That's half an engine. Put two of them together and make +600 hp, now that's an engine in a truck they can brag about.

Anyone else recall when they put that 4.3 in the S-10's? Those suckers ran like a scalded dog. I had a large time in one that had a stick shift back in the day....

Less displacement with forced induction is the future and it's here now. It's probably the cheapest way to get more HP/TQ out of a motor.

Honda dropped the 3.0 for a turbo 2.0 in their Accord matched with a 6 speed. From the reviews I've seen, it's been a success.

Not sure for your areas but regular gas is around $2.75 here. Seems that mileage is becoming more and more important. Personally, I don't have a use for a truck but I could see technology like this driving truck sales.

Truthfully MOST of us truck drivers rarely use the bed of the truck enough to warrant driving it every day. I could do like my dad did, drive a car around 99% of the time and keep an old clunker around in the garage for when it's needed. But where's the fun in riding around with my head at bumper level on 70% of the other vehicles around here? So, I feed the id and the gas pump... Like the new wrappings on the front end of the '19, btw.

quote:

Originally posted by tatortodd:

quote:

Originally posted by Scurvy:
The soccer moms who make up 75% of pickup drivers won't know the difference.

The best made up statistic of the day.

Soccer Moms are driving way more crossovers and SUVs that pick-ups.

It's called hyperbole...

The vast majority of retail pickup buyers (not fleet/commercial etc) will never take their truck off road or tow something with it. That is just a fact. They are 60k+ luxury barges these days for most.

To be honest, I had 'zero' interest in GM trucks for a multitude of reasons before this powertrain change, and I still have zero interest afterward. However, I doubt most GM trucks buyers are going to embrace this motor option in a full sized truck.

Progress.

If they slap that in a family mover like a tahoe or suburban I'd take a look.

I just went from a 2011 GMC Yukon XL Denali with a 6.2L V8 making 403 HP and 417 ft-lbs of torque to a new Lincoln Navigator L with a twin turbo 3.5L V6 making 450 HP and 510 ft-lbs of torque. No complaints. I even get significantly better mileage (went from super horrible to just horrible!).

I can imagine a change from a big V6 to a small turbocharged 4 being similarly unobjectionable.

Rather have a turbo-diesel 4...I don't understand why small diesels aren't more popular here? Way rather have that, for similar mileage, than a hybrid!

quote:

Originally posted by maladat:
I just went from a 2011 GMC Yukon XL Denali with a 6.2L V8 making 403 HP and 417 ft-lbs of torque to a new Lincoln Navigator L with a twin turbo 3.5L V6 making 450 HP and 510 ft-lbs of torque. No complaints. I even get significantly better mileage (went from super horrible to just horrible!).


I can imagine a change from a big V6 to a small turbocharged 4 being similarly unobjectionable.

I am loving my 2016 Expedition EL. It has 365hp and the thing scoots.
450hp and lighter I bet yours flies for the size of the rig.

We’re likely to get a 2nd Expedition next year. I’ll likely fool with some tuning and engine mods on the new one. 500hp to the wheels seems like a reasonable goal.
Does the Navigator require premium? I need to find out what is different with the motor if anything other than tuning.

I wouldn’t mind a 4 cylinder turbo in a single cab short bed.
But a crew cab loaded with people and gear just seems like it would struggle a bit.

quote:

Originally posted by Strambo:
Rather have a turbo-diesel 4...I don't understand why small diesels aren't more popular here? Way rather have that, for similar mileage, than a hybrid!

I suspect with the price of diesel fuel and all the extra equipment required to meet emissions small diesels have lost their advantage. I ran the math when I bought a new VW Golf diesel in 2004 and it would have taken several years for the fuel savings to offset the $3,000 extra the the diesel cost. Then two years later, ultra low sulfur diesel fuel was introduced, diesel became more expensive than gas, and my math went out the window.

These days not only does diesel cost more, you also have diesel particulate filters that burn extra fuel to "regenerate" themselves (fancy way of saying they get really hot to incinerate the crud they have filtered) and diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) which gets injected into the exhaust all of the time as you drive to reduce NOx emissions.

With a small turbo, gas motors can achieve similar power for less money. The 1.9 liter diesel in my Golf was 90hp and 180ft/lbs of torque. The 2.0 liter gas motor in my Focus ST is 250hp and 270ft/lbs of torque. The ST gets 26mpg vs. the 37mpg the Golf got, but that's to be expected with the additional power. A smaller engine with similar power to the Golf's diesel would be much closer in fuel economy.

quote:

Originally posted by Orguss:
Holy crap, their V6 is 4.3 liters? That's V-8 displacement!

An "old-school" engine, based on the small-block V8, dating back to 1985. 2014-present 4.3s are based on the LS V8.

quote:

Originally posted by sadlerbw:
Back in the 80’s, BMW made a 1.5 liter turbo four for F1 that would put out 850hp for races and up to 1400hp for qualifying.

