WHY AN ECOBOOST V8?
[Get the latest “Truth With Speedzzter” here]
“Why an EcoBoost V8?”
1. Better breathing (more valve curtain area possible for a given displacement) with better port velocities.
2. Increased firing pulses per crankshaft revolution provides smoother torque delivery.
3. Only a V8 can produce the classic V8 burble. Six cylinders sound . . . like sixes. A
“buzzin’ half dozen” simply doesn’t sound as good as a proper V8. (Even V8s of less than two liters sound like V8s)
4. Higher RPM potential in modified form with direct injection because injector dwell time is less.
5. No American manufacturer has built a world-class turbocharged V8 . . . ever (the Oldsmoblie Jetfire and the V8 Turbo Trans-Am were poorly done and did not have DOHC or modern engine controls).
6. Heritage: Harley-Davidson is known for V-Twins (even though that's not the best for high power density) and it's part of their brand persona. Similarly, Ford introduced the mass-market monoblock V8 to the world in 1932 and the 135-cube V8-60 (later a Simca engine) in 1937. Ford V8s have been legendary in 70+ years of motorsports. Ford has led American V8 development with its Modular and Boss/Hurricane engines in recent years. An EcoBoost V8 would be a worthy successor to this tradition and heritage.
7. Cylinder deactivation: Although Honda and GM successfully deactivate 3 of 6 cylinders, cutting 4 of 8 is inherently less vibration prone.
8. Motorsports: An EcoBoost V8 (if it were small enough in displacement) could homologate a hand-grenade-sized V8 for several forms of grassroots motorsports. A larger EcoBoost V8 would also be a boon to grassroots motorsports.
9. Efficiency: The current Eaton supercharged Modular V8s lack sufficient fuel efficiency for the coming CAFE standards. An EcoBoost V8 could increase off boost efficiency.
(Probably what will eventually happen someday is a computer-controlled, electrically-assisted Miller/Atkinson/Otto-cycle (MAO) engine with a clutched Eaton TVS, split-pulse turbocharging, intercooling, and direct Ethanol/E-85 injection. Such a MAO engine would allow for dramatic off-boost efficiency gains (Atkinson Cycle with cylinder deactivation, hybrid electric torque assist, and engine start-stop), low-boost efficiency gains (Miller Cycle), instant torque upon full throttle acceleration (via the TVS blower operating in the Otto Cycle, transitioning to larger-than-otherwise split-pulse turbos), an even broader torque curve than the current EcoBoost engines, waste energy recovery at mid and high R.P.M. (via the turbos) and dramatically increased power density. An EcoBoost V8s would be the first step toward the MAO engine. While a MAO engine would take a large amount of computer processing power to manage its transitions, it would not be as hard to manage as an HCCI or HCCI/Otto-cycle engine.
10. Intake ram-tuning/variable geometry intake: Unlike the current Eaton supercharged Modular V8s, an EcoBoost V8 could use a variable geometry intake manifold for Helmholtz resonance tuning, and multiple torque peaks (Ford, if it were so inclined could also add some intake runner length to the Eaton supercharged Modular V8s (ala Saleen & Edelbrock), but it’s more likely they’d do it with a turbo engine)
11. Halo Effect: V8 EcoBoost engines would stand out as unique in a sea of similarly-sized turbo sixes that will likely flood the market as CAFE requires increased power densities.
12. Camshaft timing: V8s can run wilder cams with acceptable levels of low-speed driveablity because of the increased number of firing pulses per revolution. Thus an EcoBoost V8 could potentially not have to sacrifice as much cam timing on the altar of the idle smoothness that the Japanese-dominated marketplace expects.
13. Dashes the “Gas Guzzler” stereotype: Many uninformed people believe that V8s are inherently thirsty. Displacement, not number of cylinders is the primary factor in fuel consumption. Thus a properly-sized EcoBoost V8 would go a long way in rebutting the mistaken belief that V8s cannot be fuel efficient.
WHY COMPARE THE 2010 TAURUS TO JAPANESE TUNER CARS?
Comparison of the WRX/EVO to the 2010 Taurus SHO is not as unreasonable as it might seem. Each of these cars are all-wheel-drive performance cars using turbocharged engines. The EVO and the SHO have the same basic layout (transversely mounted engines). Each of these cars are four-door sedans. Thus, it’s reasonable to see the SHO as a larger, “grown-up,” Americanized version of a Japanese WRC homologation car.
[Get the latest “Truth With Speedzzter” here]
“Why an EcoBoost V8?”
1. Better breathing (more valve curtain area possible for a given displacement) with better port velocities.
2. Increased firing pulses per crankshaft revolution provides smoother torque delivery.
3. Only a V8 can produce the classic V8 burble. Six cylinders sound . . . like sixes. A
“buzzin’ half dozen” simply doesn’t sound as good as a proper V8. (Even V8s of less than two liters sound like V8s)
4. Higher RPM potential in modified form with direct injection because injector dwell time is less.
5. No American manufacturer has built a world-class turbocharged V8 . . . ever (the Oldsmoblie Jetfire and the V8 Turbo Trans-Am were poorly done and did not have DOHC or modern engine controls).
6. Heritage: Harley-Davidson is known for V-Twins (even though that's not the best for high power density) and it's part of their brand persona. Similarly, Ford introduced the mass-market monoblock V8 to the world in 1932 and the 135-cube V8-60 (later a Simca engine) in 1937. Ford V8s have been legendary in 70+ years of motorsports. Ford has led American V8 development with its Modular and Boss/Hurricane engines in recent years. An EcoBoost V8 would be a worthy successor to this tradition and heritage.
7. Cylinder deactivation: Although Honda and GM successfully deactivate 3 of 6 cylinders, cutting 4 of 8 is inherently less vibration prone.
