Naturally Aspirated (NA) V8 Engines

Joined
Aug 30, 2004
Messages
32,746
Location
CA
My 2020 Ram 1500 pick-up has the 5.7L HEMI V8 w/eTorque. It is the first V8 engine I have owned.

On this site (and others), there is a lot of discussion about the superiority of a Naturally Aspirated (NA) V8 engine over a turbocharged V6 engine in a light-duty pick-up truck. Or just in general. Whenever there is an option to choose between a NA V8 and a turbocharged V6 option, the overwhelming consensus is to choose the V8.

Hypothetically, if Ram had offered a turbocharged V6 option in this truck, I would have chosen it in a heartbeat. There is nothing special about the HEMI V8 in this application aside from the soundtrack it offers. IMO, there are more modern and more efficient ways to deliver the performance and capability that most V8's in this segment are able to deliver.

For example, I have driven F-150's with the 2.7 Ecoboost and the 5.0. I see no advantage to the 5.0 over the 2.7. The 2.7 delivers better performance for a daily driver with better fuel economy.

From a reliability standpoint, I also do not see any advantage to any of the current domestic V8 options (in the light-truck segment). Although the NA V8's are less mechanically complex, the HEMI has cam/lifter issues that have never been fully resolved. The GM 5.3L V8 with AFM has similar cam/lifter issues but to a lesser extent. Ford has oil consumption issues with the newest iteration of the 5.0 V8. Point is, I do not a significant reliability advantage by choosing the V8 option.

So aside from a pleasant exhaust soundtrack, why would anyone choose a V8 over a turbocharged V6 IF you are given the option? Seems like the V8 is just the thirstier and more dated way of delivering power.
 
Last edited:
More cylinders does not always equal more power, at least efficient power. Most may think the more cylinders , the more performance, this is not always true.

Torque is push force, while horsepower is the speed of which something is being done.

Your V8 makes what, 340 foot pounds of torque?

A TSI (Vw) 4 cylinder makes 292.

The difference? Efficiency!

Your torque will stop being produced at a certain RPM anyway.

Many car buyers may not know this when getting a v8
 
Simpler? Less things to break?

I'm not sure I'd pick NA over turbo, in my flat lands it'd be fine but add any elevation and it's game over. Ford EB's seem more than robust enough.

Too bad one could not get GM's OHV in a V6 with a turbo. GM seems to lead the way in 2 valve motors keeping up with DOHC's and showing that they aren't needed.
 
The concern seems to be the longevity of a more highly stressed smaller displacement engine and the turbo. For lightly used daily driver trucks the V6 turbo might be the better choice.

And there's the Luddite factor. Heaven forbid a small V6 turbo with eTorque.o_O
 
The Ecoboost is a durable engine line. Most are pleasantly surprised when they drive them. Much better in high altitude too.
 
More cylinders does not always equal more power, at least efficient power. Most may think the more cylinders , the more performance, this is not always true.

Torque is push force, while horsepower is the speed of which something is being done.

Your V8 makes what, 340 foot pounds of torque?

A TSI (Vw) 4 cylinder makes 292.

The difference? Efficiency!

Your torque will stop being produced at a certain RPM anyway.

Many car buyers may not know this when getting a v8
HEMI 5.7L w/eTorque:

395 HP @ 5,600 RPM
410 lb.-ft @ 3,950 RPM
 
I don't know. On one hand, I would have a really hard time giving up my 2 NA J-Series engines. But on the other hand, I bought a truck with a boosted I4 that is going to end up towing a 26' camper here in a few months. I'm hoping that little Ecoboost I4 will go the distance as I intend to keep it for at least 10 years. If the Ridgeline had offered the capability of the Ranger would I have that instead (With a NA V6)? Hard to say. The Ecoboost would still have a good bit more torque and about the same HP.

I'm not sure I added anything to this except confusion on my part, LOL. 😁
 
Love my Ecoboost except for the sound. I like hearing the turbo whistle when the driver window is open but the engine and exhaust sounds suck. Hopefully it continues to serve me well. On the 2021 Raptor they allegedly improved the exhaust sound by making both sides equal length by taking a loop around the longer pipe to get it equal length.
 
Engine choice in a truck doesn't even matter. So few people are using trucks for "truck things" it's laughable. Any engine in any truck is going to get you back and forth from your desk job and maybe haul a sheet of plywood on the weekend.

Starbucks runs, picking the kids up from their Montessori school, grabbing gluten free bagels and vegan cream cheese on the way home. That's what a modern truck needs to do well.
 
@The Critic ... I will say that I’m a closet fan of Ram‘s eTorque implementation. They avoided making some costly transmission motor sandwich or other massive metal redeux and instead used a simple motor generator and well-invested tuning to get the thing to work brilliantly with the mild hybrid and transmission shift strategy.

I know that’s a little outside of the vein of your post but to me it plays some.

I actually enjoy the v6 2.7 sound.... it runs low rpm and has a little growl to it. Sure if you romp it, it sounds like a 6.... but where it really shines for me is towing. Even on the interstate it settles around 2200 or a little less rpm at speed, even up hill. which is so much more livable than my older v8 which needed to stay at 3k or 4K on climbs.
 
One example is if you use your vehicle in a way that you are heavy into the turbo a lot - think towing heavy loads more often than not.

While the turbo may feel better to drive, it often comes at the expense of fuel economy. You can find towing comparisons of the f150 with the 5.0 versus the turbos and they often get better fuel mileage in that usage.

