[Rico]

https://media.ford.com/content/ford.../2017-ford-f150-more-torque-better-boost.html

This goes into more detail:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/samabue...peeds-for-2017-f-150-and-raptor/#223558b548e8

www.forbes.com/sites/samabuelsamid/...eds-for-2017-f-150-and-raptor/2/#3ad711736a18

Given what the Forbes article says about the new emissions standards, both of these will most likely be in the Transit no later than 2018.

 

[Byron the Painter]

Personally, I'm not so sure the Transit needs an engine that scoots along faster than the one it has now. Granted, it would be tuned differently from the F-150, but it would certainly have more giddy up.

In other words, I certainly won't be looking to trade up in a few years because I yearn for better performance.

In the F-150 however, I'd take the more HP and torque all day long. My personal vehicle is an '04 F-150 with the 5.4. It's absolutely awesome...runs and looks like new, rides like a limo. Gets 17 MPG dead on with my road trips. I see no real reason to be rid of it in the foreseeable future.

But in the last few years I've been wondering when Ford was going to bust out the bait that I just can't refuse. A client of mine has a BMW with the start/stop thing, he says it's awesome and makes a significant difference in the gas mileage compared to the last late model Beamer he had.

I think GM needs to pull a rabbit out of the hat real quick or eat even more dust.

 

[phantom6294]

From the article:

The engine features an all-new, Ford-first dual-direct and port fuel-injection system. Two injectors per cylinder – one mounted in the intake port where air enters the cylinder and one positioned inside the cylinder – work together to improve power output, efficiency, and emissions.

Solution found to the carbon build up issue, as so many expected. Just use both direct injection and traditional port injection. Problem solved.

Too bad they're 8 years late to the party.

http://m.wardsauto.com/news-analysis/toyotas-twofold-strategy

 

[Tchgrif]

I agree more power in the transit seems overkill but some people like more power no matter what. As it is if theres anything on the floor and I step on the gas it goes slamming against the back door. However to address the BMW stop & go. two things, 1 its not as fun as you would think there is a slight pause when you let go of the brake or turn the wheel slight hesitation for power to come on. 2 theres an Eco normal sport and sport plus dynamics button and eco is like driving a prius, the opposite of fun, normal is fine like driving a typical luxury car, sport is a different animal though. Everything from throttle mapping to braking to steering effort to shock settings become more engaged, it changes the car completely and once you're in sport you never want to go back to normal and eco is reserved for people into S&M. the stop & go is deactivated once in sport, it only works in regular and eco. oh and sport plus, as far as I can tell theres no need save for launch control, you must be in sport plus for launch control to engage.

 

[Rico]

Apparently, outside of the Raptor, this combo still mostly makes the same HP as the current 3.5 Ecoboost, with a 30 lb. torque boost. From what I'm reading, the focus was on significant gains in fuel economy, smoother shifting, and beating the newer emissions regulations. I'm guessing that's why it has start/stop standard.

 

[ford99]

Nice drivetrain!! A guy could wait his whole life for new features to come out on these vans. I'll be briefly jealous when the transit comes out with this powertrain and I'm in my lowly 6speed. Haha

 

[Chance]

I'd like to see more details on both the engine and transmission.

The first question I have is what material is the block? They stated all-new and with same bore spacing and deck height as previous block, but supposedly its design was based on what they learned from 2.7 EB. Hopefully that means a compacted graphite iron block like on most Ford truck engines, but there is no mention of this. They mention heads are aluminum, which seems weird unless block wasn't.

As to transmission, one site said first gear was 4.7 to 1. Another site said total gear spread was 7.4 to 1. I certainly hope that's right.

Transmissions like the ZF 9-speed for front wheel drive have such a wide spread that some gears essentially go unused. So what's the point of having them?

If above reported ratios are close to correct, this new 10R80 seems to have a great balance between total gear spread and close ratios.

 

[RandomJoe]

I'd sure hope the 10-speed shifts a lot smoother than the 6. Mine isn't *rough*, but I sure do notice the shifts. Adding four more shift points (pushing them all closer together) would get annoying.

As it is I wonder why 1st gear is even there on the 6-speed. I guess if I was at max weight limit it'd be useful but my van spends about 1.5 seconds in 1st then shifts. I've played with manual mode, starting in 2nd, takes off just fine there.

But then I'm probably a bit biased now. Drove my NV200 work van for over a year before getting the Transit. I *LOVE* the smooth, shift-free feeling of the CVT transmission! Wish they were strong enough to be used in something bigger/heavier...

 

[joefromga]

They use more gears to allow lower gear differential and to keep the engine in the peak torque range.

More torque makes driveability better. If you've driven a diesel VW you can really appreciate the torque compared to a weak gas car.

More torque keeps the revs down as well and thus wear and economy gets better.

I'm assuming this newer design just led to more torque and wasn't necessarily planned. The design fixes any issues (probably not real) with deposits on the intake side of the valves due to direct injection.

Ecoboost is amazing and probably one of the greatest engines ever made.

 

[camarina73]

If you look at the fleet brochure for the 2017 ford f150 there is no mention of the 10 speed and it actually states six speeds for all engines.

http://www.fleet.ford.com/resources/ford/general/pdf/brochures/2017/2017 F-150.pdf

so is it possible that they could put it in the Transit and that is why they are delaying letting the order guide out.

