2021 Tahoe/Suburban being announced today

[JExpedition07]

So how many 3-valve engines have you had that have never had to have any timing chain or cam phaser repairs and had over a hundred and 165k on them?

I nor any of my family with them over the years have had to do that work on them. So all. Zero have needed camphaser repairs.

 

[TobyU]

I nor any of my family with them over the years have had to do that work on them. So all. Zero have needed camphaser repairs.

Well, if you're getting over a hundred sixty-five Thousand Miles then you are beating the odds.

 

[Mike Wolfe]

Well, it is obvious that you embrace all the technology and like performance and power even if it's in an SUV. I don't see the point for horsepower in an SUV. You may need it but I don't. Rarely have any of my SUVs or trucks ever had a receiver hitch used. I love turbo charged engines but for performance and sport cars. I have had some very fast Buick Regal turbos.
The problem I have with all this current technology is it's not very durable. Of course some of us have a different definition of the word durable. Some would say that durable means an engine last 220000 Mile switch some of these twin turbo 6 cylinders are going to do. So maybe we should qualify or be specific and what I'm eating. If a vehicle goes to 220,000 miles and needs timing chains or both turbo replaced I don't call that durable. So it depends how technically want to get about the definition. So let me say repair free. And also lower maintenance. We all know that diesels are known to require increased maintenance over gasoline but they run many more miles. They typically don't have that many more repairs than gasoline either. I'm not a diesel fan have not owned a lot of diesels but they are better in lots of applications.
The manufacturers have no problems with you having to replace a Turbocharger at 9220 thousand and doing timing sets and cam phasers at 9230 also. People are accepting this as normal. I will not. We went through this crap in the old days with cars needing timing chain replacement by 150000 because of the nylon coated top gears that so many manufacturers use it was pathetic. By around 1992 to 1996 they had perfected the gasoline engine and these engines are going 250,000 miles and never having the valve covers or timing cover off of them. That is what I mean by durable.

I want to own a vehicle like my late 90s and mid-2000s that go 250k without a sweat and still have the original water pump, usually starter, and I've never had so much as a valve cover off nor a valve cover leak.
The only thing I want to see on my list of expenses of owning a vehicle is maintenance like spark plugs and oil changes and tires and a couple of sets of brake pads, a serpentine belt, and and alternator by the time they get slightly over 200,000.
None of these engines should need any actual engine repairs because they already had them all figured out but they have screwed them up with this technology and push for increased horsepower and fuel mileage, and let's go any missions too.
So I don't embrace technology our current technology. I embrace tried-and-true proven old school reliability with super low cost of ownership except for putting a lot of gas into them.

Based on the durabiity tests Ford performed I am not at all concerned about Turbo engine longevity
The 3.5L dual turbo engines were run for several hundred hours at full load WOT
https://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/...a-torture-tested-ecoboost-v-6-looks-like.html

Yes I like snappy throttle response
The factory programing is kind of lazy from a stop & when passing
That is why I reprogram every vehicle I own including my Polaris RZR turbo
Will always use 50/50 mix of premium & E85 for much better performance as well
BTW, Turbo's last Several 100 thousand miles if full synthetic oil is used
All 18 wheeler diesel engines have had turbo's for years & they usually last longer than the engine itself
Borg Warner is one of the largest suppliers of these turbo's & also supplies them to Ford for the ECOBOOST program
So yes I embrace the technology that can really outperform N/A big cube engines & & always will!!!!!

 

[JExpedition07]

Well, if you're getting over a hundred sixty-five Thousand Miles then you are beating the odds.

Not to say the 3-valves are perfect by any stretch, they have their share of issues I’m well aware. Ford has had timing set woes up and down since they went OHC and while it seems the timing sets are improved the problems persist today on the 4V engines. What you say does have some truth, with more power and complexity comes more issues (usually).

