Manufactures going to smaller engines.

Its easier to have a turbo engine and stay out of boost during the EPA test than do something intelligent like skyactiv.

>>16933753
skyactiv is faggots i just want to pollute

ford is a shit. There you go. The correct answer. Enjoy your aluminum bed and v6 lol.

>>16933746
>but why didn't they try to make the V8 more powerful and fuel efficient?
Diminishing returns.
>>16933753
This, but even then the turbocharged engine will still generally be more efficient when worked (provided both engines are both providing the same output) as power density is usually in favour of a turbocharged engine.

File: 1428867113449.jpg (22KB, 436x448px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 436x448px

>>16933746
>why didn't they make a V8 more powerful and efficient
because it's impossible to get 510 lb ft of torque while achieving those mpg numbers out of a V8?

>>16933823
Nobody actually cares about mpg except the EPA. Trump will take care of thatsoon enough.

>>16933849
>Trump will take care of thatsoon enough
Like all the other shit he's taken care of so far :')

File: 1479863884348.jpg (61KB, 394x473px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 394x473px

>>16933849
>nobody actually cares about mpg
Sure, if you consider 90% of all drivers "nobody". Not everyone is a fucking autist who screams muh v8.

>>16933858
He's done plenty. The swamp rats are coming out of the wood work when they defy him.

>>16933871
90% of humanity are nobodies.

>>16933891
yea, and 90% of humanity are the ones keeping these companies alive you fucking idiot.

>>16933746
Another thing is a big V8 is more heavier than a Turbo charged and more efficient V6. Less weight means more mpeeeegeeees

>>16933900
No it's the men that buy V8 trucks and SUVs that keep them afloat. They have the highest profit margins.

Cucks buy ecoboost and the profits are so garbage they were considering moving production to Mexico. But don't worry, Trump is working on preventing that too :)

File: geralt_2.png (266KB, 324x360px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 324x360px

>>16933906
/thread
Ford 3.5 Ecoboost:
>450 HP @ 5000 RPM
>510 Lb Ft of torque @3500 rpm

6.2L LT1 Chevy:
>455 HP @ 6000 RPM
>455 Lb ft @ 4600 RPM


there's literally no reason to use a v8.
>>16933915
64% of the F150's sales are from the ecoboost lineup. Statistics show that people value performance over sound.

>>16933891
>He's done plenty
[citation needed]

>>16933936
>6.2 LT4
>650hp
>650 lb ft of torque

>>16934003
>cites an engine that will never be put in a production truck
great example

>>16934003
>GM fangirls confirmed strawmen
LMAO
>>16934011
Will they ever recover?

>>16934031
>GT350 lawsuit

>>16934003
>>16934011
the lt4 corvette cant drive at load for more than a minute without going into limp mode
a lt4 truck would straight up explode trying to haul the typical truckcuck around

File: 12357698_641256602643396_276629641_n.jpg (94KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 640x640px

I don't mind it

it wont be as dramatic anymore though, i read recently that we've essentially hit the limit of downsizing. Engines can't get smaller and much more powerful than they are right now, atleast in a reliable manner.

more likely to start seeing more and more hybrids than engines getting smaller.

>>16934041
>trying to deflect attention away

>>16933871
Ford F150 was still the best selling vehicle in America during the recession.

There is a very vocal minority of drivers out there.

You used to be cool Alphonse but not anymore.

>>16934060
>there is a very vocal minority of drivers out there
see
>>16933936
as of 2015 more than 64% of the F150's sales came from the ecoboost lineup. The vocal minorities opinion's are irrelevant and stupid. Money talks and money says that people prefer function over form.

>>16934087
>In the rise of consumers buying trucks just for the sake of driving something big and not using trucks as trucks
>V6 truck sales on the rise

You're not proving anything.

>>16934087
Fine theory but Ecoboost real world mileage in the F150 is abysmal because at the end of the day it's still a fucking truck.

If people gave a shit about mpg outside of twitter activism there would be a lot more prius' on the road then there are now.
MPG is just a convenient bonus on whatever car Chad or Stacey is looking at on the lot.
Surely even you see it, bro trucks and jeeps are just getting more and more popular and you need the cubes to match.

>>16934108
>you're not proving anything
neither are you. any statistics backing your claims?

>>16934112
people care about mpg. they also care about the environment. why do you think electric cars or so popular?

File: 6a00d83451b3c669e201538e200572970b-800wi.jpg (291KB, 1127x933px) Image search: [Google]

291KB, 1127x933px

>>16933746
easier to make a smaller displacement engine efficient than a large one.

Turbos are efficient essential displacement on demand so that smaller efficient engines can be made while still producing powr and torque like a larger engine.

>why ford ecoboost blah blah

Because the old 6.2 liter V8 in the raptor was useless. The previous 3.5 ecoboost made more power and more torque to the wheels while being more efficient. Going to the 3.5 ecoboost, especially the new high output one was a substantial upgrade over the 6.2 V8.