That being said, I own an f150 with the 2.7, and would buy another one tomorrow. It runs circles around the 5.4 equipped truck it replaced. It guzzles gas when I tow, which is two or three round trips a year for 600 miles round trip. But it is in the same ballpark as the v8 it replaced - but is much better in day to day driving. I get 4mpg better overall than my old truck with the same driving.

I do miss the v8 sound, but the rest I'm fully on board with the turbo v6.
 
Engine choice in a truck doesn't even matter. So few people are using trucks for "truck things" it's laughable. Any engine in any truck is going to get you back and forth from your desk job and maybe haul a sheet of plywood on the weekend.
Yep, this is exactly why I've been defending myself here at work from the horde of F150 owners as to why I didn't get a 150. I flat out didn't need it. I need to haul stuff for the house and a small RV. After that, the truck is serving to replace my Accord with the family-hauling duties it did. Didn't need an F150 for that.

I'm actually looking forward to stressing that motor out a little. From my calculations, the load of dirt should have weighed just short of 2000 pounds and the truck didn't even know it was there for the most part. Be interesting to see what 5000# of trailer does to it.
 
Yep, this is exactly why I've been defending myself here at work from the horde of F150 owners as to why I didn't get a 150. I flat out didn't need it. I need to haul stuff for the house and a small RV. After that, the truck is serving to replace my Accord with the family-hauling duties it did. Didn't need an F150 for that.
Not to mention the new Ranger is about the same size as an eigth or ninth gen F150 albeit with a 6' bed.
 
While the turbo may feel better to drive, it often comes at the expense of fuel economy. You can find towing comparisons of the f150 with the 5.0 versus the turbos and they often get better fuel mileage in that usage.

Going down to Gulf Shores a few weeks ago I actually managed to average 27mpg for a tank of fuel, but that was being stuck in much slower than normal traffic. On the way back, no traffic, 80+ mph got 23 mpg. Towing will be around 10-11 I suspect.

So true, you can have Eco or Boost, just not at the same time.
 
It's less things to break. The new Genesis is twin turbo V6 over a NA V8, and I'd rather drive the V6, but I'd rather own the V8.

But it depends how long you're keeping the vehicle too.
 
Chevy: Not familiar enough to comment much, but have read about the nightmare with AFM. From what I've read, most want to turn it off.
Ram: The Hemi has had issues for years, and they (Dodge/Ram/Fiat) have FAILED to fix it. You can get the Pentastar V6 in the Ram truck, but not with all the bells and whistles that most people are demanding nowadays.
Ford: In 2011, the 5.0 was a better choice than the EB, since it was solid and the EB had lots of teething issues. Now, they've ruined the 5.0 by making it DI (yes, 1/2 and 1/2) with low tension rings and the associated oil usage, while improving the EB engines.

Critic, you forgot the Toyota Tundra. Only one engine choice, the excellent but dated and thirsty 5.7. I understand this is bulletproof to some very high mileages.


In general and if not picky about brand, I would opt for a NA V8. Less complicated, MUCH cheaper to repair. MPG is NOT why someone purchases a full sized truck (and if you're making a choice based on mpg, buy a small sedan). I'd rather have something that's proven reliable than something brand new that requires complicated plumbing and thousands to repair - the old adage to "never buy the first model year of a new car" holds true to some extent here.

Based on the information available, if I were in the market for a 1/2 ton right now it would be the Tundra; if I needed more capacity, an F250 with the 6.2L.
 
Last edited:
I've owned both. Here's the rub with turbo's and trucks, weight. You have a Ford F-150 with a six cylinder turbo and want to use it as a daily driver and never really haul anything or tow a boat or trailer, you'll never have any issues. You use that same truck as a work truck filling the bed daily with hundreds of pounds of materials or for towing your a boat or trailer every weekend you will eventually have issues with the six cylinder turbo motor.

With the way engines are built today you'll never see any problems if your changing vehicles every 80K miles or less. The issues start coming about when the miles start adding up over the years. These turbo four and six motors aren't going to last like a NA or even a turbo V8 would in a heavy truck application.
 
Chevy: Not familiar enough to comment much, but have read about the nightmare with AFM. From what I've read, most want to turn it off.
Ram: The Hemi has had issues for years, and they (Dodge/Ram/Fiat) have FAILED to fix it. You can get the Pentastar V6 in the Ram truck, but not with all the bells and whistles that most people are demanding nowadays.
Ford: In 2011, the 5.0 was a better choice than the EB, since it was solid and the EB had lots of teething issues. Now, they've ruined the 5.0 by making it DI (yes, 1/2 and 1/2) with low tension rings and the associated oil usage, while improving the EB engines.

Critic, you forgot the Toyota Tundra. Only one engine choice, the excellent but dated and thirsty 5.7. I understand this is bulletproof to some very high mileages.


In general and if not picky about brand, I would opt for a NA V8. Less complicated, MUCH cheaper to repair. MPG is NOT why someone purchases a full sized truck (and if you're making a choice based on mpg, buy a small sedan). I'd rather have something that's proven reliable than something brand new that requires complicated plumbing and thousands to repair - the old adage to "never buy the first model year of a new car" holds true to some extent here.

Based on the information available, if I were in the market for a 1/2 ton right now it would be the Tundra; if I needed more capacity, an F250 with the 6.2L.
Tundra has a known cam tower leak that can show up at 15k or 250k miles. It’s been there since the beginning and Toyota has done nothing to address it. If you’re out of warranty it’s $5k+ to fix and it’s a PITA. The only “goodish” thing is even if it’s present it’s usually a weep and it’s doesn’t need to be fixed for the truck to keep going - certainly not catastrophic but annoying it’s been there for 15+ years.
 
Back
Top