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.
LOlTheir union head said specifically “mustang and f-150 variants” so take that ballonhead
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.
I just hope if they do decide on a cylinder on demand set up its better than GM's that eats cams and lifters.
It will 100% absolutely have to have all that "stuff" on it to meet emissions and fuel mileage standards. GM and FCA have been using this stuff for well over a decade, and have worked with all the key industry suppliers. It's very mature tech now. Ford ain't gonna revolutionize it.
It will 100% absolutely have to have all that "stuff" on it to meet emissions and fuel mileage standards. GM and FCA have been using this stuff for well over a decade, and have worked with all the key industry suppliers. It's very mature tech now. Ford ain't gonna revolutionize it.
Your not sorry to piss in the cheeriosDid anyone point out that according to the Unifor agreement, that this new engine is to be produced in the same plant as the 7.3 vs. the plant (Essex I believe) that currently produces the mod motors. That virtually guarantees that this engine will be cast iron, vs. aluminum. No way Ford wastes money investing in aluminum block production in a plant that doesn't have it, while one with existing capability is literally a mile or two down the road.
This is just another new commercial focused engine. Sorry to piss in the Cheerios.