why a V10

[Kim58]

Hi

While no expert on the Ford V10 I have been reading bad things about them on Ford related web sites. Apparently there are lots of problems with the cylinder head spark plug locations....

http://www.twoguysgarage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=7423

The plug held in the aluminium head by only 4 threads especially drew my attention.

I am really happy with the 7.5 litre Ford V8 that hauls our 350 based Fleetwood Jamboree Searcher 

As for Harleys... I'm English, the land that produced the Vincent Black Shadow if you want a well designed V twin.
I prefer the thud of that beast to the stacato racket of the open pipe Harleys that hang around here!

Geoff

this thread caught my eye, because when I talked to my mechanic about engine choices for my future RV, he Does not like the V10's at all.
  Hmm

[Gary RV_Wizard]

Mechanics are like everybody else - they have opinions that are not always based on facts. Sometimes it is just an aversion to something different. A lot of mechanics disliked the electronic control engines too - it made many of their skills obsolete and they did not like dealing with them.  Overall, the Ford V10 has been remarkably trouble free engine. Not 100%, of course, but none of them are.

The GM 8.1L V8 is a really excellent engine too. Probably more reliable than even the V10. And nearly all mechanics love a traditional big block V8!

[Kim58]

Mechanics are like everybody else - they have opinions that are not always based on facts. Sometimes it is just an aversion to something different. A lot of mechanics disliked the electronic control engines too - it made many of their skills obsolete and they did not like dealing with them.  Overall, the Ford V10 has been remarkably trouble free engine. Not 100%, of course, but none of them are.

The GM 8.1L V8 is a really excellent engine too. Probably more reliable than even the V10. And nearly all mechanics love a traditional big block V8!

Thanks for that Gary, I was just trying to convince my soon to be Ex of that fact.  While I adore my mechanic and he is very experienced, I knew he had certain likes and dislikes.  Funny when I had my Dodge Ram I seem to remember his raving about the Triton engines!  LOL
  I have found something that interests me with a V10 and it only has 14000 miles on it.
 

[hoddinron]

Isn't it funny how we hear one or two "good" or "bad" things about an engine (or whatever) and we store that in our brains, and it influences our purchasing for years.

I met a van driver who had a V-10 Ford who had experienced two spark plug blowouts in his V-10 Ford engine in one year.  I knew after hearing that I'd never want one!  But maybe it was just a few engines during a year's worth of manufacturing??

Coming home from a 10,000 mile trip, I chatted with a Ford V10 PU owner pulling a large box trailer.  He complained that he was only getting 5 MPG!  I was towing my 20 foot TT with my Dodge Hemi 5.7, and was getting 12 - 13 MPG.  That also turned me off on Ford V-10s.   But maybe he like to drive 75 MPH into a 20 MPH headwind!  Who knows?? 

That's why Forums like this are so Valuable!! 

Thanks for sharing!

Ron

[Johncmr]

I've had 2  V-10 trucks, and liked them both.  This last one has the 3 valve system (2005 F-250 SD 4x4) and pulls very well.  As mentioned in another thread, I put a K&N air system, Gibson Exhaust and Banks power chip.  I can pull my 25ft Titanium 5er on most roads with the cruise control engaged, and only use the "tow mode" in hilly areas.

Several things add to the V-10's desirability, they are overhead cam engines, so they can safely rev higher than push-rod engines, they have aluminum heads, so the engine total weight is lower (about 890 pounds lighter than Ford's big diesel), and they do not need tubro-charging and associated inter-cooling to get the torque numbers up.  So far gasoline is cheaper than diesel, but that can change.  There is a heck of a lot more room under the hood of my truck than my friend's with the diesel.  Heaven help him if he has to change an alternator.  I just wish the transmission was as beefy as the engine. 

Oh, I do miss the V-8 sound, even with the Gibson exhaust this thing sounds like a pregnant bumble bee stuck to a rock singers microphone.