It only needs to make it through the race, after which it will be torn down and rebuilt, not last for 100 or 200,000 miles.

I worked on some turbo projects in the past as an engineer (Buick Grand National and GNX). None of the vehicles recommended towing with a turbo engine, specifically, if the turbo runs for a long time (10 seconds plus), it tends to get very hot. If shut down shortly after a hard run (or towing) the oil in the turbo cooks and becomes little hard and sharp carbon particles. This can destroy bearings, and can circulate throughout the engine. It was recommended to drive conservatively a few minutes to cool the turbo down. I hope there is a technology in place to counter act this. I know some vehicles use coolant to keep turbo temperatures down, but is that enough in this application? Time will tell

quote:

Originally posted by Orguss:

quote:

Originally posted by doublesharp:
I've yet to drive a Ford turbo but people whose opinion I respect like them.

I love mine. But I'm jealous of the new 3.5L engines making 100 more horsepower from the factory.

I turned in my lease 2016 F150 Supercrew 4x4 3.5 EB 3.55 diff with the 6 speed trans and leased a 2017 with the 2nd gen 3.5. We tow a hybrid camper with it, weighing about 6k. The 2016 towed very well, but the 2017 with the additional 75lb/ft of torque and 10 speed tows it much easier. As long as the tach is above about 2k you have on tap 80% of peak torque.

I took a trip from the metro-Detroit area to Michigan's Upper Penninsula during the last really bad snowstorm we had here in January. Speeds on I-75 were between 30 & 45 for the first 100 miles. After that I was able to drive at highway speeds. For the firdt 100 miles my mpg wad at 26.9 and still climbing! Very impressive. I am sold on Fords Ecoboost.

quote:

Originally posted by 2000Z-71:
.....The automatic transmission does the four-cylinder no favors, however, as it’s eager to reach its tallest ratio and apathetic to downshift when the accelerator pedal is floored.

Cylinder deactivation, stop/start, 4-banger mated to a mess of a transmission sounds like a tough sell.

quote:

Originally posted by greco:
I worked on some turbo projects in the past as an engineer (Buick Grand National and GNX). None of the vehicles recommended towing with a turbo engine, specifically, if the turbo runs for a long time (10 seconds plus), it tends to get very hot. If shut down shortly after a hard run (or towing) the oil in the turbo cooks and becomes little hard and sharp carbon particles. This can destroy bearings, and can circulate throughout the engine. It was recommended to drive conservatively a few minutes to cool the turbo down. I hope there is a technology in place to counter act this. I know some vehicles use coolant to keep turbo temperatures down, but is that enough in this application? Time will tell

Turbo technology and cooling has come a long way since the 80s.
I had the similar concerns when I picked up my EcoBoost. My neighbor is a turbo genius has a bunch of high end Supra based vehicles and is currently fabricating a custom twin turbo set up for his Lamborghini. I asked about turbo timers and the like to protect the turbo.
He said with today’s turbos and vehicle cooling systems especially those like the Ecoboosts that are built for towing it is a nonissue.
He went into all the technical jargon as to exactly why but it was a bit beyond me.

Cylinder deactivation on a four-cylinder? This works on V8s without a feeling of "missing," deactivating the inner cylinders on one bank and the outer cylinders on the other bank, but taking out two cylinders will make a four rougher than a dried-out corncob. There must be some seriously absorbent engine mounts, possibly electronically controlled.

On a broader scale, I wonder if American car makers are retrenching and focusing on the domestic market to the exclusion of foreign markets?

I just returned from a trip to Central America, and I saw only Chevy Sparks and nary a Ford in sight. Big trucks don't go well overseas due to high energy costs and poorer secondary roads. Toyota and Hyundai rule the roost. Every automaker from France, Czech Republic, China and Germany are present in the third world. Not so the "Big Three."

It seems Americans want trucks and SUVs, despite the fact that I'd wager the majority of truck owners never haul anything larger than a six-pack.

During the gas crisis of the 70s, American car makers had their lunch eaten by the Japanese. This looks like a similar situation, with different circumstances.

So, ya want a truck without the $$? Have we got just the thing for you: an under-performing, bulky, hard-to-park hunk of metal and plastic that is wrong in every way.

quote:

Originally posted by egregore:
Cylinder deactivation on a four-cylinder? This works on V8s without a feeling of "missing," deactivating the inner cylinders on one bank and the outer cylinders on the other bank, but taking out two cylinders will make a four rougher than a dried-out corncob. There must be some seriously absorbent engine mounts, possibly electronically controlled.

Mazda has it on the non-turbo automatic 2018 Mazda6. Haven't driven one, but have read that it's pretty seamless.