Last Call for the 8.1L L18 engine

[DriVer]

Originally Posted by RLS7201

If you consider 50 RPM a BUNCH, then you are correct. The Ford V10 does get its additional horse power at 50 RPM above where the 8.1 peaks. That's really screaming.

RLS7201, I believe you're confused about the 50 RPM thing.

GM Vortec 8.1L
340HP @ 4200
455lbs/ft @ 3200

Ford Triton 6.8L (3 valve)
362HP @ 4750
457lbs/ft @ 3250

The 6.8L V10 makes its peak HP @ 550 RPM higher than the 8.1L V8.
The 6.8L V10 makes its peak torque @ 50 RPM higher than the 8.1L V8.

It's regrettable that both of these engines are going to be sunset. The 6.8L's demise will happen next year according to my resources. GM did it sooner and they are going to be moving into a smaller block engine which they already have in production. A smaller block engine will indeed have to make more RPM in order to get more HP out of the engine. The 6.8L engine has been doing that all along. Unfortunately stump pulling big block torque isn't going to be there anymore I don't expect when they move into smaller gasoline engines.

The 8.1L engine given the same highway speed turns significantly fewer engine RPMs per mile compared to the 6.8L. Doing the math the 6.8L engine works more to yield the same result.

Over the years both segments of RV owners both Ford and Workhorse have chosen their preferences and each walks away with their own rewards. We're gonna miss those engines when they're gone.

["007"]

Having owned both these engines an I'm not sure I will see 200,000 on mine, its like an old soldier said we don't die we just fade away.

[mygrayhound]

RustyJC, I understand the assumption that a smaller displacement engine (usually having less torque) has to spin faster to make the same horsepower as a larger displacement one...that can be argued since horsepower or the rate of doing the work is a factor of both the twist (torque) and the speed (rpm's). But that is only if they are not turbo charged or supercharged.
Once you add a supercharger or a turbo into the mix it changes everything.
You can now have an engine taking in and compressing the same or even more air than the naturally aspirated larger engine. Just add enough fuel and it can make the same or more torque and horsepower as the larger engine-no problem-and it won't have to spin itself into the stratosphere.

Now, using materials other than "unobtainium" may be risky however!

[LVJ58]

"One of my biggest hangups about the V10 is that it has to make a bunch of revs to get into its power band - an 8.1L does the same work with less HP and lower revs."

Mike, in all due respect, when you compare the RPM's of 8.1 v8 & the 6.8 v10 where max torque is developed you will find the v10 revs only 50 rpm higher than the v8, i.e., 3200/v8, 3250/v10. Until the 3 valve v10 was introduced, again, there was only a 50 rpm difference in the rpm where max HP was developed, i.e., 4200/v8, 4250/v10.

I will stipulate however, the new 3 valve v10 develops its max HP at 4750 rpm, 550 rpm higher than the v8's 4200 rpm.

Best regards & safe travels Jim

[DriVer]

Originally Posted by LVJ58

Best regards & safe travels.

Jim, You do the same ...

[House Husband]

Originally Posted by DriVer

RLS7201, I believe you're confused about the 50 RPM thing.

GM Vortec 8.1L
340HP @ 4200
455lbs/ft @ 3200

Ford Triton 6.8L (3 valve)
362HP @ 4750
457lbs/ft @ 3250

The 6.8L V10 makes its peak HP @ 550 RPM higher than the 8.1L V8.
The 6.8L V10 makes its peak torque @ 50 RPM higher than the 8.1L V8.

It's regrettable that both of these engines are going to be sunset. The 6.8L's demise will happen next year according to my resources. GM did it sooner and they are going to be moving into a smaller block engine which they already have in production. A smaller block engine will indeed have to make more RPM in order to get more HP out of the engine. The 6.8L engine has been doing that all along. Unfortunately stump pulling big block torque isn't going to be there anymore I don't expect when they move into smaller gasoline engines.

The 8.1L engine given the same highway speed turns significantly fewer engine RPMs per mile compared to the 6.8L. Doing the math the 6.8L engine works more to yield the same result.

Over the years both segments of RV owners both Ford and Workhorse have chosen their preferences and each walks away with their own rewards. We're gonna miss those engines when they're gone.

I stand corrected, and agree that it is the torque that is only 50 RPM apart.
I do disagree that the 8.1 will run at less RPM than a V10 at normal highway speeds. Is it not the torque that we use to climb hills and maintain crusing speeds? Can you prove your statement about highway RPM with over drive and final drive ratios of both chassis?

[DriVer]

Originally Posted by RLS7201

Can you prove your statement about highway RPM with over drive and final drive ratios of both chassis?

I don't think there's anything to prove at this moment since both of these engines are going to go away in the near term but I'll try. What we need to talk about are replacement engines.