Finally, anyone else find back-up info for Ford cutting the V-10 out for 2011?

johncmr

[KlipschHead281]

I've had 2  V-10 trucks, and liked them both.  This last one has the 3 valve system (2005 F-250 SD 4x4) and pulls very well.  As mentioned in another thread, I put a K&N air system, Gibson Exhaust and Banks power chip.  I can pull my 25ft Titanium 5er on most roads with the cruise control engaged, and only use the "tow mode" in hilly areas.

Several things add to the V-10's desirability, they are overhead cam engines, so they can safely rev higher than push-rod engines, they have aluminum heads, so the engine total weight is lower (about 890 pounds lighter than Ford's big diesel), and they do not need tubro-charging and associated inter-cooling to get the torque numbers up.  So far gasoline is cheaper than diesel, but that can change.  There is a heck of a lot more room under the hood of my truck than my friend's with the diesel.  Heaven help him if he has to change an alternator.  I just wish the transmission was as beefy as the engine. 

Oh, I do miss the V-8 sound, even with the Gibson exhaust this thing sounds like a pregnant bumble bee stuck to a rock singers microphone.

Finally, anyone else find back-up info for Ford cutting the V-10 out for 2011?

johncmr

 

The 3 Valve may rev higher than push rod motors but the previous ones (I don't know what the 3valve rev limit is) had a rev limit of 5250 or there a bouts and that is a very low limit. Adding headers and a chip may improve that number a tad but most push rod motors can rev higher. Now my 3 vlalve 4.6 with new air box and tuning went from a 6250 rev limit to 6750 which is incredible. The new 5.0 4v motor handles 7,000 all day. So I like the V10, but as a rev machine it just isn't one. My old 5.0 push rod could spin to 6k easily, 350 small blocks bone stock even in the '80's could rev higher than the V10.

[Johncmr]

You're correct.  I was thinking more of the big block engines like the 460, which stock were pretty well tuned for torque. 
I know in the motorcycle engines the racing ones run 10 -12K rpm, but their reciprocating weight is WAY lower than car engines 5.0 or so displacement, and a few pounds below truck engines like 6.0L diesels and the 6.8L V-10.
I suppose I can run the truck @ 5K on a hill or something, but the friggin noise is incredible, so I wimp out and keep it no higher than 4 - 4.2K.
I never looked up the rev limit, but I'm sure MY rev tolerance is below what the computer's is!  Humm-I don't think I'd want to rev a stock big diameter torque converter too high either.

johncmr

[DonTom]

this thread caught my eye, because when I talked to my mechanic about engine choices for my future RV, he Does not like the V10's at all.
  Hmm

Neither do I. It's a rather small (not much larger than 400 CID) high revving engine that gets lousy MPG and has had its share of problems. When I was looking for a used RV, I would not look at any Ford V-10's, but the older 460 I would consider. Unfortunately, most smaller class C RV's these days are V-10's.

But I realize there are many people who like the V-10's. I just don't understand why. I know of no advantage of the V-10 compared to other engines, but there does seem to be some disadvantages.

Now, I  expect to be bombarded with messages  from the many happy V-10 owners.

-Don- SSF, CA

[DonTom]

The GM 8.1L V8 is a really excellent engine too. Probably more reliable than even the V10.

I wouldn't say "probably". I would say there's no doubt. That's the engine I wish I had in my small Class C. But I am very happy with my 7.4L and gets 9.5 MPG freeway average, which is a lot better than I thought was possible. And it has plenty of power on the hills. But for a RV, I want the largest and most reliable gasoline engine possible, which I believe is that 8.1L. But they don't seem to put that in my size Class C RV's (26 feet or less).

-Don- SSF, CA

[KlipschHead281]

Neither do I. It's a rather small (not much larger than 400 CID) high revving engine that gets lousy MPG and has had its share of problems. When I was looking for a used RV, I would not look at any Ford V-10's, but the older 460 I would consider. Unfortunately, most smaller class C RV's these days are V-10's.

But I realize there are many people who like the V-10's. I just don't understand why. I know of no advantage of the V-10 compared to other engines, but there does seem to be some disadvantages.

Now, I  expect to be bombarded with messages  from the many happy V-10 owners.

