2011 Ford F550. Round 3!!..

[Dl5treez]

It was a sad day when Ford managed to design something that makes the overly complex, illogically designed 7. 3DIT engine in my '03 F250 look like a simple, reliable, user friendly piece of kit.



I looked at the new ones this week---jokingly asked the salesman if there was an 'engine delete' RPO code. He didn't understand... ???...

 

[HBarlow]

Trying to set aside my bias, I honestly don't see how Furd could possibly overcome these problems with this engine design. That engine with all that incredible complexity might be appropriate in a limited production high performance sports car if it had spark plugs and burned gasoline but in a truck it is the goofiest concept anyone could have possibly dreamed up. There is no way that engine can ever be durable and reliable for 250k miles or affordable to maintain and repair once out of warranty.

 

[jgillott]

Trying to set aside my bias, I honestly don't see how Furd could possibly overcome these problems with this engine design. That engine with all that incredible complexity might be appropriate in a limited production high performance sports car if it had spark plugs and burned gasoline but in a truck it is the goofiest concept anyone could have possibly dreamed up. There is no way that engine can ever be durable and reliable for 250k miles or affordable to maintain and repair once out of warranty.

I believe that you are absolutely correct here. And not to defend Ford's engineering department, but they were most likely given the perameters for the design by the marketing and sales side of the company. So, they had to design an engine that would win the to me insane diesel HP war, pull down an increase in MPG over the last Navistar offering, be a V8 to continue Ford marketing tradition, meet current EPA regulations, and be ready for production in a short period of time.



In a time when they should have gone to the most simple/reliable offering possible to break the cycle of failure started with the 6. 0L, they chose to go in this direction. I had hoped to see Ford design something similar to the ISB or a DT466. It's just so hard to understand from the customer side why they continue on this design path.

 

[rscurtis]

They already had the perfect engine- the 6. 6 litre Brazilian built in line six. It's been around since 1965 as a 3,4, and 6 cylinder version in their agricultural and industrial tractors. I don't see why it couldn't have been "freshened up" and modernized as the B engine has over the years and used in their pickups. I doubt it would have cost any more than the billion $ they spent on 6-liter warranty costs. Not only are their diesel engines excessive complicated as Harvey pointed out, so are their gas engines. How do you think the highly acclaimed EcoBoost will age? I don't think I'd want to own that out of warranty. Meanwhile, Ram and Chevy get by with simple, proven, 2-valve pushrod engines. It's a pickup, not a GT40 or a 5. 0 Mustang.

 

[Wingate]

Trying to set aside my bias, I honestly don't see how Furd could possibly overcome these problems with this engine design. That engine with all that incredible complexity might be appropriate in a limited production high performance sports car if it had spark plugs and burned gasoline but in a truck it is the goofiest concept anyone could have possibly dreamed up. There is no way that engine can ever be durable and reliable for 250k miles or affordable to maintain and repair once out of warranty.

Its complicated, there is no doubt about that. I realized that when it shut down on me this last time. I dont guess I had ever thought about a diesel having a throttle body/actuator. While I was sitting there waiting on a wrecker, I could not help but wonder if I had somehow destroyed the engine since it refused to even attempt to start on ether. Throttle plate on a diesel...
I actually felt bad for the techs trying to figure out why it shut down. According to their service information, the actuator failure will not cause an engine shutdown. It wasnt unitl they got it to act up on them that they realized thats not entirely true. While it wont cause one to shut down, it will prevent one from starting!.

 

[Road Dog]

They already had the perfect engine- the 6. 6 litre Brazilian built in line six. It's been around since 1965 as a 3,4, and 6 cylinder version in their agricultural and industrial tractors. I don't see why it couldn't have been "freshened up" and modernized as the B engine has over the years and used in their pickups.

Meeting modern emissions targets is tough so you can't take a 50 year old engine block and freshen it. Navistar picked the wrong technology and pays a fine of $3,700 per engine to the EPA. Plus they're licensing Cummins technology and selling Cummins engines to meet their obligations.

 

[JR]

Meeting modern emissions targets is tough so you can't take a 50 year old engine block and freshen it. Navistar picked the wrong technology and pays a fine of $3,700 per engine to the EPA. Plus they're licensing Cummins technology and selling Cummins engines to meet their obligations.

