Ford's diesel drama drags on: PowerStroke woes anger buyers

[robertlane]

http://autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=103776

[ford-boy]

Could somebody tell me how come I don't see articles about the Prius problems and how some people that bought Prius's say their faith in Toyota has been shaken and they will never buy Toyota again? On NHTSA's web site, there are 218 complaints about the Prius's penchant for stalling just for the 2004 model year.

[FRdesign]

Seriously,Its all the Media! The make a huge deal about this,But when the toyotas are falling apart; I dont see any articles!

[dtaylorbrown]

Seriously,Its all the Media! The make a huge deal about this,But when the toyotas are falling apart; I dont see any articles!

 

 

 

 

That is because the mainstream (read liberal) media are down on anything American!

[PoorBob]

Could somebody tell me how come I don't see articles about the Prius problems and how some people that bought Prius's say their faith in Toyota has been shaken and they will never buy Toyota again? On NHTSA's web site, there are 218 complaints about the Prius's penchant for stalling just for the 2004 model year.

 

Toyota has sold about 100,000 Priuses over the past four years. Ford has sold more than 1 million SD trucks in that time, and the about half of those had the PSD.

 

That's why you're seeing stories about it now.

 

And don't say it's all over the Media. It's in Automotive News and a few auto-specific outlets, not Time, The Washington post or some other mass media outlet. And by the way, stories were running nationwide in newspapers and television stations this summer when the Prius stalling problems came out.

 

And last off, it's in the news because it's big news. Ford has completely owned the market for big diesel pickups because it has been slavish in its attention to what its customers want. With the 6.0 liter PSD, it threw away a lot of good will on a crappy engine. If Toyota produced a Camry that was only reliable 50 percent of the time, you'd see a similar backlash.

 

And even if no one had written a single story about the PSD problems, serious truck drivers would know about it because they go to sites like this and other enthusiast sites before they buy trucks. Diesel pickup owners are some of the most loyal buyers in the auto industry, and they love to talk and compare their trucks with other diesel pickup owners. It was the truck-buying community that had this engine pegged as a loser long before any stores came out.

 

It looks like the 2004+ models have been fine, and most of the stories I've read recently have said that, so Ford may weather this storm. But if it loses big truck sales, it will have been Ford's fault for pushing a lousy product onto the road, for outsourcing a core product like an engine and for taking too long to admit there was a problem in the first place.

 

I'm not saying the media are perfect, but this isn't a case where they've gotten something wrong. If anything, there should have been more stories about this engine's problems for the past two years. That could have gotten Ford off of its a$$ and gotten a better engine out sooner. Let's hope the 07 version works right out of the box.

 

Bob

[KYSkipper]

From a longtime Ford Customer and Owner of a 2004 F250 with a 6.0 POS Diesel, I can tell you, the article is 100% on the money.

 

In my lifetime I've owned 3 F150's and 3 F250's. I currently have 3 Fords parked in my driveway. One is a 95 model F250 Powerstroke 7.3, the 2004 F250 and an 03 Expedition. The 2004 F250 is JUNK, and it has changed my mindset as to which truck I'll buy next.

 

First off, the "New" engine was advertised to have more torque and more horsepower than the older 7.3. Horse ELMO. It isn't even in the ball park. My older truck will out pull the newer one any day of the week and twice on Sunday. And just in case you are wondering, both trucks have a 3.73 axle ratio. The 6.0 is so torque anemic that you really have to ride the clutch to pull out on flat ground to keep from stalling it. With the older truck, you'd have to try real hard to stall it. It easily has 25% more torque than the newer truck.

 

Secondly, the new truck was supposed to get better milage than the older truck. Wrong again. About 16 v's 18 with the older truck.

 

The 95 model is 10 years old and has 140,000 miles on it. To my knowledge it has never been reflashed, never needed to be reflashed, and dang sure hasn't had anywhere near the problems of the newer truck. In fact, the newer truck has been in the garage more in less than 2 years than the 95 model has in 10 years.

 

The major gripe I have with the 6.0 is lack of power, and I'm not alone. It's been that way for 90% of the owners of these hunks I've talked to. Ford sent an engineer down to look at my truck to see why it keeps loosing power. He wanted me to drive it and show him what was wrong. I dropped the clutch on it in the parking lot at the dealership and stomped it to the floor. Honestly, it would not so much as spin the tires. If I'd pulled that stunt with the older truck, it would have ripped the axle out from under the truck. Not that I want it to spin the tires, but I would like to be able to pull out in traffic and beat a Volkswagon up to speed. You can set a concrete block in front of it and it won't climb over the top of it.