-Don- SSF, CA

 
When you have a preconceived opinion about something you will defend it, wrong or right. The Ford V10 as it is now is a terrific engine that gets excellent power for a gasser, decent mpg, certainly no worse than any of the competition. The 460 was a good engine, fantastic even but emissions and too many engines not making the upcoming emissions standards in the mid 90’s forced Ford to build more emission friendly tighter tolerance engines using a modular design, smart thinking in my humble view and it works like a charm. Consider the new 5.0, GM needs cubic inches to attain big numbers, 412hp from such a small engine is phenomenal.

What share of issues, the big one was spark plug blow out and this number was a small one, other than that the history of the V10 is excellent. We could argue better than the 454 and more powerful as well in later configurations.

The 460 in its best (last) configuration put out 245hp and 395lb-ft and the V10 in it’s original config (like in my 1999) put out 275hp and 415lb-ft (305hp and 425lb-ft in truck installs) so not sure why you would like the larger 460 more when it in fact is the weaker of the two and gets worse mpg? The current model puts out 362hp and 457lb-ft and if you consider that weak then no gas engine will suit you.

Add the full bolt on Banks power pack and the numbers for the V10 jump significantly. Will it ever equal a good DP, no way but for a gasser you can’t do any better.

[Gordon Groff]

Ineresting post KlipschHead! (do you know Horn Ed?)
When I drove the earliest V10 on a similar C to mine with a 460, it seemed lacking.  That musta been my imagination based on the numbers you give.  I am extremely impressed by the V10 in my 44,000lb. Tiffin.  That was a concern, but I can say that it has plenty of what it takes to move her down the highway.   Have to check the camera to see if our toad is there.

Gordon

[KlipschHead281]

Gordon,

I have seen a lot of posts by people who don't own the V10 and a lot of them call it too weak or the 8.1 is far better and the last versions of the 8.1 were indeed great engines but were they better, I don't think so. If you got an early one it made only 225hp (can't find torque for the first year), 50hp less than the Triton V10 while the newest version in RV application made 340hp and 455lb-ft, hardly stronger than the Triton V10.  Both the V10 and 8.1 GM engines produced very healthy torque for gas engines and will work just fine in up to 37ft MH's in my view.

People can argue which one is really better till the cows come home but would either be right? Of course! Ford = First On Race Day! 

[DandS]

It's a rather small (not much larger than 400 CID) high revving engine that gets lousy MPG and has had its share of problems.

I guess 362HP is a small engine to some and 7-7.5 mpg on a 38' coach pulling a toad may seem like lousy mileage, but not sure about all the problems?? I've had two V-10's the last six years (05' version and 08' version) and haven't had problem one. IMO, it's a winner!

[KlipschHead281]

I guess 362HP is a small engine to some and 7-7.5 mpg on a 38' coach pulling a toad may seem like lousy mileage, but not sure about all the problems?? I've had two V-10's the last six years (05' version and 08' version) and haven't had problem one. IMO, it's a winner!

Mine is 11 years old and pulls the 36ft Endeavor with no problem what so ever. I would LOVE to get a new 3V V10 in there.
There is a thread devoted to the 8.1 and possible issues, should we say people shouldn't buy an RV with one?   
http://www.rvforum.net/SMF_forum/index.php?topic=24251.0

[DaBeav]

Torque is the answer you seek. While the output for 460 engines built before 1972 is a whopping 365 horsepower at 4,600 rpm and 485 pound-feet of torque at 2,800 rpm, the output for the 460 starting in 1972 is only 212 horsepower at 4,400 rpm and 342 pound-feet of torque at 2,600 rpm. Thanks to emission controls that's quite a drop in power not to mention torque. However after the mid-1980s, carburetors were replaced with electronic fuel injection boosting the 460's output back up a bit to 245 horsepower and 400 pound-feet of torque. On the other hand Ford's 6.8-liter V10 engine is rated at 288 horsepower, along with 424 lb.-ft. of torque. More ponies with 24 foot lbs of additional usable torque is nothing to sneeze at, especially when you're pulling so much weight. In addition to this the V10 runs noticeably smoother.

