Two of the world's biggest automakers are squaring off for a multi-year truck engine battle, with one company trying to win by addition, while the other aims for victory by subtraction.
In one corner, Ford Motor Co. is using turbochargers to boost its V6. In the other, General Motors (GM) is deactivating cylinders on its V8s. Both companies want the same outcome -- power plus fuel efficiency. But the two are going about it in dramatically different ways. "No doubt about it, it's a face-off between them," David Cole, chairman emeritus for the Center for Automotive Research (CAR), told Design News. "Both of them have put a lot of emphasis on their decisions."
Indeed, GM has thrown down the gauntlet with the recent rollout of a family of so-called "small block" engines, which includes a 5.3L V8 and a 6.2L V8, as well as a 4.3L V6. The engines offer direct injection, continuously variable valve timing and, most importantly, cylinder deactivation. The EcoTec3 engines are important to GM because they give the giant automaker a clear path to fuel efficiency by combining the fifth-generation of the company's "small block" technology with the ability to shut down cylinders when they're not needed. It's a big step forward for truck engines in the era of CAFE mandates because it enables an eight-cylinder engine to behave like a smaller unit when the power's not needed.
GM's new 5.3L V8 EcoTec engine, left, boosts fuel efficiency by using cylinder deactivation to act as a four-cylinder engine at light loads. Ford's 3.5L EcoBoost engine, right, boosts performance by using twin-turbocharger technology to create a more dense mix of air and fuel in each cylinder. (Source: GMC, left; Ford Motor Co., right)
"In effect, it operates like a four-cylinder engine at light load," Cole told us. "The throttle is fairly open, so they reduce the throttling losses, which is one of the key thermodynamic losses for any engine at light load."
By employing the old "small block" concept, which was originated by GM in 1955, the company hopes to benefit through mechanical simplicity and experience. The engines will be used on the 2014 Silverado 1500 and the GMC Sierra 1500, where GM engineers want to appeal to customers who want to get a half-million miles out of their powertrains. "It's an engine we know well," Tom Wilkinson, spokesman for Chevrolet trucks and SUVs, told Design News. "And it's a technology we know will hold up over the long haul."
Ford, meanwhile, is taking a bottom-up approach with its V6, twin-turbo EcoBoost engine. The 3.5L engine, which has already had significant success, uses its exhaust to spin turbine wheels that create a more dense mix of air and fuel in each cylinder. Ford says the engine offers best-in-class 4x2 fuel economy (16/22 mpg), torque (420 at 2,500 rpm), maximum payload, and maximum towing capacity. In essence, the idea is for the engine to behave like a V6 until the power is really needed. "We say, 'Deactivate those extra cylinders all the time,' " Chris Terry, Ford spokesman, told us. "Don't use them in the first place."
Ford told Design news that the V6 concept has been received enthusiastically by truck buyers, despite initial claims by some that truck consumers wouldn't accept anything smaller than a V8. "They love our V6 engines," Mike Levine, truck communications manager for Ford, told us. "If you want proof, look at our F-150 sales last year. Fifty-three percent of them were sold with V6 engines." In November, the company reached production of 500,000 EcoBoost-equipped vehicles.
Right now, there's no way to fairly compare Ford's and GM's approaches. GM is still awaiting fuel efficiency numbers from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and is saying little until those numbers become available. The only statement made by the giant automaker was at the recent Detroit Auto Show introduction of the 2014 Chevrolet Corvette, which will use the 6.2L V8. There, Chevrolet said the engine will deliver 450 HP and 450 lb-ft of torque.
"Both approaches are quite valid," Cole told us. "So it's going to be interesting to see how they'll stack up in terms of performance, cost, and efficiency. This is really going to be a mega-technical issue."
Cabe: I remember reading that same article too. It reminded me of just how I used a crashed Caddy Seville V8-6-4 to power an in-field site generator for power to build several remote microwave and satcom sites our corporation had contracted. It was winter, the sites were scattered, it was cold.