In the RCVS 11-08-300 Ford F Series Super Duty Class A Motorhome Chassis product brochure that I obtained at Louisville last year from Dan for a 22,000 Ford chassis will have 5.38 ratio and a 5 speed with a final drive of 0.71.

According to the 2009 Chassis Guide, The Workhorse W-22 will have a final drive of 5.86 and a 6 speed Allison transmission with a final drive of .61 in 6th. In 5th gear it'll run .71.

I can't unequivocally prove out the RPM however you can call Brazels who runs both of these machines on a water brake dyno. They can better tell you about RPM at speed for both vehicles.

Perhaps you read the article I wrote for iRV2 while I was at the 2008 Louisville Exposition. I know Dan personally, he's in the first photo and I am not in the habit of bad mouthing any body's RV chassis product because they are all good.

2009 Ford F53 Chassis - RVIA Exposition Report, Louisville, KY

Have a good evening!

[tropical36]

Originally Posted by DriVer

Hi guys!

You know, we often spoke about this day and Workhorse is not going to abandon installing a gasoline engine in a W series chassis anytime soon. GM has an entire lineup of "LS" (there are many variants) series engines which are currently in production for use in a gas powered truck chassis.

I don't expect that Workhorse will go entirely diesel although the technology is in place so that it could if the situation demanded it.

It has also be stated that Ford isn't going to be producing their V-10 after the 2010 model year either so they are currently developing a smaller V8 for use in the motorhome and truck chassis.

I used to work on International gas engines. The one that was near and dear to me was the 345 with its weird firing order, 84365721. I don't expect to see ITE making a gasoline engine unless they buy the rights to the L18 and start producing it at one of their plants. Weirder things have happened!

I understand that Workhorse currently has a replacement gasoline engine under development -- so stay tuned for a high horsepower small block geared up hauling machine with just enough torque to keep things interesting.

Now the timing stinks with the announcement today of a Chapter 11 filing. I am expecting that the engineers that were working at GM on the small block L18 replacement project might be challenged at the moment for a paycheck. So who knows how all of that is going to unravel.

Workhorse uses the L18 and so does Mercury Marine Engines.

Let's assume for a moment that Ford will continue to have a compatible engine for it's MH's. Is there some reason why WH won't or isn't allowed to purchase a Ford engine for it's chassis and the allision tranny?

[DriVer]

Originally Posted by tropical36

Is there some reason why WH won't or isn't allowed to purchase a Ford engine for it's chassis and the Allison tranny?

Since Workhorse is a "custom" chassis company, I expect they could use whatever they wanted to however Workhorse originally bought the business from GM and I believe they have a licensing agreement. That said, I understand that Ford is also going to have to replace the V10 so Ford is going to have to come up with something new for its Super Duty as well.

Quite soon Ford will stop using the Navistar built PSD and begin building an equivalent engine off shore and import it for use in their trucks. Good news there for Ford is more profit and control over the engine operation and no licensing issues. Bad news is that Americans have lost jobs.

If you're considering building an RV chassis using a Ford engine and Allison transmission how does that successfully compete against a Ford engine with a Torqueshift? I expect that Workhorse will maintain their engine relationship with GM and continue to use the Allison.

Many owners here might offer the old argument that they would rather push a GM than drive a Ford. So that said, some folks are going to be inbred to both manufacturers and those perceptions are not going to easily change.

"Vivre la differenace!" They would say.

[tropical36]

Originally Posted by DriVer

Since Workhorse is a "custom" chassis company, I expect they could use whatever they wanted to however Workhorse originally bought the business from GM and I believe they have a licensing agreement. That said, I understand that Ford is also going to have to replace the V10 so Ford is going to have to come up with something new for its Super Duty as well.

Quite soon Ford will stop using the Navistar built PSD and begin building an equivalent engine off shore and import it for use in their trucks. Good news there for Ford is more profit and control over the engine operation and no licensing issues. Bad news is that Americans have lost jobs.

If you're considering building an RV chassis using a Ford engine and Allison transmission how does that successfully compete against a Ford engine with a Torqueshift? I expect that Workhorse will maintain their engine relationship with GM and continue to use the Allison.

Many owners here might offer the old argument that they would rather push a GM than drive a Ford. So that said, some folks are going to be inbred to both manufacturers and those perceptions are not going to easily change.

"Vivre la differenace!" They would say.

Sounds reasonable and I'm sure they'll work it out. It's amazes me that they can get the HP and torque nowadays from so small an engine and there are many out there who believe that the Ford V10 is a large engine because of it's number of cylinders, or because the Dodge V10 is a large engine. There was a time that there wasn't any substitute for cubic inches as you well know.

[rogueii]

Originally Posted by DriVer

Mike, If it were up to the President I can guarantee everything is going to get a lot smaller and greener ....

Including our Wallets and waist

[indiana journey]

I hope rogueii is right; my wallet is greener and my waist smaller.
Indiana Journey