North American Truck of the Year

catfishmontana wrote:
There is no solid info to my knowledge about a V8 ecoboost engine.

I will give as many who want 5 to 1 odds on a $5 buck bet that there is a 5.0L Ecoboost for sale within 5 years.. :W :W :W

catfishmontana wrote:
There is no solid info to my knowledge about a V8 ecoboost engine.

Rumour has it machinery being installed at the Essex engine plant this year is for a ecoboost 5.0,they already build the na 5.0 and it has always had the mounts and bosses cast in -ready to be machined .
These guys know what to look for , they build the heads for the 2.7 nano.

no links, only talking to guys I used to work with.

Aren't they getting 600 HP out of a V6 for the GT? If that is the case, what is the need for a V8?

catfishmontana wrote:
There is no solid info to my knowledge about a V8 ecoboost engine.

I agree. Not saying there are not some prototypes somewhere but if they were going to pull the trigger on a v8 ecoboost in the near future I would think the new GT would have got it.

There is no solid info to my knowledge about a V8 ecoboost engine.

mich800 wrote:

45Ricochet wrote:
Yeah good for Ford for sticking their neck out. Good Luck and happy returns stock holders :W

Ford Stockholders have done well. Ford is by far the highest return investment of the big 3 historically.

Yep it took me over four years sitting on my pile of $1.80/1.97 Ford stock to make a nice tidy sum. Sold it when it hit $13.00 a share! Thanks FMC or F.

It was a ballsy move on Ford's part and I hope it sells like hot cakes. I have a lot of that work for Ford. Would like to see any link that shows Ford is doing a V8 Ecoboost. That would be a real link not a fan site link!

True the volume is unprecedented ,but innovations are in small details like self piercing rivets ,volume bonding of two disimilar metals etc ,not the use of aluminum in of itsself.

hone eagle wrote:

geotex1 wrote:
Being an engineer, I applaud innovation but I'm also very critical in that the essence of good engineering is to design by/to function. I'm not convinced Ford had that in mind for a working truck, but to be fair the actual percentage of truck buys who buy trucks to have something in the bed a handful of times a year has risen exponentially... Don't need much truck to haul groceries and hockey equipment. Repairs to that aluminum body are going to be expensive every way around. The insurance companies are not keen on them - I know this to be fact. Will be interesting to see how it ultimately proves out.

Nothing innovative at all ,Aluminum has been around in automotive bodies forever in whole or parts.
Insurance companies could care less they will charge what ever extra it will cost to repair and so far it seems to be between $100 and $200 a year,each individual will make their own decision.
To me the never rust is a major plus,and yes I know al oxidizes.

Nothing innovative, huh?

You have no clue...

In terms of using aluminum in a vehicle? Ok, I'll give you that one. But using all aluminum bodies on three quarters of a million vehicles a year? Nobody does that (yet). Just the manufacturing and assembly of the body alone took an 8 billion dollar investment in infrastructure, equipment, and new technology. The entire manufacturing process of the aluminum body is an utterly amazing feat, and to be able to do it on the scale Ford is required significant investment from the raw materials suppliers too... 5 years ago, nobody could have done it because nobody could pedicure the amount of aluminum needed to make that many vehicles. Ford essentially owns all the output currently available from the aluminum industry to sort the f150 and super duty for the foreseeable future. It'll be interested to see the commodities cost for GM if they jump on the aluminum bandwagon too.

I think Ford is doing the right thing with aluminum. New CAFE regulations are forcing everyone to innovate to improve MPG. Some trys at this have proven not fruitful, but lowering weight seems like a sure thing. I would be amazed if the other manufactures did not follow.

DirtyOil wrote:

Ford Stockholders have done well. Ford is by far the highest return investment of the big 3 historically.

not in the last 52 weeks...

low high
Ford $13.26 - 18.12

GM $28.82 - 39.77

FCAU $8.54 - 13.76

Had you bought low and sold high GM would have made you $6.95/share,
FCAU would have got you $5.22/share and Ford would have netted you a grand total of $4.86/share. With FCAU at a lower share price, one could have bought more shares for less money, then the other 2 and made off with a pretty decent return, if bought low and sold high.

I am speaking historically. Long to medium term investments. Not short term results getting dragged around short term market influences. So if you review the overall returns for something like 10 years Ford is eating the other big 2's lunch.

And you never judge a stock by its price or how many shares you can purchase with x dollars.