8. Motorsports: An EcoBoost V8 (if it were small enough in displacement) could homologate a hand-grenade-sized V8 for several forms of grassroots motorsports. A larger EcoBoost V8 would also be a boon to grassroots motorsports.
9. Efficiency: The current Eaton supercharged Modular V8s lack sufficient fuel efficiency for the coming CAFE standards. An EcoBoost V8 could increase off boost efficiency.
(Probably what will eventually happen someday is a computer-controlled, electrically-assisted Miller/Atkinson/Otto-cycle (MAO) engine with a clutched Eaton TVS, split-pulse turbocharging, intercooling, and direct Ethanol/E-85 injection. Such a MAO engine would allow for dramatic off-boost efficiency gains (Atkinson Cycle with cylinder deactivation, hybrid electric torque assist, and engine start-stop), low-boost efficiency gains (Miller Cycle), instant torque upon full throttle acceleration (via the TVS blower operating in the Otto Cycle, transitioning to larger-than-otherwise split-pulse turbos), an even broader torque curve than the current EcoBoost engines, waste energy recovery at mid and high R.P.M. (via the turbos) and dramatically increased power density. An EcoBoost V8s would be the first step toward the MAO engine. While a MAO engine would take a large amount of computer processing power to manage its transitions, it would not be as hard to manage as an HCCI or HCCI/Otto-cycle engine.
10. Intake ram-tuning/variable geometry intake: Unlike the current Eaton supercharged Modular V8s, an EcoBoost V8 could use a variable geometry intake manifold for Helmholtz resonance tuning, and multiple torque peaks (Ford, if it were so inclined could also add some intake runner length to the Eaton supercharged Modular V8s (ala Saleen & Edelbrock), but it’s more likely they’d do it with a turbo engine)
11. Halo Effect: V8 EcoBoost engines would stand out as unique in a sea of similarly-sized turbo sixes that will likely flood the market as CAFE requires increased power densities.
12. Camshaft timing: V8s can run wilder cams with acceptable levels of low-speed driveablity because of the increased number of firing pulses per revolution. Thus an EcoBoost V8 could potentially not have to sacrifice as much cam timing on the altar of the idle smoothness that the Japanese-dominated marketplace expects.
13. Dashes the “Gas Guzzler” stereotype: Many uninformed people believe that V8s are inherently thirsty. Displacement, not number of cylinders is the primary factor in fuel consumption. Thus a properly-sized EcoBoost V8 would go a long way in rebutting the mistaken belief that V8s cannot be fuel efficient.
WHY COMPARE THE 2010 TAURUS TO JAPANESE TUNER CARS?
Comparison of the WRX/EVO to the 2010 Taurus SHO is not as unreasonable as it might seem. Each of these cars are all-wheel-drive performance cars using turbocharged engines. The EVO and the SHO have the same basic layout (transversely mounted engines). Each of these cars are four-door sedans. Thus, it’s reasonable to see the SHO as a larger, “grown-up,” Americanized version of a Japanese WRC homologation car.
Labels: Eaton TVS, Eco-Boost, EcoBoost V8, Ford Racing, Ford Taurus, Fuel Economy, HCCI, High Performance, MAO Engine, Mitsubishi EVO, SHO, Subaru WRX, turbo
posted by Editor at 07:49
3 Comments:
Well, thanks for the reply, but if Ford is bringing up the BMW 550i in their press release, I'd think that they have bigger fish to fry than going after the tuners. If they do, then they should just bring over the Focus ST and let them at it...
How about a DFI engine that runs in standard Otto mode, transitions into Atkinson cycle mode with low to moderate engine loading and then into Miller cycle mode for high levels of engine loading..??
Low displacement Otto/Atkinson cycle I4 engine with absolutely STELLAR FE for simply cruising along at a relatively constant speed but performs like a HUGE V8 when you put your foot "down".
All with modern day off-the-shelf, already in daily use, technology.
What is needed:
A. A positive displacement SuperCharger engine/electric combination differential drive using the Toyota HSD e/CVT technique.
B. A variable intake valve closing delay system and control, say using "extended" VVT-i as is used in the newest Prius and the 2010 RX450h to transition between Otto engine mode with low engine loading and into Atkinson cycle mode for moderate to high engine loads/loading.
Base/static/native engine compression ratio would be ~15-16:1. With low engine loading, partial A/F cylinder charge, that would remain the effective CR. As engine loading rises that CR would undoubtedly result in detonation so the VVT-i would be used to delay intake valve closing, thereby (incrementally..??) lowering the CR as the cylinder charge rises.
At FULL engine loading, say equivalent to WOT(***), VVT-i would reduce the effective, before BOOST, CR to ~10:1. Boost, intercooled boost, would, of course, raise the effective CR back up to ~15-16:1.
All the while the power stroke expansion ratio would remain 15-16:1
Would we call that an Otto/Atkinson/Miller/West cycle engine...??
*** No actual throttle plate required, the variable speed positive displacement SC would provide the throttling function.
Good thinking!
Of course, additional efficiency could be realized by using electric turbo-compounding (e.g. John Deere system) and/or turbocharging combined with Ethanol Boosting Systems' on-demand direct ethanol injection. The Miller-cycle positive displacement supercharger would be bypassed in the upper R.P.M. ranges (when such devices give up significant lost horsepower in comparison to turbo cars) and transient response could be improved with carefully managed compounding.
Given that Ford's sustainability plan requires 100% fitment with start-stop syttems and virtual across-the-board electrification of accessory drives, turbo-generators could make sense as a means of recovering some waste heat.
And adding a modest electric assist motor to the driveline and some ultra-capacitors and/or high-voltage battery pack would permit electric turbo-compounding during cruise conditions (such turbines could be bypassed at full throttle)
Post a Comment
<< Home