good because it means the engine operates with the throttle more open most of the time, and the power is regulated by injection timing, air/fuel mixture, boost pressure, and the throttle. Using the throttle as the means for regulating power output causes pumping losses across the throttle, and keeping the throttle more open at low rpm and/or low torque operating conditions allows for easier flow. This benefit would be lost if the engine was kept at the same size because the throttle would be less open generally.

Another benefit of the turbo is that some waste heat, which can be upward of a third of the original energy of the fuel in a naturally aspirated engine, is recovered by the turbo. This benefit would also be lost if the original engine size was retained.

Krewat is exactly right about the low end torque. If the engine is designed correctly, the downsized, turbocharged EcoBoost engine can still produce a solid low end torque curve with comparable reliability too. Of course, this adds design cost and additional manufacturing cost. This is all accounted for by the fact that the EcoBoost is an UPGRADE from the base engine that costs more money than the base engine.

The problem with using displacement to make torque is that torque measurements are all conducted at steady state and not transient conditions. As such, the effect of engine inertia is not at all represented in a torque curve. This means that smaller engines, which tend to have less inertia, do better in actual driving conditions, which are highly transient. There is a replacement for displacement.

Lastly, I'll be buying a Focus ST later this year so I can show all my friends with big *** V8 engines that Ford knows how to make a badass four banger than can blow their doors off, especially on curvy roads. It can do this and still get close to 40 mpg highway. EcoBoost engines are the future so get used to smaller blown engines. Also, I'm keeping my '96 F-150 until I die; it's just getting a little old to be a daily driver. I also have plans to add a '62 F-100 unibody with a 292 CI V8 and 3 on the tree to my garage. I like trucks, but we're not making any more petroleum, and the earth is not getting any cooler.