Ford outright cancelled the 6.2 entirely because it had no place when the 5.0 Coyote and the 2.7 and 2.5 ecoboosts exists.

See pic related.

Itt: v8 fan girls getting blown the fuck out

>>16933915
>they were considering moving production to Mexico. But don't worry, Trump is working on preventing that too :)
Thank God. What I wanna do is spend a couple thousand dollars more on a car I would otherwise pay less for. God bless president Trump and God bless America!

>>16934148
>why do you think electric cars or so popular?
Because it's trendy.

>people care about mpg. they also care about the environment.
No they don't. They may care on the weekends or the internet.
Ask anyone sitting at a red light to give up their car for a day and ride a bike.

Not only is the Ford F-series truck the best selling Ford vehicle ever it's also the best selling vehicle in America hands down.
Ecoboost trucks even get less than 20mpg.
People don't care, the statistics prove it.
Why would they even? There is no tangible effect on people for driving a gas guzzler besides a slightly thinner wallet.

>b..but global warming

Is not noticable to the average American.
Even in the recession, when nobody had money people were buying more trucks then ever.
No my friend, the gas guzzler still has a heartbeat and a strong one at that.

>>16934149
Weren't 80s oil crisis cars usually fitted with huge but efficient engines? I seem to recall the Pontiac Firebird using a low power big V8 to save gas. Maybe the point was revving less with an engine that doesn't get lugged because of how big it is?

>>16934165
No, the oil crisis sucked horsepower out of cars without tackling the real issue that they just had vast displacements.
it was all based on emissions, not fuel consumption.

File: bigby_wolf.jpg (290KB, 432x670px) Image search: [Google]

290KB, 432x670px

>>16934164
>people don't care
your delusions aren't reality. sperg more.

File: F150.png (69KB, 768x498px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 768x498px

>>16934171
>your delusions aren't reality. sperg more.
Take your own advice.

Keep crying, I'm using your tears for hydroelectric power.

>>16934165
Large displacement was the only way to really make power back then. Then with primitive emissions equipment choking up the motors more displacement was really the only way to make any power.

This is not the 70's. We have small displacement turbocharged engines that make more peak power and more torque at lower rpm than is possible even with a large displacement V8.

>>16934179
what does that prove autist?

File: you're gay.gif (4MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 320x240px

>>16934182
The best selling car during the recession was a gas guzzler crybabby.

nobody cares about the environment.

>>16934189
>statistics from 10 years ago are relevant to today
lol

>>16934193
Protip, before posting again make sure the Ford F-150 isn't the best selling vehicle in 2016, because it is.

>>16934112
So many oversights in one post.
>it's still a fucking truck
It's relative.
>If people gave a shit about mpg outside of twitter activism there would be a lot more of this irrelevant option on the road
Running costs are a major consideration for businesses and contractors of whom operate said pickups, but you'd understand that if you didn't spend 75% of your day dwelling a basement.

File: Akiraluckychannel1697052619201200.jpg (843KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

843KB, 1920x1200px

>>16934204
yes, and most of its sales come from the ecoboost lineup.

It's pretty obvious people care about the environment

>>16934213
Ecoboost motors provide the most power and torque in the F-150 lineup.

People care about power.

File: 543.jpg (52KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 680x680px

>>16934205
>It's relative.
It's less than 20mpg.

>Running costs are a major consideration for businesses and contractors of whom operate said pickups, but you'd understand that if you didn't spend 75% of your day dwelling a basement.

Nice theory but fleet vehicles are slowly moving to hybrids anyway.

>>16934213
>yes, and most of its sales come from the ecoboost lineup.
Which still gets less than 20mpg.
It's a gas guzzler sorry.

>It's pretty obvious people care about the environment

Your tears sustain me

File: 1449988936412.jpg (37KB, 291x302px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 291x302px

>>16934221
>>16934219
>literally no argument presented

>>16934228
You jumped to a conclusion based on F-150 sales being ecoboost. I proposed an equally valid conclusion one could draw from what you posted.

Deal with it fag.

>>16934221
>It's less than this arbitrary number
...relative.
>Nice theory but fleet vehicles are slowly moving to hybrids anyway
That's exactly my point. I'm not really sure if you were trying to make an argument, and failed horribly, or if you were trying to confirm my point but you're too socially inept to convey yourself in such a way.
>Which still gets less than an arbitrary number
>It's a gas guzzler sorry
Need a source as to what measure constitutes a "gas guzzler".

>>16934232
I didn't jump to a conclusion I presented facts. stay btfo

File: 1483771629323.jpg (28KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 300x300px

>>16934228
>This btfo

lol i almost feel bad i ruined your day

Next time know what you're arguing about, champ.

>>16934228
There really was no argument kek

>>16934238
>know what you're arguing about
that people care about mpg?