The Caddy V8-6-4 with alternator, panel insturmentation, along with a reversed flow radiator fan and flex-ducted output for job site heat and AC gererator package; all supported by the origional Seville gas tank is still in use today. The modified car alternator outputs variable DC for Bat tools. Leather seats were used in the Chevy support pickup asigned to the unit. The enclosed modified Seville frame trailer along with the Primary Power/Heater Unit houses a wireless repeater, security, camera, and job site computer systems.
It is interesting to note that the car was one of the best I ever owned as it had the free factory chip upgrade installed when I purchased it used. It got fantastic gas MPG, using regular fuel and went like a BOoH when you tromped it. I wish all my investments returned a fraction of the value this old V8-6-4 Seville still does.
GTO, if the technology is success, obliviously competitors also may look up for fuel efficiency methods. Otherwise they can’t survive in market. From customer point of view, while evaluation vehicles for purchase, power and mileage are the two main factors.
I've run Broncos and a F250 over southern CO (Wolf Creek, Engineer's, California Passes). Of course two of those are off-road, but I know how tough it can get climbing and trying to maintain speed. My Broncos both had 4:10 rears so I could pull and keep speed, but always got the same 12-14 mpg mileage everywhere I drove.
The market has really loved the extended cab trucks. I don't think I could ever go back to a single cab, so I will admit a little bias here.
Watashi, I've always owned at least one truck since 1970 and all but one was underpowered for real mountain passes like Vail or Rabbit ears. The only truck that had power to spare was an engine swapped 66 Chevy standard and it was just under 3k lbs. If you get rid of all the car like accesories, dual cabs and dump that extra 800lbs you would have a chance.
Gear ratios and and a poor power to weight ratio will not get milage and performance. Only light weight will get there. A truck can be tough without weighing 4k lbs plus.
Trucks are built to accomodate payload and provide pulling/hauling power. A lighter truck would not last very long under the stress of heavy loads. Unfortunately you have to be heavy to do heavy work.
Your mountain pass problem sounds like either an under powered truck (300hp engine rating, not at the wheel) or improper gearing. I've never had problems keeping speed in the mountains with my big engine trucks unless I had a load or saw a cop.
that's pretty good for a V-10. My wife and I are looking into alternative energy for our next truck - Dodge 3500 diesel dually. I would consider a Ford, but since '08 the 250 and 350 have been so ugly.
An interesting thing is that the US Marine Corps also has a vehicle that consumes over a gallon of diesel fuel per minute. The only other information that I can provide is that that vehicle has a diesel engine.
My point being that they use equipment most suited to a specific application, with some applications being more "interesting" and others being more "green".
Cabe, a lot of automotive analysts believe that the biggest market for pure electric vehicles will be in delivery trucks that drive a predictable route every day. I think you're on to something.
I agree with what you said Watashi. I'm more interested in torque in my truck engine. My 2003 Ford F350 with 6.8L V-10 doesn't even know my 3 horse trailer is behind it. When not towing, it gets 12 MPG around town and 17.5 MPG on the open road.
But I have to drive it more. It's 10 years old with 21,000 miles on it. I'm getting tired where, every time I want to use it, I have to replace a wire or two that was chewed off by critters.
A new battery design, which replaces lithium with abundant and low-cost elemental sulfur, is still in its nascent stages but shows real promise for giving batteries more energy potential.
PTC will offer a virtual desktop environment for its Creo product design applications, potentially freeing engineers to run them from remote desktops on a variety of operating systems and mobile devices.
The push to achieving more intelligent, integrated manufacturing is putting a strong focus on networking and connectivity as key enabling technologies.
Now that solar and wind harvesting technologies are a thriving market, researchers are seeking other environmentally related energy sources for which they can create harvesting devices.
From Dell / Intel® New Paradigms in Design Work Scott Hamilton, vertical market strategist for Dell Precision workstations, 5/2/2013 5
Early in my career, I worked as a draftsman and remember the days of drawing on vellum with numbered pencils and Mylar with plastic lead. This was a fun experience in the sense that I ...
I've been using workstations for more than 10 years and love finding ways to get more performance from my system. With demanding professional applications that require more power each ...
A lasting memory from my first job as an engineer in an auto assembly plant is standing on hard concrete at six in the morning, vending-machine coffee clutched in hand, listening to ...
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This radio show will show what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.
To save this item to your list of favorite Design News content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This
7 