 

If you polled the majority of the full size truck owners 5 years ago on a couple simple questions you'd find this:

 

Diesel Engine Quality:

1. Dodge/Cummins

2. Ford/Navistar (Very close 2nd)

3. Chevrolet/Detroit=Junk

 

Rest of truck Quality:

1. Chevy/Ford

3. Dodge

 

The reason that Ford Diesels have owned the market is because the 7.3 was dependable and provided satisfactory horse power and torque. It was also in a truck that was far better than Dodge. The fact is, the Cummins engine gets better milage and has always been more durable than the Navistars and has had pretty equivalent power to the Navistars. The Cummins has always been more readily modifiable than the Navistars, and can be made to produce much more power than either Navistar engine could.

 

Chevy's diesel offerings have traditionally been a candidate for the boot award. Poor head design leading to failures and poor quality injector pumps have traditionally choaked them. When Chevy changed engines to the Isuzu/Duramax, they greatly improved their lot.

 

Today the rank of the diesel engines is

1. Dodge/Cummins

2. Chevy/Duramax

Distant 3rd. Ford/Navistar

 

It is beyond me how Ford's R&D department let this piece of junk engine be put in production trucks. There is no doubt in my mind that it is currently costing Ford sales even with repeat customers. The funny thing about diesel truck owners is, they talk to one another about their trucks. I can't say that my opinion of the 6.0 has been favorable. I know of more than one loyal Ford customer who is and has been holding off the purchase of a new truck waiting for a new engine or contemplating buying a Dodge or Chevrolet. Honestly, I feel like I've paid $40,000 to be Ford's R&D guinnea pig for this truck, and I'm not happy about that.

 

Skip

[PolarBear]

From a longtime Ford Customer and Owner of a 2004 F250 with a 6.0 POS Diesel, I can tell you, the article is 100% on the money.

 

In my lifetime I've owned 3 F150's and 3 F250's. I currently have 3 Fords parked in my driveway. One is a 95 model F250 Powerstroke 7.3, the 2004 F250 and an 03 Expedition. The 2004 F250 is JUNK, and it has changed my mindset as to which truck I'll buy next.

 

First off, the "New" engine was advertised to have more torque and more horsepower than the older 7.3. Horse ELMO. It isn't even in the ball park. My older truck will out pull the newer one any day of the week and twice on Sunday. And just in case you are wondering, both trucks have a 3.73 axle ratio. The 6.0 is so torque anemic that you really have to ride the clutch to pull out on flat ground to keep from stalling it. With the older truck, you'd have to try real hard to stall it. It easily has 25% more torque than the newer truck.

 

Secondly, the new truck was supposed to get better milage than the older truck. Wrong again. About 16 v's 18 with the older truck.

 

The 95 model is 10 years old and has 140,000 miles on it. To my knowledge it has never been reflashed, never needed to be reflashed, and dang sure hasn't had anywhere near the problems of the newer truck. In fact, the newer truck has been in the garage more in less than 2 years than the 95 model has in 10 years.

 

The major gripe I have with the 6.0 is lack of power, and I'm not alone. It's been that way for 90% of the owners of these hunks I've talked to. Ford sent an engineer down to look at my truck to see why it keeps loosing power. He wanted me to drive it and show him what was wrong. I dropped the clutch on it in the parking lot at the dealership and stomped it to the floor. Honestly, it would not so much as spin the tires. If I'd pulled that stunt with the older truck, it would have ripped the axle out from under the truck. Not that I want it to spin the tires, but I would like to be able to pull out in traffic and beat a Volkswagon up to speed. You can set a concrete block in front of it and it won't climb over the top of it.

 

If you polled the majority of the full size truck owners 5 years ago on a couple simple questions you'd find this:

 

Diesel Engine Quality:

1. Dodge/Cummins

2. Ford/Navistar (Very close 2nd)

3. Chevrolet/Detroit=Junk

 

Rest of truck Quality:

1. Chevy/Ford

3. Dodge

 

The reason that Ford Diesels have owned the market is because the 7.3 was dependable and provided satisfactory horse power and torque. It was also in a truck that was far better than Dodge. The fact is, the Cummins engine gets better milage and has always been more durable than the Navistars and has had pretty equivalent power to the Navistars. The Cummins has always been more readily modifiable than the Navistars, and can be made to produce much more power than either Navistar engine could.

 

Chevy's diesel offerings have traditionally been a candidate for the boot award. Poor head design leading to failures and poor quality injector pumps have traditionally choaked them. When Chevy changed engines to the Isuzu/Duramax, they greatly improved their lot.

 

Today the rank of the diesel engines is

1. Dodge/Cummins

2. Chevy/Duramax

Distant 3rd. Ford/Navistar

 

It is beyond me how Ford's R&D department let this piece of junk engine be put in production trucks. There is no doubt in my mind that it is currently costing Ford sales even with repeat customers. The funny thing about diesel truck owners is, they talk to one another about their trucks. I can't say that my opinion of the 6.0 has been favorable. I know of more than one loyal Ford customer who is and has been holding off the purchase of a new truck waiting for a new engine or contemplating buying a Dodge or Chevrolet. Honestly, I feel like I've paid $40,000 to be Ford's R&D guinnea pig for this truck, and I'm not happy about that.

 

Skip

 

 

 

I think a lot of what you're feeling is the delay caused by the stoopid drive-by-wire setup, which is really noticeable with manual-transmission PSD's. (Do the engineers actually drive these things before they're released?) It really does have more HP and torque than your old 7.3- but tell that to anyone with 10,000 lbs hanging off of the back end, at a stoplight, on a hill. I also think Ford would have taken less heat on the 6.0 if the 7.3 hadn't have been such a great motor.

[KYSkipper]

I think a lot of what you're feeling is the delay caused by the stoopid drive-by-wire setup, which is really noticeable with manual-transmission PSD's. (Do the engineers actually drive these things before they're released?) It really does have more HP and torque than your old 7.3- but tell that to anyone with 10,000 lbs hanging off of the back end, at a stoplight, on a hill. I also think Ford would have taken less heat on the 6.0 if the 7.3 hadn't have been such a great motor.

 

I have had suspicions about that drive by wire although the 1995 model is drive by wire also and both are standard shift trucks. Is there anyway that you know of that I can fix that back to the way they used to be on the older trucks. I don't know why they have to have an electric gadget thinking for such a simple thing as a gas peddal.

 

I don't know why in the sam elmo Ford wants to do away with people who like driving standard shift pickups. I DO NOT WANT AN AUTO TRANNY IN A TRUCK. An F250 Super Duty is supposed to be a WORK TRUCK not a Momma take the kids to the soccer game truck. In a work Truck, I don't want a tranny that need regular filter changes, that I have to worry about over heating, that I have to be aggrivated with it shifting gears back and forth going up hills when I don't want it shifting gears. I want to do the gear thinking not the dang truck.

 

I still contend there isn't a close relationship in power between the 6.0 and 7.3. It is very noticable on hills. One hill here in town my 7.3 truck will pull just fine in 3rd gear and even 4th. The 6.0 truck won't pull it in 2nd gear with the factory program on the computer. I have been testing a Superchips programmer on it. In the "Performance" mode is does seem to be close to the 7.3 if not a spec better. The 7.3 is not chipped or altered. It is 100% factory. I just talked to a guy who traded his 04 F250 for a 06 Chevy. He and I both agreed that when we bought our 04 trucks, they had plenty of power. When mine was new off the lot it would run a circle around my 95 truck. Both of us agreed that when we went in for recalls and got them reflashed, they went down hill fast. I noted once on mine that the computer messed up and it went to running on the default mode. It ran better on the default mode than it did on the program.

 

The only place that the 6.0 seems to have an advantage on my 7.3 is above 75 mph. The problem is very little of my driviing is on the highway, most is 2 lane country roads.

 

There are also other gripes on this truck that ammount to piss poor engineering.

 

1. Too small of a fuel tank. Most of the time with the guage on empty I can put about 27 gallons in the tank. The older 95 model holds 34 gallons. Now, 7 gallons may not seem like much, but at 18 mpg that is 126 miles. One of the reasons many of us are driving these diesels in the milage they get. Some of us like to go to a job site and get back to where the fuel is cheaper without having to fill up. Fuel in Eastern Kentucky can vary 90 cents or more per gallon in cost depending on where in the state you are. The extra 126 miles on a tank is helpful.

 

2. Piss poor tires from the factory. You'd think after having the number of lawsuits Ford had over tires they'd find a good supplier. NO. My 04 truck showed up with Generals on it. Thank goodness they finally wore out enough to justify buying a new set of Bridgestone. The Generals would not balance, rode horrible and had 0 traction. I know, I know, some of the trucks came with BF Goodrich. Why not all of them? I couldn't find one with a manual tranny and Goodrich tires so I had to take the Generals which I'm not 100% sure were even round.

 

3. That sorry design for a fuel filter and water separator on the frame rail. Hey guys. You can't blame Navistar for that. That is a Ford design. The Navistar design on that exact same engine is the same as it has always been, right on top of the motor where you can get to it and change a filter without pouring out a pint of diesel all over yourself. All small diesels that I've seen have the water drain valve on them that can be opened by hand. Not the 6.0 Ford. It's under the truck, requires an allen wrench and when it drains, it hits the frame rail and splatters all over, it can't be caught in a drip pan because of that.

 

4. The air filter need not be as complicated as it is nor as expensive. The $20 filter on my 7.3 worked great. It was easy to change. 2 plastic nuts that could be loosened by hand, lift the cover off, and you're good to go. The 04 truck's air filter is $105 (Motorcraft) or $65 (Wix). It's a booger to change, takes about 30 to get all the tabs and slots lined back up and inserted.

 

Skip

[PolarBear]

I have had suspicions about that drive by wire although the 1995 model is drive by wire also and both are standard shift trucks. Is there anyway that you know of that I can fix that back to the way they used to be on the older trucks. I don't know why they have to have an electric gadget thinking for such a simple thing as a gas peddal.

 

Not that I'm aware of, I'm afraid. You might stop by ford-trucks.com and check in the diesel forum, though. There are tweaks- but a lot of what you're experiencing is the nature of the beast. I bought a Torqueshift for that reason alone.

 

I don't know why in the sam elmo Ford wants to do away with people who like driving standard shift pickups. I DO NOT WANT AN AUTO TRANNY IN A TRUCK. An F250 Super Duty is supposed to be a WORK TRUCK not a Momma take the kids to the soccer game truck. In a work Truck, I don't want a tranny that need regular filter changes, that I have to worry about over heating, that I have to be aggrivated with it shifting gears back and forth going up hills when I don't want it shifting gears. I want to do the gear thinking not the dang truck.

 

 

Unfortunately, the "work truck" crowd is in the minority here. A standard-issue F250, at least up here, is a Crew-Cab 4X4 Lariat that retails somewhere close to $50K. That ain't no work truck. On the GM side, the Allison has absolutely killed the little manual-transmission business we saw in chevy.

 

 

I still contend there isn't a close relationship in power between the 6.0 and 7.3. It is very noticable on hills. One hill here in town my 7.3 truck will pull just fine in 3rd gear and even 4th. The 6.0 truck won't pull it in 2nd gear with the factory program on the computer. I have been testing a Superchips programmer on it. In the "Performance" mode is does seem to be close to the 7.3 if not a spec better. The 7.3 is not chipped or altered. It is 100% factory. I just talked to a guy who traded his 04 F250 for a 06 Chevy. He and I both agreed that when we bought our 04 trucks, they had plenty of power. When mine was new off the lot it would run a circle around my 95 truck. Both of us agreed that when we went in for recalls and got them reflashed, they went down hill fast. I noted once on mine that the computer messed up and it went to running on the default mode. It ran better on the default mode than it did on the program.

 

The only place that the 6.0 seems to have an advantage on my 7.3 is above 75 mph. The problem is very little of my driviing is on the highway, most is 2 lane country roads.

 

Unfortunately, the '05's on showed some dramatic improvements. there are a number of TSB's out on reflashes for that '04- make sure they've all been done.

[KYSkipper]

Unfortunately, the "work truck" crowd is in the minority here. A standard-issue F250, at least up here, is a Crew-Cab 4X4 Lariat that retails somewhere close to $50K. That ain't no work truck. On the GM side, the Allison has absolutely killed the little manual-transmission business we saw in chevy.

 

Unfortunately, the work truck crowd is who has brought Ford to the dance.

 

Chevy has nearly always had a plusher cab than Ford, and Chevy's gas engines, paticularly the 350 V8 have always out performed Ford's gas engines in both power and fuel economy. The advantage Ford has had for years has been the SUSPENSION. When it comes to buying a truck to haul and or tow stuff Chevy hasn't cut the mustard for years because their suspensions have been built way too soft to make a smooth ride instead of a TRUCK. Back when I had the F150's I fished bass tournaments with a local club. All 3 F150's were 300 6 cyls and manual shifts. On the highway the 350 Chevy's would run off and leave me and get far better gas milage doing it, but when it came to the twisty 2 lanes on the way to lakes like Dale Hollow, The Chevys couldn't keep up with me at all, not even a close race. The main reason was the F150's Twin I Beam front end was much much stouter than the Chevy's front end and the Chevy's couldn't anywhere near corner with me. I know people gripped about those I Beams, but they lived and or drove in flat straight country. When Ford went to the A arm type suspension like a Chevy in the F150's, that's when I went to F250's. If I'd wanted a Chevy to start with, I'd have bought one.

 

When I bought my 04 F250 the dealer begged me to take an auto tranny, mainly because that's what he had on the lot, he had to order the 6 spd. I had a GMC several years ago that I bought used off my dad. The truck had a good 350 gas engine but that auto tranny just killed it. Every time I'd get back from fishing, I'd have to throw cardboard under the truck to catch the oil off the tranny because it had overheated running across the mountains. That truck made regular trips to the tranny shop. Additionally, I hated the auto tranny in the mountains. They just don't hold a gear like you want them to. So basically my opinion of autos wasn't high to start with, but I gave the Torque Shift a drive from the dealership to the farm. Danged if it didn't do everything I hated about an auto tranny. On the way up the mountain, every time I'd let off coming into a corner instead of holding a gear to slow the truck as opposed to brakeing, it would upshift 2 gears, then when you got through the corner it had to hunt back down 2 gears before it would take off again. Basically I ended up manually shifting it into 3rd and leaving it there across the mountain. If I gotta do that, why would I want to pay $5,000 extra for one that's supposed to do it for me but won't.

 

One of these days somebody is going to realize there is a full size truck market for quality built and designed trucks that don't have a bunch of junk on them to cause problems and accessories and such that people just don't want. If Ford doesn't pay attention, it may very well be a Yota or some other foreign manufacturer.

 

The rumor is that Dodge is going to dump Cummins and put a Mercedes diesel in their trucks. If they do, the market is wide open for someone to put that Cummins in a good quality built truck.

 

Skip

[PolarBear]

Unfortunately, the work truck crowd is who has brought Ford to the dance.

 

Chevy has nearly always had a plusher cab than Ford, and Chevy's gas engines, paticularly the 350 V8 have always out performed Ford's gas engines in both power and fuel economy. The advantage Ford has had for years has been the SUSPENSION. When it comes to buying a truck to haul and or tow stuff Chevy hasn't cut the mustard for years because their suspensions have been built way too soft to make a smooth ride instead of a TRUCK. Back when I had the F150's I fished bass tournaments with a local club. All 3 F150's were 300 6 cyls and manual shifts. On the highway the 350 Chevy's would run off and leave me and get far better gas milage doing it, but when it came to the twisty 2 lanes on the way to lakes like Dale Hollow, The Chevys couldn't keep up with me at all, not even a close race. The main reason was the F150's Twin I Beam front end was much much stouter than the Chevy's front end and the Chevy's couldn't anywhere near corner with me. I know people gripped about those I Beams, but they lived and or drove in flat straight country. When Ford went to the A arm type suspension like a Chevy in the F150's, that's when I went to F250's. If I'd wanted a Chevy to start with, I'd have bought one.

 

When I bought my 04 F250 the dealer begged me to take an auto tranny, mainly because that's what he had on the lot, he had to order the 6 spd. I had a GMC several years ago that I bought used off my dad. The truck had a good 350 gas engine but that auto tranny just killed it. Every time I'd get back from fishing, I'd have to throw cardboard under the truck to catch the oil off the tranny because it had overheated running across the mountains. That truck made regular trips to the tranny shop. Additionally, I hated the auto tranny in the mountains. They just don't hold a gear like you want them to. So basically my opinion of autos wasn't high to start with, but I gave the Torque Shift a drive from the dealership to the farm. Danged if it didn't do everything I hated about an auto tranny. On the way up the mountain, every time I'd let off coming into a corner instead of holding a gear to slow the truck as opposed to brakeing, it would upshift 2 gears, then when you got through the corner it had to hunt back down 2 gears before it would take off again. Basically I ended up manually shifting it into 3rd and leaving it there across the mountain. If I gotta do that, why would I want to pay $5,000 extra for one that's supposed to do it for me but won't.

 

One of these days somebody is going to realize there is a full size truck market for quality built and designed trucks that don't have a bunch of junk on them to cause problems and accessories and such that people just don't want. If Ford doesn't pay attention, it may very well be a Yota or some other foreign manufacturer.

 

The rumor is that Dodge is going to dump Cummins and put a Mercedes diesel in their trucks. If they do, the market is wide open for someone to put that Cummins in a good quality built truck.

 

Skip

 

I really enjoyed that post for some reason. Yep- the working folks did bring Ford to the dance, but then folks like myself discovered the virtues of an honest, well-made product. I bought a '78 Chevy with power windows, and caught more grief from friends that saw it and said "no way, power windows in a pickup!" Now i get asked why Ford doesn't offer a Navigation system in a Super Duty- go figure. At any rate, modern emissions standards are working against manual transmissions, not the manufacturers per-se (manuals are harder to control). I see the future going more to tap up/down shifting like the new six-speed Allison offers. The other problem I see is price. With a basic, bare bones diesel running out at over $35K, it's getting beyond the means of the same folks that put Ford pickups on the map.

 

 

 

edit: don't believe those Dodge rumors. Hell will freeze over before Dodge buyers will accept anything less than a Cummins in their pickup- something that drives the parent company nuts.

Edited December 20, 2005 by PolarBear

[FRdesign]

What do you think would be better a CAT diesel or a CUMMINS diesel.In a F350?

[PolarBear]

What do you think would be better a CAT diesel or a CUMMINS diesel.In a F350?

 

 

 

CAT doesn't make anything remotely small enough, at least not for this application, and a Cummins just ain't gonna happen. I actually like my 6.0..... a lot. If you click on my screen name, there's a pic of the big black monster. Looks great up here in the land of the Lexus.

[KYSkipper]

What do you think would be better a CAT diesel or a CUMMINS diesel.In a F350?

 

The smallest Cat I'm aware of is the one that comes in a F650, and no, I wouldn't want it in a pickup. As one guy says that drives one daily "Caterpussy". One of the things that is mucking up the 6.0's is the injector system which isn't a Navistar product, it's a Caterpillar system. The Cummins still uses a normal common rail injector system. The Cummins system is a lot simpler than the HUII/Cat system Navistar uses in the Powerstrokes. Simpler means less things to go wrong and easier servicing if it does. A single HUII injector for the Fords costs in excess of $300 for the part. There are 8 of those in the engine. That does not include labor. I pulled the injectors on my 7.3 a couple years ago and replaced the O ring seals. It was about a 3 hour job to get them out and another 3 to put them back in. Then it took about 2 hours to get the truck lined out and running again. (have to bleed the air out of the heads and system)

 

A set of 6 injectors for a Cummins costs about $350 and can be changed in a couple hours. The expensive part of common rails is the injector pump.

 

 

 

For the life of me I can't see how a manual transmission affects emissions. If driven correctly, it ought to work out better. My 95 model has no Miracle Emmission Curing device on it like an EGR valve and it doesn't smoke near as much as the 04. That stinking EGR on the 6.0 stays messed up and causes more problems than it solves. What it ammounts to is most people these days can't drive a stick. Heck, old farts like me that have driven sticks since the 70's cant drive them either because the manufacturers can't make one that works right.

 

I had a 78 Chevy C10 in College. It didn't have electric windows. It had a motor and ash tray, and that was about it. AM radio. :P In my 04 F250 I have a Garmin 276C. It's a small marine model and is at home on the water or in the truck cab. Handy invention. If it was screwed to the dash I couldn't carry it with me in the boat. If someone put an Onstar in my truck, I'd find a way to disconnect it. No need for the government or anyone else to be able to watch me drive.

 

Skip

[PolarBear]

For the life of me I can't see how a manual transmission affects emissions. If driven correctly, it ought to work out better. My 95 model has no Miracle Emmission Curing device on it like an EGR valve and it doesn't smoke near as much as the 04. That stinking EGR on the 6.0 stays messed up and causes more problems than it solves. What it ammounts to is most people these days can't drive a stick. Heck, old farts like me that have driven sticks since the 70's cant drive them either because the manufacturers can't make one that works right.

 

I'm going to try to explain this, but hope an engineer might stumble along and help out. We have a combination of the strictest diesel emissions standards in the world, along with the worst quality diesel fuel sold in any first-world country. From a computer software standpoint, it's easier to control emissions when you can control the whole driving process- engine and transmission. A manual trans adds the human element- and more things to compensate for, if your designing the emissions controls.

 

If it's any help- it's not just Ford. I was talking to a buddy of mine that's a VW service manager, and they're having the same issues with the tdi's. About $400 to clean out the EGR of a tdi every 10,000 miles- and no, it's not a warranty thing,

[KYSkipper]

I'm going to try to explain this, but hope an engineer might stumble along and help out. We have a combination of the strictest diesel emissions standards in the world, along with the worst quality diesel fuel sold in any first-world country. From a computer software standpoint, it's easier to control emissions when you can control the whole driving process- engine and transmission. A manual trans adds the human element- and more things to compensate for, if your designing the emissions controls.

 

If it's any help- it's not just Ford. I was talking to a buddy of mine that's a VW service manager, and they're having the same issues with the tdi's. About $400 to clean out the EGR of a tdi every 10,000 miles- and no, it's not a warranty thing,

 

Dodge Cummins and Chevy's Duramax run off the same fuel and have to meet the same emmission standards. Why don't they have the same problem?

 

Have you ever heard, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." The 7.3's weren't broke and didn't need fixing. They were dependable, very servicable, and powerful enough. While in a lab with white coats on and some sort of special environment and fuel the 6.0 supposedly has more horsepower and torque, in real life, I can easily tell that is BS. My 7.3 truck will walk all over my 6.0 truck. The only place the newer truck does better is at extremely high speeds well above the speed limit, and the main reason for that is a taller high gear in the tranny than the 7.3 has. I have a programmer on my 6.0 and have it set to performance. The 6.0 at that level is close but still not any where near exceeding the performance of the 7.3.

 

GM did the exact same thing when they went from having 350 gas engines to the 5.3 or whatever it is. They say more horsepower and more torque. Bull. I've towed with both engines. The 5.3 has nothing on the 350. Not horsepower, not torque and surely not fuel milage.

 

It is beyond me how the US manufacturers can supposedly "Improve" their products yet in practicality they are worse than their predecessors. Of the 3 F150's I had with 300-6's the first and oldest one was the best in both milage and power. The 87 truck wich was actually built in July 86 and was one of the first batch of Fuel injected 300-6's got 21 mpg on the interstate and had plenty of power. IMO more power than the 302's I drove. It sure had more torque than the 302's. I had an 88 F150 also with the same engine and tranny. 17 mpg on the highway and significantly less power. The 94 was a complete dog. 14 mpg on the highway and 0, zilch power. You would think that in 7 years time they would improve the power and the mpg. NOT.

 

Skip

[PolarBear]

Dodge Cummins and Chevy's Duramax run off the same fuel and have to meet the same emmission standards. Why don't they have the same problem?

 

Have you ever heard, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." The 7.3's weren't broke and didn't need fixing. They were dependable, very servicable, and powerful enough. While in a lab with white coats on and some sort of special environment and fuel the 6.0 supposedly has more horsepower and torque, in real life, I can easily tell that is BS. My 7.3 truck will walk all over my 6.0 truck. The only place the newer truck does better is at extremely high speeds well above the speed limit, and the main reason for that is a taller high gear in the tranny than the 7.3 has. I have a programmer on my 6.0 and have it set to performance. The 6.0 at that level is close but still not any where near exceeding the performance of the 7.3.

 

GM did the exact same thing when they went from having 350 gas engines to the 5.3 or whatever it is. They say more horsepower and more torque. Bull. I've towed with both engines. The 5.3 has nothing on the 350. Not horsepower, not torque and surely not fuel milage.

 

It is beyond me how the US manufacturers can supposedly "Improve" their products yet in practicality they are worse than their predecessors. Of the 3 F150's I had with 300-6's the first and oldest one was the best in both milage and power. The 87 truck wich was actually built in July 86 and was one of the first batch of Fuel injected 300-6's got 21 mpg on the interstate and had plenty of power. IMO more power than the 302's I drove. It sure had more torque than the 302's. I had an 88 F150 also with the same engine and tranny. 17 mpg on the highway and significantly less power. The 94 was a complete dog. 14 mpg on the highway and 0, zilch power. You would think that in 7 years time they would improve the power and the mpg. NOT.

 

Skip

 

Careful there- we're going to date ourselves. The 350/5.3 comparison is a good one- the 5.3 get's it's power a few '000 rpms further up the powerband, and doesn't run out of breath until about 5500. For the 350, anything over 3000 rpms was just needless flogging. Similiar to the 7.3/6.0, but not as many rpm's involved.

 

I am still going to blame emissions on a lot of this, and CAFE standards. Engineers are forced to make decisions based on arbitrary limits, not necessarily what works best in the real world. Remember, all these trucks and cars are tested indoors on dynos, not out in the field.

[KYSkipper]

Careful there- we're going to date ourselves. The 350/5.3 comparison is a good one- the 5.3 get's it's power a few '000 rpms further up the powerband, and doesn't run out of breath until about 5500. For the 350, anything over 3000 rpms was just needless flogging. Similiar to the 7.3/6.0, but not as many rpm's involved.

 

I am still going to blame emissions on a lot of this, and CAFE standards. Engineers are forced to make decisions based on arbitrary limits, not necessarily what works best in the real world. Remember, all these trucks and cars are tested indoors on dynos, not out in the field.

 

True, the 6.0 is still winding up at 3000 rpm's but who operates their engine at that RPM range? The shift point on it is about 2000 or so. 80 mph on the interstate in 6th gear is about 2800. Most in town driving is between 1500 and 2000. The 6.0 has 0 power till it gets wound above 2200. So for in town it doesn't have hardly anything because it's not wound tight enough. I actually did an experiment on mine over 1 tank of fuel and about 3 or 4 days of work by running it 1 gear lower than normal keeping it wound above 3000 rpms. The fuel milage surprisingly didn't change much although it was about 2.5 mpg less, but what aggrivation running a truck wound tighter than dick's hat band. It got some wierd looks and a short lecture doing that through a school zone too even though I had it in Granny low.

 

Dad's got the 5.3 L in his Burban, and while I don't drive it much, I don't believe it runs 3000 rpms at highway speed, maybe if you hold it out of OD. I know with a boat behind it going through Atlanta it's a witch to merge where the older GMC that I had would go right on with it's 350.

 

I've got a buddy with 500,000 miles on an 87 model 7.3 IDI. Although it is pretty weak compared to the 7.3 PSD, that likely has a lot to do with the tiny turbo on it. If you stuck a larger turbo like the one on the Powerstrokes I would think it would pick it up a whole bunch. The sad thing is, it's more powerful than my 6.0 without the programmer. Kind of embarrassing actually.

 

They really ought to drive these trucks when they are designing them, and I don't mean empty. I mean loaded and pulling trailers, boats, campers, stock trailers, etc. Testing indoors with no temp variance, no rain, no humid air, etc is about useless.

 

Skip

[mesg]

you shouldn`t need a programmer to get power, but yup they do work nice got an edge on my new dodge!!! if you lost torque run the unit back to the dealer and hound the heck out of them!!! looks like i`m not the only one with 6.0 issues. when you drop 60k`s on a truck it better run right!! i know my dealer rools his eyes every WEEK when i get towed in, or drive into the service bay!! Rule # 1 for owning an 05 350 crew cab... no warranty.. no drive 23 months till it time to dump this turkey.

[mesg]

i have also made a post in the letter to ford management in case anyone is interested

[KYSkipper]

you shouldn`t need a programmer to get power, but yup they do work nice got an edge on my new dodge!!! if you lost torque run the unit back to the dealer and hound the heck out of them!!! looks like i`m not the only one with 6.0 issues. when you drop 60k`s on a truck it better run right!! i know my dealer rools his eyes every WEEK when i get towed in, or drive into the service bay!! Rule # 1 for owning an 05 350 crew cab... no warranty.. no drive 23 months till it time to dump this turkey.

 

I never have needed one with my 1995 F250 7.3 PSD, but the 6.0 ain't worth a hoot without it. I don't see why it doesn't come with a programmer from the factory. I mean Ford has put out 47 updates on this rig so far. They should have hired the Supertuner or Edge or Bully Dog or whatever people to start with.

 

Skipper

[Tcall]

I have owned 3 6.0l from day one. My first was a 03 F350 that I sold last year with over 200000 miles and only saw the shop for Oil and Filter changes. When I sold it still had the same tranny and was running strong.

 

I bought a 04 F550 for my company and in less than 13 months had 5 turbo's 2 aftercoolers and 2 wiring harnes replaced Ford bought back and we replaced with V10 F550.

 

I replaced my 03 F350 with a 05 F350 and have over 40000 miles on her and It is running strong.

 

 

In talking with other 6.0l owners I have found that most of the problems have been with low milesge units.

 

 

I will not Bale on Ford. They have always been there for me good or bad. I would put my 05 6.0l up agiast any Dodge or Chevy out there.

 

Keep your head up Ford Employees and keep building the best Truck on the market.

[96towncarcartier]

I don't proclaim to be an expert on these matters, since I dont drive big trucks very often. When I was a new vehicle salesman, I took out a 2003 F350 King Ranch dually, with the then-new 6.0. I was very very impressed.

That truck was HUGE...and it moved when you hit the pedal. The best thing, was that I could raise the hood and still talk to the customer with the engine running, and not have to raise my voice in the slightest.

 

Ford changed to the 6.0L because of emissions, and also because it was about time for some major diesel advancements... such as having one that was QUIET....or at least, quieter.

 

All engines are smaller now than they were 10 years ago. The 4.6 that replaced the 5.0... the 5.4 that replaced the 5.8. These are solid improvements. I truly loved the 302... but having driven police Crown Vics with both the 5.0 and 4.6, I'll take the 4.6 any day. 250hp could never be obtained from that 5.0.

 

I'm not saying that you guys don't have legitimate gripes... god, all you do is gripe. The simple fact is that vehicles are not "backyard-mechanic simple" anymore and never will be. There are government regulations on all kinds of things you wouldn't believe! Check this out:

 

If your check engine light comes on, and you bring it to a technician, you can not have him to simply "disconnect" the light. For if the tech actually did so, would violate gov't regulations, and the technician would be slapped with a personal $10,000 fine.

 

New vehicles are built with smaller engines that perform better, give better efficiency, and offer more power. 7.3L and the old 7.5L may drive like a dream (and I can personally attest to that) but they pollute a LOT more. It would cost BIG bucks to cut their emissions down to what the new engines can do. Just not cost-effective.

 

Let's face it, Diesel engines put out NASTY NASTY crap into the environment. Even *breathing* diesel fumes causes cancer.

 

Your best bet? Switch to Bio Diesel. Or convert your engine so it can run on pure vegetable oil. Willie Nelson did it with his tour buses. The result is an engine that smells sweet, offers almost NO pollution, and you can drink what's in the gas tank.

 

 

As for your 2004 F250, don't assume that Chevy is any better. As for Dodge, their trucks have shoddy build quality...just push the doors fully open and watch the body move and flex. *ScArY*

Sometimes it take a year or so to work out the bugs in anything new.

 

That's why airbags started appearing on cars back in the late 1980's.... to prepare for the deadline when they would be required, so all the fixes could be made in their design. Same with ABS. It's the way vehicles are built...what is great in the blueprints isn't always perfect in implementation. Focus had a couple of rough years in the beginning...now it's one of the best vehicles in the world. I suspect the same is true with the 6.0L.

 

 

i have also made a post in the letter to ford management in case anyone is interested

[dzltech1]

Seriously,Its all the Media! The make a huge deal about this,But when the toyotas are falling apart; I dont see any articles!

let me tell you,from someone who works on 6.0's all day long,Toyota can not keep up with the customer complaints. Hopefully Ford will recover with the new body style and engine.

[smurf764]

I'm a little late in finding this thread; wish I knew what the article said.

 

I bought my 03 on faith in Ford on a first year of production. I won't buy an 07 to replace it.

Its not the same truck I bought.