>>16934237
You jumped to the conclusion that people buy ecoboost F-150's because they care about the environment. That isn't a fact, thats an assumption.

It is just as, if not more likely that people buy more ecoboost F-150's because Ecoboost motors are the top of the line motors for the range and offer more power and torque in a vehicle that relies on power and torque as a selling point.

>>16934250
>thats an assumption
nope. stay btfo

>>16934254
>nope.
post source showing people buy ecoboost F-150's because they care about the environment or stfu.

File: 1484006694657.jpg (101KB, 1080x1080px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1080x1080px

>>16934235
>...relative.
20 is bare minimum for not being a gas guzzler.
Relative is a poor man's excuse for the wife.

>Need a source as to what measure constitutes a "gas guzzler".

For 2016 the EPA slapped gas guzzler taxes on vehicles with more than 20 mpg sorry bro.


>>16934245
>that people care about mpg?
Wrong btfo.

>>16934250
There's no point in convincing him, his vagina has already been slagged he's trying to pick up the pieces now.

File: geralt_14.jpg (158KB, 514x796px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 514x796px

>>16934256
>spoon feed me mommy
>>16934258
>btfo
stop writing autobiographies

>trump supporters are pedophiles
why am i not surprised?

>>16934263
>makes claim
>claims it as fact
>cannot back it up
>tries to damage control his way out of it

Just what I thought faggot.

>>16934256
>nah-ah, you prove it
>>16934250
>you jumped to the conclusion that people buy ecoboost F-150's because they care about the environment
I was talking about fuel economy and running cost.
Also >>16933982 still awaiting on this citation.

File: 1485648450970.gif (985KB, 325x277px) Image search: [Google]

985KB, 325x277px

>>16934263
>>btfo
>stop writing autobiographies
>>trump supporters are pedophiles
>why am i not surprised?
Welp i guess i can count another notch on my bed for internet victories if this is all you have left.

Pic related, one of the many faces of crybabbyphonse.

it's because of emissions. it's easier to get power from a turbo engine while staying within legal limits than it is to do the same to a naturally aspirated motor.

also they provide better torque for the MPG that you get which is very important for towing.

>>16934269
>>nah-ah, you prove it
you have no idea what burden of proof is and your trolling is shit tier

File: geralt_is_so_dreamy.jpg (340KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

340KB, 1920x1080px

>>16934265
>spoon feed me
>>16934274
not an argument

>>16934258
>20 is bare minimum for not being a gas guzzler.
Good thing it's EPA rated for 20mpg combined... And that's the 4x4 model.
By your very definition, not a gas guzzler.
BTFO

>>16934280
>makes claim
>expects other people to verify his bullshit claim

not how it works fag.

File: geralt_15.jpg (37KB, 417x426px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 417x426px

>>16934283
>spoon feed me
yea, no.

>>16934280
>not an argument
Not an argument.


>>16934281
>Good thing it's EPA rated for 20mpg combined
Good thing EPA ratings don't reflect real world MPG.

>>16934286
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_burden_of_proof

>>16934277
>you have no idea what burden of proof is
That "burden" is on the person making the initial claim >>16933849
So please, spoon feed us :)

File: Uncharted_4_A_Thiefs_End_20161206103952.jpg (704KB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

704KB, 3840x2160px

>>16934288
>not an argument
not an argument
>>16934291
>spoon feed me mommy!
>>16934292
this desu

>>16934288
>Good thing EPA ratings don't reflect...
What a gas guzzler is? It actually does :)

>>16934292
That wasnt me, you made the claim here:
>>16934213
That people buy ecoboost motors because they care about the environment.

You have not backed up that assertion.

I provided a coutnerassertion taht is just as if not more probable here:
>>16934219
>>16934250

>>16934292
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_burden_of_proof

File: 1455069648000.jpg (121KB, 948x717px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 948x717px

>>16934297
>spoon feed me mommy

File: Ed_5126d8_6140730.jpg (9KB, 285x249px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 285x249px

>>16934293
>not an argument
not an argument.

>>16934294
Wrong.
Ecoboost trucks rarely reach 20 mpg highway as reported from the owners themselves:
http://www.f150ecoboost.net/forum/6-f150-ecoboost-chat/7-real-world-f150-ecoboost-fuel-mileage.html

While cars that regularly get 21mpg get a gas guzzler tax.
You see the EPA is retarded but by their definition the Ecoboost F150 is a gas guzzler.

>>16934304
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_burden_of_proof

File: 1463103412896.jpg (130KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 499x499px

>>16934305
>not an argument
not an argument
>>16934307
>spoon feed me mommy

>>16934305
>wrong
>as reported by this confirmation bias
>it's a gas guzzler even though it isn't
You can't make this up

>>16934310
>not an argument
not an argument

>>16934313
So you concede?

