Since I now own a vehicle with a Ford Cyclone V6 (Duratec 3.5) in it, I've been doing some "research" on this engine and ran across this article on a torture test of the turbo version. Pretty impressive. When you consider this engine was designed from the start with turbocharging in mind and the bottom end of the turbo and non-turbo versions are the same, a naturally aspirated 3.5 Duratec is probably darn near indestructible if properly maintained.
One tough engine
- Thread starter G-MAN
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Gabe
So, it ran for 300 hours in the engine lab to replicate 150,000 miles. I wonder if the production trucks will be able to do the full 500 mph or if they will govern it.
I'm sure that 300 hours was WOT and, as noted, it included temp shock loading. The goal was to "replicate" 150,000 miles of real world driving not "duplicate" it.
The really impressive part to me was what the engine was put through after lab torture test.
So, it ran for 300 hours in the engine lab to replicate 150,000 miles. I wonder if the production trucks will be able to do the full 500 mph or if they will govern it.
I'm sure that 300 hours was WOT and, as noted, it included temp shock loading. The goal was to "replicate" 150,000 miles of real world driving not "duplicate" it.
The really impressive part to me was what the engine was put through after lab torture test.
Our family inherited a 1975 Granada; that was, in itself, a torture test.
I was always under the impression that the most recent family of ford engines seem to be well thought out and designed. I like my duratech
I was always under the impression that the most recent family of ford engines seem to be well thought out and designed. I like my duratech
Last edited:
Pure marketing designed to impress. And it does.
Ford has an interesting concept here, using the Net to promote engine designs. But every manufacturer does dyno testing in a lab setting to prove durability.
The exact parameters may vary but the intent is the same. To replicate real world stress and strains.
Ford has an interesting concept here, using the Net to promote engine designs. But every manufacturer does dyno testing in a lab setting to prove durability.
The exact parameters may vary but the intent is the same. To replicate real world stress and strains.
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
Since I now own a vehicle with a Ford Cyclone V6 (Duratec 3.5) in it, I've been doing some "research" on this engine and ran across this article on a torture test of the turbo version. Pretty impressive. When you consider this engine was designed from the start with turbocharging in mind and the bottom end of the turbo and non-turbo versions are the same, a naturally aspirated 3.5 Duratec is probably darn near indestructible if properly maintained.
You can watch the ecoboost torture test here:
Eco Boost Torture Test
There areabout 5 or 6 (don't remember exactly) that take you through the dyno test, truck used as a skidder, truck pulls trailer around Daytona, truck races competitors up grade with max payload, engine goes in Baja race truck and engine is torn down.
The Eco Boost is an impressive engine.
Since I now own a vehicle with a Ford Cyclone V6 (Duratec 3.5) in it, I've been doing some "research" on this engine and ran across this article on a torture test of the turbo version. Pretty impressive. When you consider this engine was designed from the start with turbocharging in mind and the bottom end of the turbo and non-turbo versions are the same, a naturally aspirated 3.5 Duratec is probably darn near indestructible if properly maintained.
You can watch the ecoboost torture test here:
Eco Boost Torture Test
There are
The Eco Boost is an impressive engine.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
Pure marketing designed to impress. And it does.
It may be marketing, but it works at impressing because the results are impressive.
Gasoline engine longevity and durability (for virtually all makes) are approaching what was only achievable by Mercedes-Benz diesel engines back in the 70s and 80s. In large measure, that is the result of not only robust designs (like the Duratec and Pentastar) but also tighter production tolerances and assembly QC--something Benz had a lock on in the 60s, 70s, and 80s. A good example of that is the ill-fated V8 diesel GM developed in the late 70s. It was based on an Oldsmobile 350 small block. On paper, the changes that were made to the block and crankshaft were more than enough to handle the added pressures and stress from conversion to compression ignition. Testing of the hand-built prototype engines, which were blueprinted at every step, showed them to be ready for prime time. However, when GM tried to assemble these engines on the same line as the regular gasoline V8, with the same production tolerances and assembly QC, the result was a reliability and warranty nightmare.
Pure marketing designed to impress. And it does.
It may be marketing, but it works at impressing because the results are impressive.
Gasoline engine longevity and durability (for virtually all makes) are approaching what was only achievable by Mercedes-Benz diesel engines back in the 70s and 80s. In large measure, that is the result of not only robust designs (like the Duratec and Pentastar) but also tighter production tolerances and assembly QC--something Benz had a lock on in the 60s, 70s, and 80s. A good example of that is the ill-fated V8 diesel GM developed in the late 70s. It was based on an Oldsmobile 350 small block. On paper, the changes that were made to the block and crankshaft were more than enough to handle the added pressures and stress from conversion to compression ignition. Testing of the hand-built prototype engines, which were blueprinted at every step, showed them to be ready for prime time. However, when GM tried to assemble these engines on the same line as the regular gasoline V8, with the same production tolerances and assembly QC, the result was a reliability and warranty nightmare.
It does make one wonder why after all this testing done by manufacturers that they still have huge issues.
Heads on Pentastars, sludge on many makes, cam failures, piston slap, timing chains, cam phasers, etc.
I don't think their torture test is that much of a torture as an engine subjected to a soccer mom.
Starting the engine 10 times a day and driving only a few miles in between for 5 or 6 years is real torture.
Heads on Pentastars, sludge on many makes, cam failures, piston slap, timing chains, cam phasers, etc.
I don't think their torture test is that much of a torture as an engine subjected to a soccer mom.
Starting the engine 10 times a day and driving only a few miles in between for 5 or 6 years is real torture.
Originally Posted By: Trav
It does make one wonder why after all this testing done by manufacturers that they still have huge issues.
Heads on Pentastars, sludge on many makes, cam failures, piston slap, timing chains, cam phasers, etc.
I don't think their torture test is that much of a torture as an engine subjected to a soccer mom.
Starting the engine 10 times a day and driving only a few miles in between for 5 or 6 years is real torture.
The only "torture tests" and "durabilty tests" I believe are real world...NOT on a dyno.
It does make one wonder why after all this testing done by manufacturers that they still have huge issues.
Heads on Pentastars, sludge on many makes, cam failures, piston slap, timing chains, cam phasers, etc.
I don't think their torture test is that much of a torture as an engine subjected to a soccer mom.
Starting the engine 10 times a day and driving only a few miles in between for 5 or 6 years is real torture.
The only "torture tests" and "durabilty tests" I believe are real world...NOT on a dyno.
I wonder what the OCI was when it was on the dyno?
Well see how they hold up.
I think the GM 4.3 is a pretty durable V6 but it has a long track record behind it.
I think the GM 4.3 is a pretty durable V6 but it has a long track record behind it.
Originally Posted By: G-MAN
Gasoline engine longevity and durability (for virtually all makes) are approaching what was only achievable by Mercedes-Benz diesel engines back in the 70s and 80s. In large measure, that is the result of not only robust designs (like the Duratec and Pentastar) but also tighter production tolerances and assembly QC
Honda also had a good jump on this. I recall the shop manual for my 1984 Accord specifying engine parts in .06mm (if I recall correctly) tolerance blocks (A, B, C and D).
Gasoline engine longevity and durability (for virtually all makes) are approaching what was only achievable by Mercedes-Benz diesel engines back in the 70s and 80s. In large measure, that is the result of not only robust designs (like the Duratec and Pentastar) but also tighter production tolerances and assembly QC
Honda also had a good jump on this. I recall the shop manual for my 1984 Accord specifying engine parts in .06mm (if I recall correctly) tolerance blocks (A, B, C and D).
- Status
