false, additional pistons produce extra pumping power not less. They exert extra force on the crank every revolution. Fun fact: the 5.0L V8 produces less NOX emissions and CO2 per mile than the new Chrysler 3.0L I-6 Hurricane engine. DOHC 4-valve architecture with Displacement on demand is proving to be very effective.
I find that hard to believe. Where is the evidence for that? Do you mean the front hubs are always engaged, or the transfer case is always engaged?
Nothing personal, but so many people make that same argument about “time saved vs gas consumption“, and they are usually the ones barely going above 60 on the interstate, causing all the traffic to slam on their brakes and fight each other trying to get around... yes you’re only saving a few minutes on a short trip. But on a LONG road trip that’s greater than 500 miles, the difference between 70 vs 80 is huge, especially when you have other people riding with you, including kids. It also can mean the difference between stopping once to sleep vs twice to sleep. When I was active duty over 12 years ago, it would take me almost 3 days to drive home from New Orleans to western Arizona in my 2500HD going 68 mph since diesel was outrageously expensive then. That was just me having to stop at a rest stop twice and sleeping in the truck for 4-5 hours. Making that same trip in my 2012 Ford ecoboost, going 75+ made the difference and only had to stop once to rest. If I’m able to go 79-80 mph and still break 20 mpg with either the 3.5 or 5.0, I’ll be happy.
Well you can believe what you'd like, but you've been given the facts. I have a 22 XLT w/ 4A and the ability to unlock my frontend. Voodoo I tell ya, voodoo. (Just kid'n, 22/23 XLT + 21 TOD TC + ATCM + TCCM = 22+ w/ unlocking hubs)
What he's speaking of is parasitic drag. I think you'd have a better position in arguing ford v. ford.
We’re starting to go way off into the weeds here, causing analysis paralysis among those of us who are still on the fence. Does all of that equate to a significant difference between the two engines when cruising on the interstate, going 75-80 mph, with just passengers and luggage? If it’s negligible, then the 3.5 it is.
That’s great and all, but have you seen a significant difference between the 5.0 and 3.5 in mileage when cruising 75+ without a trailer? I’m not looking for a tow monster, otherwise I’d spring for a superduty, and I’m not expecting Prius mpg’s either. I’m looking for a comfortable, all-weather, long-range highway cruiser with an engine that’s the least affected by the drag of wind resistance. If it’s negligible, meaning 1 mpg difference, then I’d rather the 3.5. Otherwise if the 3.5 and especially the 2.7 takes a nosedive compared to the 5.0, than I’d rather the V8.
Parasitic drag is a percentage of your displacement, his post was very misleading with a blanket statement that a V8 has more parasitic drag than a V6. That’s simply untrue from an engineering standpoint when all 8 pistons are producing power and exerting force on the crankshaft. Your drag is calculated all the same as it is for a V6, an I-4 or a W12, or a 2 cylinder lawn mower engine.
I think they produce similar results under those conditions even though you are describing the best possible condition for the 5.0 and the worst possible for the 3.5HEV. Roughly equal unloaded at 75mph on the Interstate, and the PB does far better once you come off the ramp.
For your use case the 2.7 actually sounds like the winner. That gets the best unladen highway MPG. The 5.0 does the best on gas of the bunch with a trailer behind it, it gets great MPG towing my boat to the ramp…surprisingly good. But empty the 3.5 and 5.0 are close, with the 2.7 winning the efficient fight by a good bit.