File: 129372528396.png (384KB, 852x479px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 852x479px

>>16934319
>not an argument
not an argument

>>16934320
Okay bye

>>16934310
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_burden_of_proof

File: 103987451321.jpg (30KB, 352x344px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 352x344px

>>16934322
>literally ragequits
>>16934331
>spoon feed me mommy!!!!

>>16934334
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_burden_of_proof

>>16934334
>>literally ragequits
Bro i have other things to do like drive GM products.

>>16934319
>So you concede?
You've already done that when you provided the citation against your own argument.
Most popular fullsize pickup is literally not a gas guzzler.

File: 1444538345718.png (276KB, 424x412px) Image search: [Google]

276KB, 424x412px

>>16934335
>spoon feed me mommy!
>>16934339
stay btfo

>>16934342
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_burden_of_proof

>>16934341
>You've already done that when you provided the citation against your own argument.
>Most popular fullsize pickup is literally not a gas guzzler.
Wrong.

>>16934342
Wrong.

>>16934334
>>16934342
dude you got thoroughly btfo in this discussion. as evidenced by your resorting to this shit trolling.

Try harder next time and dont say stupid shit if you dont want to get trashed on.

>no i dont care if you respond with some shitty troll attempt to this. go right ahead.

File: 1460529807280.jpg (30KB, 600x540px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 600x540px

>>16934345
>spoon feed me mommy!
>>16934346
stay btfo
>>16934351
your delusions aren't reality. you're the only one who got btfo.

>>16934358
Wrong.

>>16934358
Not even the one you were arguing with. I just ran across this autism fight and noticed how shit of an argument you had and how terrible of a debater you are. You got btfo

night sweet cheeks.

>>16934360
not an argument
>>16934365
stay btfo.

>>16934371
u wan som fuk?

>>16934382
ur mom already gave me some

>>16933746
If ford or chevy made a muscle truck and stuck an inline 4 in it, i would totally buy it.

>>16934385
Wrong. I'm a test tube baby.

>>16934388
>muscle truck
That's the most redundant name for anything I've ever heard.
every truck is """""muscle"""""

>>16934392
stay btfo

File: 1479775597209.png (8KB, 746x623px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 746x623px

>>16934399
I'm going to blow you the fuck out

>>16934406
stay btfo

File: this poster5.png (274KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

274KB, 640x480px

>>16934411
I'm going to blow you the fuck out

>>16934413
stay btfo

>>16933849
People who actually use their vehicles do

>>16934421
I don't and i use my vehicle.

>>16934392
>That's the most redundant name for anything I've ever heard.

Muscle is just terminology for a fuckfast preformance vehicle with shit ton of horsepower.. You're just thinking about the strength of a vehicle, or at least I assume.

>>16934431
oh my bad

>you weren't alive to buy a Syclone new

>>16934339
>drive GM products.
Hope you weren't planning on going further than 6 ( S I X ) miles

>>16933746
Yeah man I really hated when Porsche went 4cylT with they Cayman instead of that smooth and awesome V6. The reviews are ridiculing it by saying "It's trying to be a V6 but it's not yet there because it's a 4cyl working at it's peak that could blow out."

>>16934388
Toyota makes a 2.7L 4cyl Hilux.

>>16933906
The 3.5 Ecoboost is 415lbs without accesories, intercoolers and intercooler tubing.
The 5.0 is 444lbs without accesories.

>>16934171
He is right though. The majority of people really don't care. Look at the number of SUVs carrying a single person. Look at the number over trucks not carrying anything in the bed. The only time the majority of people care about mpg is when fuel prices rise.

File: 1477861222627.gif (459KB, 272x180px) Image search: [Google]

459KB, 272x180px

>>16934524
>tfw i live in burgerland and can't import it

i'm sad now.

6cyls sounds like ass

File: Fiat-500-500C-TwinAir-1[1].jpg (181KB, 1307x1600px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 1307x1600px

>Year of our lord 2017
>Having more than 2cyl and/or 1liter

Disgusting

>>16933746
http://www.evo.co.uk/features/18753/is-engine-downsizing-finally-falling-out-of-fashion

>>16933746
Smaller engines make more torque and power while getting better empeegees nowadays than old larger engines. Why wouldn't you downsize?

File: hqdefault.jpg (11KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 480x360px

>>16933753
Skyactive is fancy talk for direct injection. Ford is doing that, but isn't too pussy to force induct as well.

>>16934949
>NEED

>>16934957
Pardon?

File: 1481253288477.jpg (12KB, 251x251px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 251x251px

>>16933849
>nobody cares about fuel economy except libcucks!
>Trump will fix this!

You ever get so brainwashed you intentionally waste as much of your money as possible to spite a nebulous enemy who doesn't even know you exist?

>>16934959
It's a joke from /k/
Basically i'm free to own whatever vehicle i want and i choose a 7 liter boat anchor.