[Memtb]

this thread caught my eye, because when I talked to my mechanic about engine choices for my future RV, he Does not like the V10's at all.
  Hmm

    Kim58, The early V-10’s, did indeed have a problem...more like only about 3 full threads holding the spark plug. My younger brother had a spark plug blow out twice (two different plugs) in his Motorhome.
    If anyone has this issue “do not” use a typical “heli-coil” repair. It will likely fail! Ford designed a specific repair for that issue.
     Ford addressed the issue, changing head design, to give more threads for the plug. This was done about mid-year 2004. As most rv’s have the previous years chassis, I personally would not buy anything older than an ‘06. There is a way to verify the production date on the engine... but it’s kind of a pain in the behind. Safer to buy ‘06 or newer. That was our choice.

  Other than the early head design issues....they are a “rock solid” engine!

[Professor54313]

The date of the revision was December 1999 . I know because my 2000 Coachman  had a December 1999  engine which was the last of the 3 thread spark plugs. So I missed the revision by a month . You want engines made after jan 2000.
You can tell if you have those heads by removing the doghouse ( on Class C) and looking at the rear of the heads. They wrote the date of engine manufacturing on the rear surface . Mine was a yellow marker.

[Willandgiselarv]

Hi

It's still a bunch more moving parts though... a V12 would be smoother but even more parts.

The Vincent 1000cc V twins came about because Phil Irving (if I recall correctly) had two blueprints of the 500cc single on top of each other and realised, by rotating them 90 degrees, he could fit a twin in the same frame. I think the Jaguar V12's were two straight six heads on a new block.

 

Geoff

Yes we had the v12 jaguar and it would actually run off 1 bank, and pretty smoothly.
Never had a Ford V10 but when it first came out I was impressed by Ford

[billwild]

I still remember replacing the spark plugs on an old 1987 class C with the 460. Changed out 7 plugs in short order then for the life of me I could not change out the last one. Gave up after hours. Later I heard they actually jack up one side of the engine in the shops  to get at that one plug. I can only imagine the work it would take to change out all 10 in the Ford V10.

Bill

[Charlie 5320]

Ford doesn't have a big block V8 anymore, so there isn't much to discuss. GM's 8.1L V8 gave about the same performance as the Ford V10 in a similar size motorhome, and their displacement was close to the same, so I guess the fair answer is that the V10 did not have any particular advantage.

As far as general theory goes, a V10 can rev higher for the same displacement because the pistons are smaller and lighter than a V8 of the same displacement.  Now one has to ask, why do you want to rev higher?  I'll leave that question as an exercise for the student...

The ford V10 don't even compare in size to the 8.1. The 8.1 is 496 CI with much more torque. No comparison when moving a heavy vehicle. The V10 reaches it's HP level at a much higher RPM than the 8.1. Both Ford and GM abandoned the big block V8 to go to modular engines. The 6.0 GM truck engine is no more fuel efficient than the old 7.4 or the 8.1, and a LOT less torque. Yea they got the HP just like Ford but they really have to crank the engine up to get it. So they just increased speeds in the trans to compensate for LACK of torque, and crank the engines up.     

[oldryder]

I was told Ford made the V10 because it's just a 5 liter V8 with two more cylinders.  That means many ignition, valve train, and fuel system parts will be the same for the V8 and V10 and yields considerable cost savings for the manufacturer.  I'd be interested to know if this is true.

[Lou Schneider]

I can't find a current reference for this, but I remember reading Ford killed the 460 V-8 because of emission problems.   They found a bore over a certain diameter left a pool of unburned fuel in the center of the cylinder that was ejected out the exhaust, increasing the hydrocarbon count to unacceptable levels. 

This not only made the engine unable to meet tighter emission standards but not burning all of the fuel in the cylinder also gave the large bore V-8 it's reputation of being able to pass anything but a gas station.

Going to more cylinders let them continue to have a high displacement engine without having to increase the bore beyond the critical size.

[TonyDtorch]

Changing plugs is actually very easy on the V10.   They are right on the top of the engine.

 You do need a special 12" inch long sparkplug socket, and make sure to use anti-seize on the plugs.....  but the good news is...they are not supposed to need replacing for 100k miles.

IMO...the 3 valve V10 is a wonderful engine.