How long has cummins been around? Ive read stories about Mr. Cummins dropping one of his engines in a customers truck and running their routes to prove to them how much more efficient the diesel was compared to the dominant gas engines of the time. Coincidentally, one of those trips about got him killed when he started experiencing some major brake fade running some mountainous terrain. Hence his inspiration to start working on his next design, the engine brake... . Ford could have went alot of different directions but they thought the epa backed technology of the navistar was a surefire route. Epic fail...

 

[Wayne M.]

They already had the perfect engine- the 6. 6 litre Brazilian built in line six. It's been around since 1965 as a 3,4, and 6 cylinder version in their agricultural and industrial tractors. I don't see why it couldn't have been "freshened up" and modernized as the B engine has over the years and used in their pickups.

I agree. We had a couple dozen 6. 6's in late '80's F650 doing varoius jobs. It was a good engine. I always thought it looked like the old standby 300 six gasser. It was a smoker though. Perhaps common rail technology would have done the trick.



Just today I may have a problem with our only F550 6. 7. I had just performed it's winterization PM which includes all engine and hydraulic filters. There are 2 Fuel filters. The primary/ water separator is inside the left frame, mid ship. It's a decent design (MUCH better than the last version) with a vertical bowl that unscrews and element inside. The secondary is what looks like a sized up Asian sealed fuel filter with two quick connect nipples. There is no way to pre fill this. I'm thinking since this is a common rail system, I would recover well. I cycled the key a few times, and was able to hear the pump just like on our Dodges. I got it to start after a couple of cranking attempts- nothing really strange. Now I have on the data display "low fuel pressure" and "reduced power". Indeed the engine is in derate and was barely able to get it out of the bay. I will have to further investigate Monday.

I have done hundreds of filter changes like this and NEVER had a problem like whats happening. If there was air, the engine would just shrug it off and be fine... If there is a special procedure to change a fuel filter, it's not in the owners manual or obvious anywhere else. This truck is NOT shade tree friendly for even the most basic maintenance.

 

[Wingate]

I agree. We had a couple dozen 6. 6's in late '80's F650 doing varoius jobs. It was a good engine. I always thought it looked like the old standby 300 six gasser. It was a smoker though. Perhaps common rail technology would have done the trick.

Just today I may have a problem with our only F550 6. 7. I had just performed it's winterization PM which includes all engine and hydraulic filters. There are 2 Fuel filters. The primary/ water separator is inside the left frame, mid ship. It's a decent design (MUCH better than the last version) with a vertical bowl that unscrews and element inside. The secondary is what looks like a sized up Asian sealed fuel filter with two quick connect nipples. There is no way to pre fill this. I'm thinking since this is a common rail system, I would recover well. I cycled the key a few times, and was able to hear the pump just like on our Dodges. I got it to start after a couple of cranking attempts- nothing really strange. Now I have on the data display "low fuel pressure" and "reduced power". Indeed the engine is in derate and was barely able to get it out of the bay. I will have to further investigate Monday.
I have done hundreds of filter changes like this and NEVER had a problem like whats happening. If there was air, the engine would just shrug it off and be fine... If there is a special procedure to change a fuel filter, it's not in the owners manual or obvious anywhere else. This truck is NOT shade tree friendly for even the most basic maintenance.

Seen that message before. Not sure what yours weighs. . but mine is near the 19K mark and you are absolutely correct. . you have to HOPE coming out of the shop is downhill or you wont make it!. hahaha. .
We recently had another truck go in to the dealership for a p/m and after a fuel filter change, it would not start... they drained the batteries twice trying to get it started... . finally had to change the water seperator/lift pump assembly under the truck and it was able to prime up and start, although the pump was running and filling the filters. . apparently it would not produce the required pressure/volume to the high pressure system. It was strange since the truck went in running fine and with no recent issues.

 

[rscurtis]

Meeting modern emissions targets is tough so you can't take a 50 year old engine block and freshen it. Navistar picked the wrong technology and pays a fine of $3,700 per engine to the EPA. Plus they're licensing Cummins technology and selling Cummins engines to meet their obligations.

The DT466 has been arouond since the mid-seventies, the B engine since 1983, and both meet standards. The problem with Navistar is their decision to use heavy EGR instead of using SCR like everyone else. It cost Dan Ustian his job.