As far as pushrod vs OHC both have pluses and minuses. OHC is more power per liter and top end. Ford gets 480 horsepower out of the double overhead cams on the 5.0 Coyote which outdoes the GM 6.2 and Chrysler 6.4 power ratings in their respective muscle cars. Pushrod namely is more compact and less moving parts while being lighter (easier to add displacement without making huge engine). Another benefit to pushrods like the LS is cheap to build/ to add massive power. Two ways of achieving an end goal.

 

[Fozzy]

Ford needs to twin turbos their V10. That would be an awesome combo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Deadman]

Ford needs to twin turbos their V10. That would be an awesome combo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good lord it would need to record fuel milage in GALLONS per MILE! That V10 was lazy and sucked fuel like it was going out of style. My father in law pulled a camper for us to a music festival and his V10 averaged 3.9 mpg on that 40 mile one way trip. We went almost 80 miles round trip and his tank was on empty when we got home! lol. lol

 

[TobyU]

Based on the durabiity tests Ford performed I am not at all concerned about Turbo engine longevity
The 3.5L dual turbo engines were run for several hundred hours at full load WOT
https://news.pickuptrucks.com/2011/...a-torture-tested-ecoboost-v-6-looks-like.html

Yes I like snappy throttle response
The factory programing is kind of lazy from a stop & when passing
That is why I reprogram every vehicle I own including my Polaris RZR turbo
Will always use 50/50 mix of premium & E85 for much better performance as well
BTW, Turbo's last Several 100 thousand miles if full synthetic oil is used
All 18 wheeler diesel engines have had turbo's for years & they usually last longer than the engine itself
Borg Warner is one of the largest suppliers of these turbo's & also supplies them to Ford for the ECOBOOST program
So yes I embrace the technology that can really outperform N/A big cube engines & & always will!!!!!

Okay, to each his own but you're telling me that you mix your gas 50/50 with E85 for an expedition?? Is this your daily driver? Do you drive it to work? Do you go get groceries in it? Do you take the kids to soccer practice?
I can with certain say that an absolutely huge percentage of expedition owners do not mix fuel
And very few I even worried much about performance. There are a few that take them to get it tuned or whatever for a towing or to add horsepower because it makes them feel better but I can assure you that the vast majority of SUV owners rarely even see the floor mat with the gas pedal.
I feel they are right to be this way. Who's going to want to outmuscle somebody on the road in an SUV. I had all kinds of SUVs and a big Durango was my last with 38-inch tires on there. I wasn't kicking it down trying to race someone. I was driving because it looked awesome.
I guess I just feel that each vehicle has a certain Duty or you should pick the right vehicle for what you're going to do with it. I don't think SUVs should be race cars anyways despite the fact that that jeep Tomahawk thing is wickedly fast.

 

[JExpedition07]

Good lord it would need to record fuel milage in GALLONS per MILE! That V10 was lazy and sucked fuel like it was going out of style. My father in law pulled a camper for us to a music festival and his V10 averaged 3.9 mpg on that 40 mile one way trip. We went almost 80 miles round trip and his tank was on empty when we got home! lol. lol

The V10 was interesting, a lot of cylinders for not so much displacement and made a giant engine. A lot of people loved them and they were a good engine but it’s just too big dimensionally, the new 7.3 V8 is a lot smaller than the old V10 and much more fit-friendly.

 

[Fozzy]

My dad had a V10 King Ranch, it was a good engine and did good towing but wasn’t stellar overall. The 6.2 V8 he bought after it had more power and better mpg than the V10 so overall I’d say an improvement. The V10 was long in the tooth. He’s going back to the premium gas engine now that one is available and is going to order a new 7.3 over the 6.2 this time.

You guys are crazy. Yes it sucked gas, but kicked ass. I have a 32’ motor home pulling a 24’ trailer full of SXS and gear full of water. Gets 8 MPG and pulls every grade 60mph or better. My 6.7 power stroke pulling a comparable toy hauler with the same gear would only do 10 MPG. Yes it would pull it faster but I don’t speed when towing. A V10 Ecoboost would be killer. I hope the 7.3 is a winner for Ford. I am tired of diesels.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JExpedition07]

You have a point Fozzy