Industry joke:
How do you make a 2.7L engine 50% more expensive?
Make it a V6.
GM 2.7 L3B = inline 4, 1 cylinder head, 16 valves, 2 cams, 1 turbo 310 hp, 430 lb-ft
Ford 2.7 Nano = V6, 2 cylinder heads, 24 valves, 4 cams, 2 turbos, 325 hp, 400 lb-ft
It is rumored that GM is in development for a new inline 6. Stellantis is launching their Hurricane inline-6. What has Ford been doing these last 3 years? Our leadership has let us fall behind.
It’s not that easy. GMs 2.7L is not a cheap engine. It has an expensive valve train system that can do a 2 stage intake and cylinder deactivation. Also Inline 4s are horrid for lugging NVH, you make good fuel at low speed high load, but the engine sounds like a Harley. Also 2nd order imbalance which requires a balance shaft. 6cylinder is better with 3rd order firing. Inline6 is the sweet spot where they are naturally balanced. Thus the reason why the heavy truck industry and German OEMs remained in this space. Stellantis has remigrated here, as has GM with the 3.0L diesel. Ford has been short sighted not to offer an inline6.
avo+1lflWdWE if History has taught us anything is that when Ford starts to divert from the core business the company starts to fall.
I still have not seen where this so called FORD -E is making enough profit to sustain itself.
F-Series makes 90% of the profits.
I have not seen a demonstration of leadership. I see incompetence. to sit there a blame your troops for items for which you should know about and control is disgraceful.
Then to make a comment about 25% redundant heads for Development I wander how that id--t came up with that? One he is not and engineer. he is a marketing guy and a terrible one at that. He has no product he could hang is hat on nor did we gain any market share. In fact we lost market share and we left all but the mustang for the car segments. JF is not a car guy as he proclaims to be. he is a POS.
@qkm
The GM 2.7 inline-4 is a truck motor. Interesting that you would use the non-truck 2.3 ecoboost figures to benchmark it against.
Ford Ranger 2.3 = 270 hp and 310 lb-ft
GM Silverado 2.7 L3B = 310 hp, 430 lb-ft
You might also be surprised to learn that Mazda is releasing a new inline-6. Mercedes introduced the M256 in 2017. BMW never stopped using them. Jaguar and Land Rover released the AJ300 around 2020. Seems the industry left you behind.
The 2.3L Ecoboost makes 332hp and 350 lb-ft of torque. Why wouldn't you compare that to the L3B?
V6s have some significant packaging advantages when compared to an inline 6. I was very surprised to hear Stellantis put together a new one because the industry had moved away from inline 6s a long time ago.
Model E has no chance of replacing the revenue that comes from ICE F150s. There will have to be a huge reduction in payroll. Given the reluctance to trim bloated and unproductive LL levels, prospects are slim.
The Ford ICE engines will not be redesigned. Why would we even think of dedicating any funding to sunset products? Ford+ Plan is focused on EV's, software, and mobility services.
Model e is where funding is going towards and revenue will be coming from. Any new ICE engine development does not align with Model e or the company transformation that all Ford leadership is fully backing.
Farley is being exposed as the EPIC FAILURE. The Ford family are taking a hard hit to their wallets and from shareholders and wall street. Farley accomplished nothing at Toyota, they were thrilled to get rid of him and his fails continued at Ford. He will be TERMINATED by summer, then the issue is a replacement.
Possibly bring back Joe Heinrichs? or ???????
Farley's days are numbered, next are the removal of the rest of the liabilities, Franck Louis Victor, Antony Lo, Ken Musgraves, Doug Field, etc etc.
They all need to be exposed, shareholders and wall street influence decisions and they are not happy!