RV.Net Open Roads Forum: Tow Vehicles: Is V-10 Technology Dead?

RV Blog

  |  

RV Sales

  |  

Campgrounds

  |  

RV Parks

  |  

RV Club

  |  

RV Buyers Guide

  |  

Roadside Assistance

  |  

Extended Service Plan

  |  

RV Travel Assistance

  |  

RV Credit Card

  |  

RV Loans

Open Roads Forum Already a member? Login here.   If not, Register Today!  |  Help

Newest  |  Active  |  Popular  |  RVing FAQ Forum Rules  |  Forum Help and Support  |  Contact

Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Tow Vehicles

Open Roads Forum  >  Tow Vehicles

 > Is V-10 Technology Dead?

This Topic Is Closed  |  Print Topic  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 5  
Prev  |  Next
Sponsored By:
SWD

Land of Living Skies

Senior Member

Joined: 06/07/2005

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 03/01/12 06:34am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

NewsW wrote:

The V10 is far from dead.

It has been moved into displacing the diesel in a lot of medium duty applications as the price of diesels (both initial and operating) skyrocket, negating their former advantages except in certain well defined applications like heavy duty trucking, and medium duty with a lot of miles.

At present costs, there is no advantage to owning a 2010 or later diesel outside of these segments for most users with the exception of the niches like the VW diesels --- and even there the economics are being undermined by combination direct gasoline injection and turbo charging.

If I were to guess, there will be a steady expansion of turbo charging / direct gasoline injection down and up the line until every engine is converted over. The only ones left out will be industrial, marine, and little segments like defense / military (which in USA, is not gasoline).

I expect to see a V10 ecoboost around 2016 2017 timeframe. That means a decision to do it around 2014.


Thumbs up!!!!! and lets keep the fingers crossed.

NewsW

US

Senior Member

Joined: 02/06/2012

View Profile



Posted: 03/01/12 06:42am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

As an aside, one reason to stay with gasoline engines is that they can be easily converted to natural gas and many other alternative fuels, from propane, methanol, ethanol, to butane, or whatever is available with little impact on emissions as long as the fuel is "sweet" (not much sulfur) and not heavily contaminated.

With current prices for compressed natural gas, operating a gasser on natural gas is basically the cheapest deal in town, with the extended maintenance a bonus.

The only downside is the lack of availability of CNG. But that can change or is not an issue for fleets that mostly run local and can do gasoline at a flip of a switch.

skipnchar

Topeka or somewhere else

Senior Member

Joined: 12/17/2003

View Profile



Posted: 03/01/12 07:38am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Ford has publically stated that they are concentrating on reducing the engine size while maintaining or improving the performance (like the Ecoboost). It, in the correct configuration could easily be a competitor for any smaller diesel engine by producing huge torque numbers at very low RPM. I would look more at that engine technology as a means to replace their big bore gassers in the future.


2011 F-150 HD Ecoboost 3.5 V6. 2550 payload, 17,100 GCVWR -
2004 F-150 HD (Traded after 80,000 towing miles)
2007 Rockwood 8314SS 34' travel trailer

US Govt survey shows three out of four people make up 75% of the total population


Turtle n Peeps

California

Senior Member

Joined: 06/23/2008

View Profile


Online
Posted: 03/01/12 09:35am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

WyoTraveler wrote:

I have two f250s with a V10. A 2002 with a 3.73 differntial and a 2008 FX4 with a 4.10 differential. Love them both. I just got new ball joints on my 2002 F250 4X4 with 105,000 miles. I also added a Rancho steering stabilizer on my 2002 F250. Great vehicles.

I suspect in the future we will see some big changes in automatic transmissions. 6 gear is nice but what about a 10 or 12 gear. They use 12 and 16 gear auto and semi auto transmissions in tractors and they can use 50 hp engines with tremendous power. Why don't they put them in on the road vehicles? In pickups we could go down to a 25 hp engine with a 12 or 16 gear transmission.

If I can pull a stack wagon loaded with over 3 ton of hay, plus the weight of the stack wagon I'm at approx 5 ton with a 55 HP tractor with a 12 gear trany and have more power than I need why not put these tranies in pickup? Just thinking.


Because you don't understand how HP works.

HP is figured with a torque/time based formula.

Your tractor puts out a LOT of torque and not much HP. Even more torque gets to the ground through gear multiplication. Gears can make more torque but not more HP.

You can have a tow truck with 16 gears and 25 HP engine and tow 3 tons of hay and a 2 ton trailer behind it very easily...................at 5 miles per hour! Just like your tractor does.