 

[phantom6294]

The design fixes any issues (probably not real) with deposits on the intake side of the valves due to direct injection.

Genuinely curious why you think the problem with build up may not be real.

 

[Rico]

Video interview with Ford engineers that also goes into detail.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkScQN7fxGg

Confirmed 365 HP, same as the current engine.

 

[joefromga]

Genuinely curious why you think the problem with build up may not be real.

Just seems like a huge oversight.

 

[airmengarrettm]

But then I'm probably a bit biased now. Drove my NV200 work van for over a year before getting the Transit. I *LOVE* the smooth, shift-free feeling of the CVT transmission! Wish they were strong enough to be used in something bigger/heavier...

RandomJoe, while automotive journalists constantly rail on all the things they dislike about CVTs, I'm with you I absolutely love them. I love knowing it has extremely large amounts of "gear ratios" to make sure my engine and transmission are running at optimum efficiency and smoothness. I love not feeling shift points!

 

[orton]

RandomJoe, while automotive journalists constantly rail on all the things they dislike about CVTs, I'm with you I absolutely love them. I love knowing it has extremely large amounts of "gear ratios" to make sure my engine and transmission are running at optimum efficiency and smoothness. I love not feeling shift points!

How about that new invention - a manual transmission. It is always in exactly the right gear that I want. Particularly useful if you enjoy driving. Not so useful for driver's sitting on a couch doing other things.

I test drove a couple of Porsche Boxsters the other day. One with the manual was great and the one with an automatic was just another Buick.

 

[phantom6294]

Just seems like a huge oversight.

Well, never underestimate an engineer's ability to overlook the obvious. lol Now, admittedly, it may not necessarily have been a matter of overlooking something, but rather a decision based on engineering design risk/reward analysis. The risk of carbon build up may well have been significantly outweighed by rewards of better emissions/fuel economy, power, etc. -- especially if the impacts of carbon build-up would be much later in an engine's life and thus little risk to the manufacturer (i.e., being responsible for warranty repairs). I could even imagine that companies wanted to use a hybrid direct/port injection systems initially but had difficulty handling the integration of the two systems and thus utilized one initially allowing the design for a hybrid system to evolve.

I certainly am not in the 'sky-is-falling' camp, but I also do not believe it is a non-issue. It's hard to really know the extent of the problem -- it's not wise to rely on internet forums as a gauge because they tend attract those who actually have a problem (i.e., self-selection bias). I also will not necessarily fully trust manufacturers who say say it's mostly a non-issue. I would imagine that manufacturers are only going to become aware of issues when customers have complaints but a customer has to actually complain about the vehicle. The impacts of carbon build-up are generally going to set in gradually and I suspect a majority of drivers would never notice such a gradual change and thus never complain. This may well be exacerbated by the fact that on average, new car buyers keep their car for about 6.5 years. It may be that (if truly a non-issue) folks are getting rid of their vehicles around the time more noticeable symptoms would start to manifest.

RandomJoe, while automotive journalists constantly rail on all the things they dislike about CVTs, I'm with you I absolutely love them. I love knowing it has extremely large amounts of "gear ratios" to make sure my engine and transmission are running at optimum efficiency and smoothness. I love not feeling shift points!

I have an admitted bias against CVTs because I dislike 'automatic' transmissions - just have never driven one I actually liked. Every one of my daily drivers has been a manual and I don't anticipate that changing. From my engineering perspective though, CVTs are awesome, precisely because of the inherent flexibility. The Achilles heel of the CVT seems to be the belt so it may well take an advancement in materials science for use in consumer friendly high torque applications.

 

[auto]

Carbon build up from the EGR system is a very real problem.Subaru has come out out with there version of a aux injector.I've been on the edge about getting a Transit.I love simple diesels,but that's gone forever.Now I will take a serious look at this new 3.5.

 

[Chance]

Video interview with Ford engineers that also goes into detail.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkScQN7fxGg

Confirmed 365 HP, same as the current engine.

Thanks for posting -- interesting information confirmed.

So the total transmission range is indeed 7.4:1. And first is 4.7:1. Top overdrive is about 0.64:1.

Talking about close ratios. Six underdrive gears, direct, plus three overdrive gears. So in order to get to 0.64 in three overdrive gear steps, they have to average around 0.86:1 each. On average each 2,000 RPM downshift at the high end would only go to about 2,300 RPM. That's insanely tight gearing.

This tight gearing should help a lot with naturally aspirated engines when it finally filters down to standard V6s.

 

[RandomJoe]

How about that new invention - a manual transmission.

Yeah... No thanks! I've driven a manual transmission since I got my license 30 years ago. I was looking FORWARD to the automatic in the Transit precisely because I'm SICK and TIRED of rowing through the gears when driving in town! If all I ever did was head out of town and cruise in the country it'd be no problem at all but my daily driving was basically an incessant shift-up-2-3-4-and-down-3-2-1...

That's with a 5-speed, I'd be even loopier if I had to use a 6 or 7 speed manual.

 

[DeemTime]

I think it is funny how orton compares the Transit transmission to a Porsche Boxter. I like the tactile connected feel of a manual. But that's not the point of my Transit. Not really comparable in any meaningful way with a 2 seater little sport coup. At least for me, the debate was between the Transit and a Sprinter, maybe I'm the weird one...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk