Hmmm. Looks like the competition is trying to keep up....

[Wingate]

A 2 cent brief history lesson on Ford diesels as I view them..
6.9/7.3/7.3 HUEI... Yep, your right they "run forever"... lets see 445 cubic inches low RPM limit and low horsepower... I would HOPE it could have a decent service life!
6.0L, much fewer cubic inches and getting into the horsepower wars, engine issues starting coming... a years of that mess and upset owners, warranties denied, parts breaking, truck values plummeting.
6.4L comes into play being touted as the answer to all the 6.0 issues. Remember the "sequential turbocharger" commercials?? Every dyed in the wool Blue Oval Jim Jones disciple ran out and dumped their 6.0l at HUGE losses for a 6.4L, all the while, Ford is suing the engine manufacturer over warranty claims on the 6.0L... International is suing Ford for bills not paid on engines shipped. Who loses? the owners who get legitimate warranty claims denied cause the dealer is scared to get stuck with the check.
6.7L comes out as the final answer to all Fords diesel engine issues... no more relying on a 3rd party for design and development as Ford went in-house. Still the same old crap, engine failures, parts breakage, almost impossible serviceability due to horrendous design. Warranty denial for improper use of non-synthetic blinker fluid....etc..
Now that it doesnt work either, they are troweling out the next greatest thing... (except for us C&C guys, we get absolutely zero improvements)
This has been going on for over a decade... in the span of 10 years, HOW MANY engine platforms have they went thru?? Its like "flavor of the month club" at Ford... How can an informed consumer have any faith or trust in a manufacturer that has changed engine platforms that many times in such a short span?
Ok... im done ranting about the blue oval boys..

 

[GHarman]

Yesterday, I observed a GM Dura-"minimum" sitting on the side of the road, while I was headed up the mountain. It was trying to pull an UNLOADED TRAILER uphill, at about 8000' above sea level and quit!??
The hood was up and someone was, leaning over the fender, up to their belt line, into the engine compartment! I do feel sorry for folks that have vehicle issues!

GregH

 

[TFucili]

A 2 cent brief history lesson on Ford diesels as I view them..
6.9/7.3/7.3 HUEI... Yep, your right they "run forever"... lets see 445 cubic inches low RPM limit and low horsepower... I would HOPE it could have a decent service life!
6.0L, much fewer cubic inches and getting into the horsepower wars, engine issues starting coming... a years of that mess and upset owners, warranties denied, parts breaking, truck values plummeting.
6.4L comes into play being touted as the answer to all the 6.0 issues. Remember the "sequential turbocharger" commercials?? Every dyed in the wool Blue Oval Jim Jones disciple ran out and dumped their 6.0l at HUGE losses for a 6.4L, all the while, Ford is suing the engine manufacturer over warranty claims on the 6.0L... International is suing Ford for bills not paid on engines shipped. Who loses? the owners who get legitimate warranty claims denied cause the dealer is scared to get stuck with the check.
6.7L comes out as the final answer to all Fords diesel engine issues... no more relying on a 3rd party for design and development as Ford went in-house. Still the same old crap, engine failures, parts breakage, almost impossible serviceability due to horrendous design. Warranty denial for improper use of non-synthetic blinker fluid....etc..
Now that it doesnt work either, they are troweling out the next greatest thing... (except for us C&C guys, we get absolutely zero improvements)
This has been going on for over a decade... in the span of 10 years, HOW MANY engine platforms have they went thru?? Its like "flavor of the month club" at Ford... How can an informed consumer have any faith or trust in a manufacturer that has changed engine platforms that many times in such a short span?
Ok... im done ranting about the blue oval boys..

I basically agree, except for point #1. The 6.9s we had were trouble-ridden dung heaps, and most of my friends and customers who had 7.3 IDI had similarly poor results.

 

[mpaulson]

My first diesel was a 92 with the 7.3 and I put on a Banks turbo kit on it and it was pretty good at pulling. Never had any engine trouble whatsoever with it, just bearings on 5 gear in the ZF transmission. Ran it till just over 300,000 kms before my brother in law bought a 97 cummins new and straight piped it. I was hooked and had to have the 12 valve cummins straight piped sound!!! The 6.9's would cavitate the cylinder walls and needed a coolant additive to help avoid this, but the 7.3's didn't have this problem.

 

[AH64ID]

Im waiting for 500hp/1000tq!

I think I am already there


Well in all honesty probably 490/1000...

 

[SRay]

Here's another thing about the ford 6.7... When the aftermarket tried to come out with a programmer for the newer diesel, the engine spit out connecting rods trying to make 500 hp.

So the aftermarket re-did the programming to make 500 hp but limit the low end power at low rpms.

Keep the power in the high rpm range.

 

[Wingate]

Here's another thing about the ford 6.7... When the aftermarket tried to come out with a programmer for the newer diesel, the engine spit out connecting rods trying to make 500 hp.

So the aftermarket re-did the programming to make 500 hp but limit the low end power at low rpms.

Keep the power in the high rpm range.

The connecting rods are a weak point of the Ford 6.7l.... as for programmers and the addition of HP, I try not to take that into account when judging the durability of an engine. There are so many factors that can come into play when you venture outside the realm of what it was designed for.
EVERY engine has a weakest point. Most of the time, that weakest part is still well beyond sufficient to handle the designed target power as designed. The Cummins is more tolerant of the added stresses due to its heritage in the industrial market where it was designed for a much higher duty cycle and expected life.... It will be interesting to see if the little v8 Cummins was designed and built as an automotive diesel?
Ford had a target price point, hp, torque, BSFC, duty cycle, etc when they designed the engine. The track record of the engine suggest they missed on several accounts.

 

[mwilson]

The same, basic truth as we have mentioned before.....

A V-configured diesel will not live as well or as long as an in-line for automotive or truck applications. They can try all they want, but it will not happen.

If V-6 and V-8 diesels were worth a snot this dooryard would be full of them, and I assure you that under every hood here be it new, used or a customers unit lies an in-line 6 cylinder diesel. A proven design and if the Furd / Chebby crowd chooses to step out of that box may the good lord be with them.

Mike.

 

[jhenderson]

One of the first quotes I remember reading here years ago still applies today.When left stock these motors are idiot proof. When modified they are merely idiot resistant. This seems to apply even more to Ford and GM.

 

[PMcCall]

One of the first quotes I remember reading here years ago still applies today.When left stock these motors are idiot proof. When modified they are merely idiot resistant. This seems to apply even more to Ford and GM.

Oo.

Words to remember

 

[Wingate]

The same, basic truth as we have mentioned before.....

A V-configured diesel will not live as well or as long as an in-line for automotive or truck applications. They can try all they want, but it will not happen.

If V-6 and V-8 diesels were worth a snot this dooryard would be full of them, and I assure you that under every hood here be it new, used or a customers unit lies an in-line 6 cylinder diesel. A proven design and if the Furd / Chebby crowd chooses to step out of that box may the good lord be with them.

Mike.

Pretty much sums it up.!

There was a time though that Cat 3408 were in some trucks and good engines, BUT, they owe their herritage to the EPG, Industrial, and Machine sides at Caterpillar... a REAL diesel engine.
These higher speed, aluminum head, V configs that Ford and GM are utilizing are designed for a lighter duty "automotive" application.
I think that when the programmers get moving good on the little Cummins v-8, they will find its not as idiot resistant as our 6-shooters are.

 

[SnoKing]

Wingate, what makes you think a programmer will be out for the little Cummins V-8, the EPA is after these guys big time!!!! The days of deletes and programmers are limited.

SNOKING

 

[mwilson]

I would also like to mention the dismal track record of even the Cummins brand of V-8 diesels, google up the V-903, VT-903 and lest we forget the "Triple Nickle" V-555.

They are still in service as mooring anchors for many a boat.........

Just sayin'...............

 

[SnoKing]

I would also like to mention the dismal track record of even the Cummins brand of V-8 diesels, google up the V-903, VT-903 and lest we forget the "Triple Nickle" V-555.

They are still in service as mooring anchors for many a boat.........

Just sayin'...............

But there are a lot of 3208's V-8 CATs still running in boats! 6000 hours seems to be no problem. And they were built as throw away engines. Lots of dirty old 8V71's and 8V92's, along with 10V and 12V's still running in boats.

SNOKING

 

[AH64ID]

Boats have different duty cycles, the prop/pump can't demand full power at lower rpms so low-mid rpm operation is never at its full power potential. Trucks are the opposite, rarely run at rated rpm and often make full power in the mid range.

Look at what Cummins does with the QSB, 480hp in a 5.9 and 550hp in a 6.7.

 

[RustyJC]

Marine service also has the advantage of an infinite supply of cool water to keep lube oil, coolant and especially charge air temperatures lower even under high loads. With the heat rejection capability that marine engines have through their raw water heat exchangers, they can handle higher ratings than engines that are cooled by ambient air.

Rusty

 

[AH64ID]

Marine service also has the advantage of an infinite supply of cool water to keep lube oil, coolant and especially charge air temperatures lower even under high loads. With the heat rejection capability that marine engines have through their raw water heat exchangers, they can handle higher ratings than engines that are cooled by ambient air.

Rusty

Yes they do, but cooling is only part of the reason they can run higher ratings. Constant load/rpm and the way the prop demand curve works allow for it.

One negative is there is minimal, if any, airflow thru the engine room so they need the additional cooling because there is no cooling from movement.

 

[RustyJC]

Yes they do, but cooling is only part of the reason they can run higher ratings. Constant load/rpm and the way the prop demand curve works allow for it.

I believe that's reflected by the word ALSO in my statement, right? We have manufactured engines of the same model types for propulsion, power generation, dredge pump drive and other marine services as well as for atmospheric cooled services (land-based power generation, for instance). I assure you that having the higher heat rejection capabilities plays a big part in higher marine ratings. As an example, our turbocharged marine engines are rated at 90 degF air manifold temperature versus 130 degF air manifold temperature for turbocharged land-based engines.

Rusty

 

[AH64ID]

I believe that's reflected by the word ALSO in my statement, right? We have manufactured engines of the same model types for propulsion, power generation, dredge pump drive and other marine services as well as for atmospheric cooled services (land-based power generation, for instance). I assure you that having the higher heat rejection capabilities plays a big part in higher marine ratings. As an example, our turbocharged marine engines are rated at 90 degF air manifold temperature versus 130 degF air manifold temperature for turbocharged land-based engines.

Rusty

Of course...

 

[mwilson]

V-8's do better in non-vehicle applications, crankshaft is always under load.

Vehicles not so much, it's more like power, coast, power, coast, power, coast, etc. and that only gets you to the end of my driveway with a loaded truck......add in the engine brake and it goes like this....power, coast, jake, power, jake (shift), power etc.

Internals are tight, then loose, then tight, then loose...On and on it goes for many miles.

A far cry from a day spent at 75% load with no idle time.......