>>16934949
because that's not where the demand is?

automakers have been downsizing because Obama's cultural marxist EPA policy made it impossible to make big gas guzzling engines without heavy government penalties.

but the demand is for gas guzzlers. Nowhere was this more apparent than last summer when oil price collapsed and Americans started snapping up the nearest gas guzzler they could find. SUV sales soared higher, Bush Era landbarges started showing up on the roads, even Hummers started popping up everywhere.

And as time has moved on, and gas prices stabilized, that hasnt changed.

>>16933753
>something intelligent like skyactiv.
>skyactiv
literally a buzzword for "direct injection and high compression"
Everyone is doing that right now fucktard.

Goddamn fanboys

>>16934975
Nobody wants to take that right away from you. However, most people don't want huge V8s anymore, so the manufacturers offer V6 options.
What's not to understand?

>>16933849
Here's your reply.

http://consumerfed.org/press_release/poll-shows-bipartisan-support-strong-mpg-targets-epa-reaffirms-fuel-economy-standards/

>>16934978
90's and older too. I've seen a lot of 90's caprices.

File: 1490500891603.jpg (103KB, 383x339px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 383x339px

>>16934978
>Obama's cultural marxist EPA policy
Take your buzzwords and fuck off back to /pol/. I love big engines too but even I know that environmental shit isn't "cultural marxism". That doesn't even make any fucking sense; it's almost as if you just apply that label to anything that makes you REEEEEE.

>>16934986
>What's not to understand?
Stop liking what i don't like commie.

File: doubt.jpg (4KB, 160x242px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 160x242px

>>16934978

>>16934990
it is when you want to make sure that every car in the US and Europe are identical right down to tiny engines.

Obama pushed it, but Ford for example, was all to happy to go along, because it means they can streamline their production and just sell the same thing everywhere without having as many regional varieties.

make no mistake, it is cultural marxism.

the us has a very specific car culture, based on big cars and bigger engines. Can't have that, it's too american. people might get pesky notions of nationalism. let's turn the US auto industry into Europe's so that everyone has the same shitty auto culture.

>>16934986
>However, most people don't want huge V8s anymore

[citation needed]

people would buy them if companies fucking offered them.

>>16935007
You're reaching bro

>>16935012
So you're trying to say that companies don't offer V8s anymore in America?
Glad I live in Europe then.

>>16935012
This is why trucks are getting so popular.

>>16935007
I wish I could be this delusional

>>16935007
That's a goddamn reach and you know it. People wants smaller cars because they can't afford to give gas stations a blank check to fill up their land yachts anymore. This is why even trucks get 20 mpg now, up from 15-at-best before.

Economical cars are literally classical conservatism anyways. Or is "preserving your natural resources so they last longer" something only commie libcucks do now?

File: 1483153591036.png (53KB, 132x154px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 132x154px

>>16935012
>people would buy them if companies fucking offered them.

And this is why the Crown Victoria sold so well in the last decade of its life, right?

>>16935012
Wow, even here in Yurope we have brand new V8s.

>>16935007
Most people don't give a flying fuck about the power plant they have in their lease/finance mobiles. You're grasping at straws to make everything political when all people want is better power and fuel economy than before - they don't care how that is accomplished.

>>16935022
>This is why even trucks get 20 mpg now
My dad's gas 2016 Ram gets 13.7mpg.

For comparison, an 8 liter 70's Eldorado got 14 mpg highway.

>>16935024
>First decade
You mean when there was still a plethora of V8s on the market right?

>>16935027
We have them in America too; they're just either in trucks or in luxury cars. Performance cars as well, obviously.

File: 5113661+_db3428a3ff01ff9fd4ed5517d56c566e.png (207KB, 586x424px) Image search: [Google]

207KB, 586x424px

>itt: anecdotal evidence central

>>16935033
I said LAST decade, genius. Can't you read? Please, lay on us all the V8 barges that were on sale alongside the Crown Victoria 2002-2012 that aren't the Grand Marquis or Town Car.

>>16935036
That's where they belong, don't you think. An econobox with a V8 is a bit of a contradiction on wheels.

>>16935045
Cadillacs, Monte Carlos, Chrysler 300's.

The reason Crown Vics stopped selling well is
A: the recession happened
B: there was already a shit load out there
C: the later models were arguably worse then the older ones.

>>16935015
Ford sure doesn't. they keep trying to force the ecoboost 4cyl meme.

even lincoln doesnt offer a V8. The new Continental is a FWD V6

most automakers have stopped offering normal V8 sedans. they exist, but you have to look for it, they don't generally advertise the V8 models

>>16935049
>Cadillacs
Luxury cars.
>Monte Carlos
Haven't had a V8 since the 80s, anon.
>Chrysler 300s
Fair point, I forgot about them. And credit where credit is due, they're about the only thing keeping FCA afloat.

That said, they aren't ubiquitous anymore. People who want a V8 can buy them, but they don't make good commuters, which is what people are looking for in their DDs. And if you can get the same power in a lighter engine, why shouldn't you? "No replacement for displacement" was true in the early 60s, but it sure as shit isn't anymore.

>>16935049
don't forget Ford themselves did nothing to actually update the platform. They deliberately let it die a slow death. 2003 was the last major update to the platform. If they had refreshed it in 2010, with some kind of update, it might have continued.

>>16935067
7th gen Monte's had an LS4.

>"No replacement for displacement" was true in the early 60s, but it sure as shit isn't anymore.
Ultimately you still need the cubes to support more and more boost.

>>16935103
MEP is not tied to displacement.

File: pedobear____by_black_hayate13-d2ym84y.jpg (40KB, 467x350px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 467x350px

>>16934258
[audible sweating]

>>16934979
Skyactiv also includes components unrelated to the engine. e.g., the transmission, weight shaving, and some silly capacitor thing.

File: flanders.jpg (8KB, 256x197px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 256x197px

>>16935103
Power to Weight ratio, nigga. It doesn't matter if you've got 600hp coming out of a 7 liter boat anchor if it's fucking heavy. A lighter car with a lighter engine "only" putting out 300hp is still fast as fucking hell.

You even saw this in the age of muscle. That's why the AAR Cudas and Boss 302s were faster than the Hemi Cuda and Boss 429.

>>16935254
So like bluetec, ecotec and the rest meaning more aerodynamic parts and better rolling tyres?

>>16935258
Lets be honest here, the 340 was a stout motor for what it was, if it was a 360 it wouldn't have been as good.

That's said.
tfw no 6 pack 440 Superbee just to wake up the asshole neighbors at 3 in the morning.

>>16935260
No, like using the same shaft for 1st and reverse gear, and a shorter secondary shaft in manual transmissions to improve efficiency and simultaneously shave weight.

Or using clutches to disengage the torque converter for automatic transmissions, to improve efficiency.

Basically, instead of just shoving in more efficient engines and making cars boring, Mazda tries to keep up the fun factor while increasing efficiency. Skyactiv is really more of an approach to engineering, instead of specific technologies or engines.

>>16935280
>Or using clutches to disengage the torque converter for automatic transmissions, to improve efficiency.
A lot od of them do that now though, It's funny to watch a mid 2000's automatic coast, for a second they stay in gear then just drop into idle for god knows what reason.

>>16933746
I think the problem /o/ has when analyzing things like this is that they fail to remember that the majority of the world does not live in this autistic bubble of 24/7 fact checking and logic. You think the people buying the raptor even know why the fuck a V6 is called a V6? These are the same people that refer to any 4 cylinder engine as V4. These people simply do not care. The people buying the trucks buy it based on how it looks, how it makes them feel, and whatever the dealership tells them with regards to mpg/tow rating/etc..

Same goes for most trucks.

With that said, yes the raptor is a joke of a vehicle. Emaciated turbocharged V6 that is going to shit the bed well before 100k miles

>>16935293
>the raptor even know why the fuck a V6 is called a V6?
This, back when i knew nothing about cars my friend and I were talking about his mom's car
>wow bro this thing has power
(it was a ford escort lol)
>yeah it has a V4, is that what it's called
>yeah i think

Now i actually own a bona fide V4

Why have semi tractor engines and industrial engines stayed the same displacement for 50 years now?

Checkmate enginelets

>>16935348
Semi trucks are actually fucking fast if it isn't some disposable base model tractor unit.
Truckers were notorious speeders in the late 70's early 80's

>>16933746
Forced induction essentially adds displacement.

A mild high displacement engine will never suffer the stresses of a strung out boosted (shits where it eats) engine.

>>16935357
This. Most of the big fleet trucks have governors and shit in them, otherwise they can get up to like 90 mph with a light load (which is still multiple tons). Unloaded all that power can make them go fast.

>>16934415
Give him his Pepe's back

>>16933746
because no one cares about the engine other than us

because you dont need more power

because those larger engines were never about efficiency otherwise they would be smaller

you dont need 200000 hp in your 46mpg truck

you need a car that gets good gas milage makes decent power and doesnt need any maintinence

>>16933746
DO YOU WANT TO KNOW THE TRUTH?

WE COULD HAVE BEEN GOING 400 MPH YEARS AGO, BUT THERE IS A GENTLEMAN'S AGREEMENT TO STAY AT 150

>>16936120
EVERY AUTO MANUFACTURER AND ENGINEER WILL PLAY IN THE 150 MPH SANDBOX THAT THROUGH UNWRITTEN AGREEMENT IS WHAT OUR ROAD SYSTEMS ARE.

i havent been involved with this thread but i just want it to be known that in 2015:

Ford has stated that a whopping 63% of all new F150s sold are powered by either the 2.7L or 3.5L EcoBoost V6


citation:
http://www.torquenews.com/106/2015-ford-f150-sales-v6-engines-selling-record-numbers


anyone that says people dont care about the environment and that the EPA and global warming are wrong just doesnt know the facts and is too afraid to acknowledge the fact that within a few years there will be nothing we can possibly do to prevent global warming from being what ultimately destroys the human race

>>16936159
>Inu
so are you the king shill around here?

