Ford to make 4.8 coyote based engine

[Bullitt1809]

http://www.allfordmustangs.com/2016. Ford to make a 4.8 based coyote based engine. Can anyone with any inside information confirm or deny this?

 

[tjm73]

A 4.8 Ecoboost for the Super Duty would be pretty sweet. Backed by a 10 speed would be even sweeter. Probably tow like a mother effer.

 

[Bullitt1809]

Ford usually decreses the displacement of their motors when they add forced induction.....

 

[06 T-RED S/C GT]

With the exception of larger displacement for the Shelby GT500 from 07-12 as in the 5.4L whipple S/C over the 4.6L 3v for the 05-10 S197 GT..

Then displacement increased once again in 13-14 from 5.4L to 5.8L for the GT500 over the smaller displaced 5.0L 4v Coyote in the 11-14 Mustang GT..

But with eco-boost FI.. I definitely agree with going to a smaller displacement 4.8 or even a 4.6 based 4v Coyote for that matter..

 

[Gabe]

Ford usually decreses the displacement of their motors when they add forced induction.....

Yeah, all manufacturers usually do that.
I figure they increase the cylinder wall thickness for the engine to be able to take the boost.

The Shelby 5.4 to 5.8 change was a huge difference in the way the cylinder bore was machined, they went to some spray technique that made it super strong while not needing to be that thick.

I don't see the Mustang switching to a 4.8 engine anytime soon, when having a "302" under the hood sounds so good to so many potential buyers/owners.

A twin-turbo gas V8 engine would be a great idea for the trucks, for the Expedition/Navigator, could easily be tuned for 500hp in those 6,000+lb SUV's/trucks, and would be an interesting alternative to the $8-10k diesel option in the Super Duty trucks

 

[tjm73]

A twin-turbo gas V8 engine would be a great idea for the trucks, for the Expedition/Navigator, could easily be tuned for 500hp in those 6,000+lb SUV's/trucks, and would be an interesting alternative to the $8-10k diesel option in the Super Duty trucks

450-500 hp and 600-650 ft-lb gas engine would sell like crazy. If it kept the same kind of torque delivery as the 3.5 in the F150 it would still have like 475+ ft-lbs at 2500 rpm. It would be diesel like power from a gasoline engine. And it seems gas engines are easier to make clean emissions with than diesels.

 

[fdjizm]

Yeah, all manufacturers usually do that.
I figure they increase the cylinder wall thickness for the engine to be able to take the boost.

The Shelby 5.4 to 5.8 change was a huge difference in the way the cylinder bore was machined, they went to some spray technique that made it super strong while not needing to be that thick.

I don't see the Mustang switching to a 4.8 engine anytime soon, when having a "302" under the hood sounds so good to so many potential buyers/owners.

A twin-turbo gas V8 engine would be a great idea for the trucks, for the Expedition/Navigator, could easily be tuned for 500hp in those 6,000+lb SUV's/trucks, and would be an interesting alternative to the $8-10k diesel option in the Super Duty trucks

But I can still say "I got that 281 son"
Turbo V8 would be pretty sweet, I'd swap to it.

AMG does a 4.4 with 503hp @ 17psi
http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/future-cars/news/a8399/amg-gt-m178-turbo-v8/

 

[Gabe]

450-500 hp and 600-650 ft-lb gas engine would sell like crazy. If it kept the same kind of torque delivery as the 3.5 in the F150 it would still have like 475+ ft-lbs at 2500 rpm. It would be diesel like power from a gasoline engine. And it seems gas engines are easier to make clean emissions with than diesels.

Yeah gas engines are much easier to run clean than diesels.
Diesels are natural heavy producers of nitrogen oxides, and the emission equipment needed to clean their exhaust is heavy, expensive, and large, all unfortunate contributors to today's trucks' weight and price.

I would be all over a 500hp 600 ft-lb turbo V8 in an F250 ...

But I can still say "I got that 281 son"
Turbo V8 would be pretty sweet, I'd swap to it.

AMG does a 4.4 with 503hp @ 17psi
http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/future-cars/news/a8399/amg-gt-m178-turbo-v8/

Yup, AMG, BMW and Audi all have awesome twin-turbo V8's with well over 500 hp .... even over 600 hp in the case of Audi's S8 Plus (or whatever they call it)

Oh, and the 4.6 is a 281. a 4.8 would be about 292 ci .... no catchy ring to that number :/

Maybe they can make it a "small" 4.8 and have it be a 289.
Now THAT number has some history.

 

[tjm73]

What about the 292 Y-block? That has history with Ford too.

 

[BruceH]

A de stroked coyote would rev a little faster but not offer much else. A smaller bore coyote would hold up to boost better than the current block and could still be made with the bore centers the current tooling allows.

Maybe something close to a 4.6 block that will take coyote heads and use the coyote crank? Doesn't make a whole lot of sense no matter how you look at it. There are already solutions to any goal Ford would have that would involve a 4.8 liter motor.

 

[06 T-RED S/C GT]

Yeah gas engines are much easier to run clean than diesels.
Diesels are natural heavy producers of nitrogen oxides, and the emission equipment needed to clean their exhaust is heavy, expensive, and large, all unfortunate contributors to today's trucks' weight and price.

I would be all over a 500hp 600 ft-lb turbo V8 in an F250 ...



Yup, AMG, BMW and Audi all have awesome twin-turbo V8's with well over 500 hp .... even over 600 hp in the case of Audi's S8 Plus (or whatever they call it)

Oh, and the 4.6 is a 281. a 4.8 would be about 292 ci .... no catchy ring to that number :/

Maybe they can make it a "small" 4.8 and have it be a 289.
Now THAT number has some history.

Or better yet.. Make it a small 4.7 which would be closer to being a 289 IMO.. And yes that number most definitely has some history, especially the 289 Hi-Po V8

 

[eighty6gt]

200 cc is a very small difference, esp among 8 cylinders. Pretty interesting.

 

[tjm73]

Yeah gas engines are much easier to run clean than diesels.
Diesels are natural heavy producers of nitrogen oxides, and the emission equipment needed to clean their exhaust is heavy, expensive, and large, all unfortunate contributors to today's trucks' weight and price.

I would be all over a 500hp 600 ft-lb turbo V8 in an F250 ...

So would a lot of people that want diesel performance without the diesel up charge and maintenance.

And emissions are a never ending bugaboo for the manufacturers even in heavy trucks. The regs are always tightening. Fuel economy for them is probably not far away.

This engine would help if it actually gets built.