With the setup your proposing you can go fast with a very light load or go very slow with a heavy load but you can't have both at the same time because of that nasty little HP forumla.

If you want to see how your proposed TV will work just do this little experment with your tractor.

Hitch your loaded hay wagon on the back of your tractor and find a long straight flat road. Get the load up to speed in 12th gear and then hit a little hill.

Can you guess what is going to happen? If you can then you understand why your proposed TV with a lot of gears and 25HP won't work. Or I should say it will work but nobody will buy it unless they want to go 5 MPH up hills.

Your essentially describing what truckers were up against in the 50's and 60's. 16 speed big rigs with 150 to 200 HP towing 80 thousand lbs. There was a reason they were down to 5 to 10 MPH on the hills. I remember when I was a kid thinking I could run faster than that big rig is going! And I could!

As far as more gears with lots of HP. We are getting to the point of diminishing returns. More gears means more HP to spin. More HP to spin means more fuel used in stop and go traffic. Do you really want to use more fuel?

A small example. A 2 speed PowerGlide takes around 25 to 30 HP to spin. A 3 speed Turbo 400 takes 50 something HP to spin. That extra 25 something HP burns a lot of fuel!


~ Too many freaks & not enough circuses ~


"Life is not tried ~ it is merely survived ~ if you're standing
outside the fire"


Grub

Pierre

Senior Member

Joined: 07/13/2011

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 03/01/12 07:52am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Smaller turbo charged engines could easily take the place of the V10 while maintaining the same reliability and power ratings.

No reason to have 7liters of displacement when 3.5 will do in my opinion.
Granted there is no substitute for a big honkin 5liter V8.


Any day enjoying the great outdoors beats any day enjoying your 8x8 office cube!

WyoTraveler

Northwest, Wyoming

Senior Member

Joined: 11/22/2011

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 03/01/12 06:54am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

I have heard that the price tag on the new urea system on diesels is going to increase the price tag of diesels up to $10,000. We may not see that amount in this recession but as we pull out of the recession that is quite a bit of an increase for EPA air control. Especially when new pickups already are upwards of $50,000. It just seems like they could do a lot more. I do realize you not only have to build vehicles you also have to find a large enough market to make money. I really hate to see the V10 go away in the F250 and F350. We live in a very cold climate and I went to the V10 Vs the diesel because diesels not run everyday in very cold weather sometimes have problems starting. Since we only drove our 2000 7.3L diesel to town every couple of weeks it was a problem that I don't have with the V10. I traded that diesel after the fuel turned to jelly at 60 below zero on the way to town. Breaking down in 60 below zero weather is an experience I never want to repeat.

However, all that said, buying a pickup capable of towing a good sized TT, 5Ver etc really requires a diesel engine now that the V10 is going away in F250 and F350. The answer I see on the truck forums is the H & S computer system for diesels. Completely re-programing the diesel engine, including the urea system.


2013 Monaco Monarch
2012 Jeep Wrangler
AC6CV, ex-WN8RUR, ex-W8RUR, ex-K7RIO, ex-WB6GBR since 1954
Commercial 1st class Radio Telephone, & Telegraph certificate
ARRL 35 WPM Certificate.


Grub

Pierre

Senior Member

Joined: 07/13/2011

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 03/01/12 10:36am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

NewsW wrote:

Grub wrote:

Smaller turbo charged engines could easily take the place of the V10 while maintaining the same reliability and power ratings.

No reason to have 7liters of displacement when 3.5 will do in my opinion.
Granted there is no substitute for a big honkin 5liter V8.



Conversely, a turbocharged, direct injection V 10 can replace many medium duty diesels.


True enough.

NewsW

US

Senior Member

Joined: 02/06/2012

View Profile



Posted: 03/01/12 10:43am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

One of the most common Class 8 engines is the Cummins ISX:

http://cumminsengines.com/sites/every/applications/heavy_duty_trucks/EPA_2010_ISX119_HDT.page

Typical (mid range performance)

ISX12 370 370 hp(276) 1350 torque (1695) @ 1200



That is not a lot of HP to move 80,000lbs around.

NewsW

US

Senior Member

Joined: 02/06/2012

View Profile



Posted: 03/01/12 10:27am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

How many HP do you need cruising along at a steady speed (no hills, winds, etc.)?

Depends... how fast do you want to go... how much weight... how much aerodynamic drag... how much rolling resistance..