File: 1274320060517.png (7KB, 191x234px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 191x234px

>>16934524
They also make a 2.4l diesel 4cyl currently

>>16936173
>>16936159
on the chance you're just a massively ignorant libtard bernout:

the problem I have with 'global warming' and 'science' in general, is that "Science" to me and any rational man is the study of ALL relevant facts.

In the case of 'global warming' a relevant fact would be deforestation rates - as growing trees will eat carbon and produce oxygen, thereby improving the ratio and air quality. But this fact is NEVER in any sort of """""""""study"""""""""" because deforestation is a competing industry, and they're very quiet about it.

File: john-green.jpg (33KB, 320x321px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 320x321px

itt: retarded Republicans shit up another thread

>>16936200
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zgk8UdV7GQ0

>>16936432
This was always a republican thread.
You libpenises just had to trying and """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""reason"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'your way into this thread.

>>16936200
>In the case of 'global warming' a relevant fact would be deforestation rates - as growing trees will eat carbon and produce oxygen, thereby improving the ratio and air quality. But this fact is NEVER in any sort of """""""""study"""""""""" because deforestation is a competing industry, and they're very quiet about it.
This is true, the oxygen output in the Taiga and Boreal forests is massive, ya'll niggas need to plant more trees.

File: mfw commies.png (148KB, 631x408px) Image search: [Google]

148KB, 631x408px

>>16933849
Abolish the EPA

>>16934263
You btfo fucking KEK

Good shit >>16934274

>>16934438
Cyclones are dope.
But they aren't faster than Ferraris as marketing would have had you believe

>>16936159
The fact that people buy ecoboost motors doesnt mean peoplw care about the environment you fucking idiot. You cannot prove causation there.

EB motors are the top range motors with the highest power and torque.

It can just as easily be inferred that people want the most power and torque in their pickups and dont give two shits about the environment.

You might have had a point if everyone was buying the economy teir non turbo V6. But people dont want that shit.

>>16935290
>>16935280
But the 1991 Ford Falcon automatic I used to drive would lockout like that. If you kept it between like 1/8th and 1/2 throttle, when you went past 100kp/h the rev's would drop and it would lockout like a manual, the revs are locked to the wheel speed. If you try to accelerate hard or just let go of the throttle, it would re-engage the torque converter to prevent engine braking, or allow better acceleration.

That's probably what you were experiencing when you noticed the revs drop.

>>16935365
>Forced induction essentially adds displacement.

Yeah it's like having a bigger, equivalent power engine, but without the immediate, anywhere in the rev range throttle response, reliability, ease of maintenance or diamond-inducing sound.

>>16937178
>t.iveneverdrivenamodernturbo
>t.v8sareeasiertoworkonthanI4s
Wrong

File: sexbox.jpg (87KB, 1280x782px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1280x782px

>>16937133

They were """"""quicker"""" in a straight line than a Ferrari of the time. There's obviously a difference between quick and fast.

>>16937162

Turbo V6's, even with all the extra piping for the intercooler, are lighter than a similarly powered V8.

Package environments for applications that are dropping the larger motors (which is where the next generations of chassis's are moving) allow the overall package of the engine bay to be smaller and lighter.

Also, when out of boost (i.e. highway driving) the Ecoboost motors ARE more fuel efficient. The fuel economy of the motors are slightly in favor of the Ecoboost motors in real life city driving, not as large as the EPA estimates show, but it still saves fuel.

And for instance, you cannot find a N/A motor which will compete with Ford's 1.0L GTDI in terms of fuel economy. In the Fiesta/Focus real world results are 30+ MPG around the city.

>>16937266
But more mechanically complex. You think turbochargers dont shot the bed? Try working at a Subaru shop. Even the average Subaru buyer is weary of the turbocharger meme. More parts mean more parts to break, replace, and bill hours for. That's what this is all about. Ford wants more service for those service departments. They know the average Ferd buyer wont jump ship and go buy a na Chevy. It's more Jewery.

Mechanical simplicity will always be more reliable than added mechanical complexity.

A large engine working lightly will always be more reliable than a light engine maxing out on every rep.

>>16937331
You cannot make blanket statements like that. That's not how engineering works.

In engineering things are engineered to a design reliability and factory of safety. Yield strengths of materials, service life of bearings, wear life, etc already known variables.

Simply saying "SIMPLER IS MORE RELIABLE AND DURABLE" is factually false.

Material quality, design reliability/durability, quality of manufacture, etc. are all significant variables in the longevity and durability of a motor. These factors are far more important to these qualities than "ITS MORE SIMPLER SO BETTER".

A smaller displacement turbocharged motor WILL be designed to a stringent durability and longevity standards and will have high strength/quality materials and built much beefier to meet these standards. Manufacturing quality will also be important for meeting the design standards.

Once again, you do not understand how engineering works. "SIMPLER IS BETTER FOR RELIABILITY" is a bullshit misnomer perpetuated by people who are not engineers.

>>16938146

t. 1st semester engineering student

>>16938352
Actually I'm a field manager for a utilities engineering firm.

But this IS basic engineering knowledge that faggots still get wrong when they say stupid shit like "SIMPLER MAKES IT BETTER" without a single thought to the relevant variables.

File: Untitled.png (742KB, 984x554px) Image search: [Google]

742KB, 984x554px

>>16938404
derp, pic related.

>>16938404
>Works for a government subsidized Monopoly
>Thinks he's smart

>>16933982
>He's done plenty
>[citation needed]
You are being deliberately stupid. He's actually done plenty. But only succeeded in few things due to amazingly ferocious cockblocking as you've read in the news.

File: 2587930-wolf+-+wolf+-+2014-07-05+08-27-4409.jpg (1021KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

1021KB, 1920x1080px

>>16939640
>>>/pol/

>>16936120
It's based on the road systems.

File: _DSC5133.jpg (87KB, 1166x655px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1166x655px

>>16934524
And it looks pretty nice in the highest trim you can get it in. Really nice pick-up tho.

File: Obama-laughing.jpg (87KB, 1200x839px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 1200x839px

>>16939640
yeah, that whole healthcare reform thing was a big success. done on day 1 just like he said

>>16934524
You won't understand man. You just hurt my feelings too. In the US, you can't get it. I want that truck so bad.

>>16939666
Trump said on the campaign trail that the easiest way to solve healthcare was to let it fail. Trump actually wants to help though and tried to reform it. Now it's just going to fail like he said it would.

File: muh bortion.png (339KB, 816x1056px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 816x1056px

>>16939680
>retarded hicks still clinging to any shred of hope they have
holy fuck this would be hilarious if it weren't so sad and pathetic. how are you still putting stock in what this pathological liar says lol?

Trump said on the campaign trail that he would repeal Obamacare on "day one" and "it's gonna be so easy." He can't even get it done with a majority in the house. You were bamboozled.

>>16939703
>repealing a convoluted clusterfuck is easy all you need is a house majority

back to pleddit

>>16939725
>You're going to have such great healthcare at a fraction of the cost. It's going to be so easy.
>It's going to be so easy.
>It's going to be so easy.
>It's going to be so easy.
>It's going to be so easy.
>It's going to be so easy.
>It's going to be so easy.

Let me share with you three Donald J Trump quotes which I find quite inspiring:

"You're going to have such great healthcare at a fraction of the cost. It's going to be so easy." -Donald J. Trump on the 2016 campaign trail

"Nobody knew health care could be so complicated." -Donald J. Trump after being elected, 2017

"You can't con people, at least not for long. You can create excitement, you can do wonderful promotion and get all kinds of press, and you can throw in a little hyperbole. But if you don't deliver the goods, people will eventually catch on ... I'd never understood how Jimmy Carter became president. The answer is that as poorly qualified as he was for the job, Jimmy Carter had the nerve, the guts, the balls, to ask for something extraordinary. That ability above all helped him get elected president. But, then, of course, the American people caught on pretty quickly that Carter couldn't do the job, and he lost in a landslide when he ran for reelection." -Donald J. Trump in 'The Art of the Deal,' 1987

>>16939738
You act like people haven't been fighting him every single day he's been in office.

>>16939465
I never said I was smart.
But my degree says I know a hell of a lot more about engineering than you do pleb.

Come at me, dropout.

>>16939872
You mean exactly like what happened to Obama.

Cry more conservicuck.

V8s are shitty, heavy meme engines. V or inline 6 engines with some sort of forced induction will always be superior. why would i want some beefy sack of shit 5.7 or 7.2 L v8 when I could have a supercharged 4 liter inline 6? fudds are stupid and easy to troll. it's easy to roll out garbage v8s and hillbillys eat that shit up cuz "muh lub dub dub and displacement and bigger is always better!"

>>16940034
Wrong.

Must feel nice being so sure that hillshill was going to win.

File: 1372396051353.jpg (7KB, 167x144px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 167x144px

>>16940071
>this delusional of reality

File: 1479925412326.gif (657KB, 433x362px) Image search: [Google]

657KB, 433x362px

>>16940078
Remember how Trump was never going to be President?

>>16940095
you aren't exactly refuting his point. you're just shitposting

File: wrong.jpg (35KB, 637x499px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 637x499px

>>16940111
I know

Why don't they ecoboost a v8?

>>16940150
why don't they have a inline 4?!?!

>>16933849
damn, americans are this fucking stupid

File: boi.jpg (12KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 320x320px

>you will live long enough to see 1 cylinder turbocharged engines become common