This does not address the question as to how fast you can accelerate --- that is a different calculation.

http://www.assassinracing.com/tech/horsepower_calc.shtml

Horsepower Required Calculator wrote:

Horsepower & Aerodynamic Drag Calculator
By AssassinRacing.com

Calculate the theoretical Horsepower required to move a vehicle at a certain speed based on the Vehicle Drag Coefficient (Cd), Vehicle Frontal Area (sq. ft.), Vehicle Weight (in pounds), and desired Vehicle Speed (MPH).

Assumptions: The vehicle is a car driven on concrete with tire pressures set to 30 psi. Ambient temperature is around 25º Celsius (77º Fahrenheit), no wind.

Drag figures are usually calculated from wind tunnel models without side mirrors, gaps in the windows and body panels, and smooth wheel covers. These all contribute to Drag Coefficient (Cd) and can increase the vehicle's frontal area. Most of the drag on a car is aerodynamic drag rather than rolling resistance (from tires and vehicle weight).

Top speeds are either gear limited or drag limited. Use the Gear Ratio Speed Calculator to determine which is the case for your particular scenario.

Use the Drag Performance Calculator to calculate the theoretical 1/8 Mile ET, 1/4 Mile ET, 1/4 Mile Top End Speed, and Ideal 1/4 Mile Gear Ratio and the 0-60 MPH Time Calculator to calculate the theoretical 0-60 Time for a given application.







Calculating HP wrote:

HORSEPOWER FORMULAS
For Rotating Objects

HP =


Where T = Torque (lbft)
N = Speed (rpm)

Objects in Linear Motion HP =

Where F = Force (lbs)
V = Velocity (ft/min)

For Pumps HP =


HP =

Where

GPM = Gallons per Minute
Head = Height of Water (ft)
Efficiency of Pump = %/100
PSI = Pounds per Inch

Specific Gravity of Water = 1.0
1 CuFt per Sec. = 448 GPM
1 PSI = A Head of 2.309 ft (water weight)
62.36 lbs per CuFt at 62°F

For Fans and Blowers HP =


HP =


HP =

Where CFM = Cubic Feet per Minute
PSF = Pounds per Square Foot
PIW = Inches of Water Gauge
PSI = Pounds per Square Inch
Efficiency of Fan = %/100

For Conveyors HP (verticle)

HP (horizontal)
Where

F = Force (lbs)
V = Velocity (ft/min)

Coef. of Friction
• Ball or Roller Slide = 0.02
• Dovetail Slide = 0.20
• Hydrostatic Ways = 0.01
• Rectangle Ways with Gib = 0.01 to 0.25
TORQUE FORMULAS
T = HP x 5252


N

Where T = Torque (LbFt)
HP = Horsepower
N = Speed (rpm)

T = F x R
Where T = Torque (LbFt)
F = Force (Lbs)
R = Radius (Ft)

Ta (accelerating) WK2 x Change in RPM


308 x t (Sec)

Where

Ta = Torque (LbFt)
WK2 = Inertia at Motor Shaft (LbFt)2
t = Time to Accelerate (Sec)

Note:
To change LbFt2 to InLbSec2, Divide by 2.68
To change InLbSec2 to LbFt2, Mult. by 2.68
AC MOTOR FORMULAS
Sync Speed = Freq x 120
Number of Poles
Where Sync Speed = Synchronous Speed (Rpm)
Freq = Frequency (Hz)

% Slip = (Sync Speed - FL Speed) x 100


Sync Speed

Where FL Speed = Full Load Speed (Rpm)
Sync Speed = Synchronous Speed (Rpm)

Reflected WK2 =

WK2 of Load
(Reduction Ratio)2





What can you get for under 25hp:

CD (drag coeff) .4

30 sq ft frontal area

6,000lbs weight

55mph

22.4hp

That is net, not including things like AC, heated seats, AV, power steering / brakes, water pump, wipers, lights.

NewsW

US

Senior Member

Joined: 02/06/2012

View Profile



Posted: 03/01/12 10:30am Link  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Grub wrote:

Smaller turbo charged engines could easily take the place of the V10 while maintaining the same reliability and power ratings.

No reason to have 7liters of displacement when 3.5 will do in my opinion.
Granted there is no substitute for a big honkin 5liter V8.



Conversely, a turbocharged, direct injection V 10 can replace many medium duty diesels.

This Topic Is Closed  |  Print Topic  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 5  
Prev  |  Next

Open Roads Forum  >  Tow Vehicles

 > Is V-10 Technology Dead?
Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Tow Vehicles


New posts No new posts
Closed, new posts Closed, no new posts
Moved, new posts Moved, no new posts

Adjust text size:

© 2014 RV.Net | Terms & Conditions | PRIVACY POLICY | YOUR PRIVACY RIGHTS