7Mary3 Posted January 24, 2012 Author Share Posted January 24, 2012 Here is the specific section regarding emission testing for 'heavy duty' on-road engines: http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=84d88c12c96b11f203aaa515ecd3d800&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40cfr86a_main_02.tpl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) My link covers current procedures. Yours does not. And it's not a question of logic, it's a question of not being able to find anything that says that an engine is to be subjected to a sustained run at maximum power output. It's also a question of why overheating would not be remedied by a larger cooling system. Edited January 24, 2012 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted January 24, 2012 Author Share Posted January 24, 2012 (edited) Furthermore, I can't find anything in the relevant CFR that suggests that a test needs to be run with the engine at WOT for an extended period of time: http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=33f172b24a3dff82c1b6f6ba8b15e982&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title40/40cfr1065_main_02.tpl There are references to maximum power/torque or speed testing, but much is up to the manufacturer's descretion if it is to be considered: http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=6c5bac4bfc5ec5232fd0c12950f02b9b&rgn=div8&view=text&node=40:33.0.1.1.13.6.29.4&idno=40 In any event, overheating may not necessarily refer to coolant temperature, but could be oil, cylinder head, or exhaust gas temperatures as well. Edited January 24, 2012 by 7Mary3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 You guys keep arguing ! I got my information second hand. From the Ford calibration supervisor responsible for certifying all 6.8L (2V and 3V) applications !! :shades: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 In any event, overheating may not necessarily refer to coolant temperature, but could be oil, cylinder head, or exhaust gas temperatures as well. I think we have a winner here ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Maybe new cylinder heads are required? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 There are references to maximum power/torque or speed testing, but much is up to the manufacturer's descretion if it is to be considered: http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=6c5bac4bfc5ec5232fd0c12950f02b9b&rgn=div8&view=text&node=40:33.0.1.1.13.6.29.4&idno=40 In any event, overheating may not necessarily refer to coolant temperature, but could be oil, cylinder head, or exhaust gas temperatures as well. Remember the 429? I have seen F-800's after an extended high load run with cherry red exhaust systems. Its a wonder fires were not an issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 You guys keep arguing ! I got my information second hand. From the Ford calibration supervisor responsible for certifying all 6.8L (2V and 3V) applications !! :shades: You are summarizing info given to you by a guy who didn't test the 6.2, who was repeating what he knew or thought he knew about the 6.2. I'm sorry, but that's just not credible. Especially since I can't find anything on the CFR website that says that the engine has to be blasted along at WOT for any length of time that would far exceed what it would be subjected to in normal duty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Richard, do you have any first hand experience with in-service use of medium duty trucks? Given GVWs and the drag of some of the bodies and loads on a typical medium, I expect to see extended periods of WOT or near WOT operation. Just maintaining legal speed on a road such as the New York Thruway westbound Albany to Buffalo with a stiff headwind (common) with a platform body with an irregular, loosly tarped load will frequently require significant periods of near WOT operation. Get a driver trying to make up some time, and there you have significant WOT. And you can operate at near full rated HP without being at WOT. In regards to Bob's comment on cherry red exhaust manifolds, I have seen that on 370s and 429s after pulling a 2 mile grade with a max GVW load on roads in PA. What many people consider to be abusive operation is on the edge of normal in the medium sector. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Richard, do you have any first hand experience with in-service use of medium duty trucks? Given GVWs and the drag of some of the bodies and loads on a typical medium, I expect to see extended periods of WOT or near WOT operation. Just maintaining legal speed on a road such as the New York Thruway westbound Albany to Buffalo with a stiff headwind (common) with a platform body with an irregular, loosly tarped load will frequently require significant periods of near WOT operation. Get a driver trying to make up some time, and there you have significant WOT. And you can operate at near full rated HP without being at WOT. In regards to Bob's comment on cherry red exhaust manifolds, I have seen that on 370s and 429s after pulling a 2 mile grade with a max GVW load on roads in PA. What many people consider to be abusive operation is on the edge of normal in the medium sector. Yeah, and towing 10k up a steep grade in an 5700lb F150 is roughly ~16k GCW, and SDs can go up to what? ~20k GCWR with the 6.2? Point being: If the 6.2L is incapable of handling the excess drag on a medium duty body, it's hard to imagine that it would have enough margin of safety for Ford to rate it for a similar weight on a more aerodynamic vehicle (SD). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 If you want to talk GCWR, 30K to 35K is not out of the ordinary for mediums. Apples to apples. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 If you want to talk GCWR, 30K to 35K is not out of the ordinary for mediums. Apples to apples. Yeah, but AFAIK, the 6.8L gasser doesn't go that high. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 24, 2012 Share Posted January 24, 2012 Yeah, but AFAIK, the 6.8L gasser doesn't go that high. Surely, you're getting into diesel territory with those sorts of figures, could they redesign to fit the 6.7 V8 diesel or are thereissues with space? i remember something about the previous diesels not fitting in E series.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstock Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Just wondering — This probably impractical, but I wonder if a twin turbo 6.2 with the alcohol injection system Ford has experimented with might provide a real diesel alternative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Surely, you're getting into diesel territory with those sorts of figures, could they redesign to fit the 6.7 V8 diesel or are thereissues with space? i remember something about the previous diesels not fitting in E series.. Yeah. Point of discussion is whether the 6.2 can replace the 6.8, with TOW saying that the 6.2 overheated running tests that the 6.8 can perform. I expressed a certain amount of skepticism regarding that claim. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MGolden Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 FWIW, I dont know anything about this overheating issue but I do know we are beating the balls off our fleet 6.2's. They are really awesome motors. We have 6 (i think) v10's and now 4 - 6.2's and love them all. The v10's have been very reliable (one comming up on 300k of hard miles) hopefully the 6.2l holds up as well. We only have 1 diesel left and cant wait till its worn and gone. The v10 in our 2 F550's work really well. Averaging ~7mpg which we are happy with and plenty of power. I hope that a bigger disp. version of the 6.2 is the replacement for the v10 because the 6.2 is a beast across the entire rpm range. -matt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 You are summarizing info given to you by a guy who didn't test the 6.2, who was repeating what he knew or thought he knew about the 6.2. No, I was talking to the Engineering Supervisor whose personal performance review is based on him delivering 6.8L calibration for medium duty trucks through 2015MY ! One of his complaints is that the 2V 6.8L is still planned for the E350/450 along side the 6.8L 3V through 2015MY. I admit. I have not talked to him in a couple of months and things do change. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Surely, you're getting into diesel territory with those sorts of figures, could they redesign to fit the 6.7 V8 diesel or are thereissues with space? i remember something about the previous diesels not fitting in E series.. This discussion is primarily about medium duty trucks (F450-F750) and the 6.7L diesel (is ?) will be an option on all of those. The motivation for offering a large gas engine is lower initial cost, lower maintenance, and lower fuel cost, especially when running on CNG. (Yes, the CNG conversion cost put the engine price back in the same price range as the diesel.) You are correct, the 6.7L diesel does NOT fit in an E-series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) OOPs, OK, Now I understand... Would increasing the 6.2 V8 to say, 7.0 help the situation by making it a bigger air pump that is less stressed and less prone to over heat or would that create even more problems? I get the feeling that the 6.2 is too small for SD and too big for F150..... Edited January 25, 2012 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpvbs Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 I don't know if this is relevant or not, but when the latest SD was intro'd (last year/2010?), there were a lot of articles and interviews about various topics. I have a vague recollection of an interview with a Ford engineer about the 6.2. I believe the question was asked about why the power level was reduced from the 6.2 used in the Raptor. The engineer answered that at the higher power level, it didn't meet Ford's operating temperature criteria. He indicated that the temp criteria wasn't a water temp issue, but the internal combustion temps were too high at the higher output level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) No, I was talking to the Engineering Supervisor whose personal performance review is based on him delivering 6.8L calibration for medium duty trucks through 2015MY ! Okay, I can buy that. No 6.2 until at least 2014, and who knows what happens after that? 6.2 will be 5 years old by then.... Edited January 25, 2012 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 OK, I looked at the specs for the 2012 F650. With the 6.8 gas engine, the standard GVW is 26,000 lb. Max available GVW is 29,000 lb. The same ratings as with the diesel. The Ford literature does not list any GCWR values for any F650 or F750, gas or diesel. They refer you to a qualified dealer. With a GVW of 29,000 lb, it is reasonable to expect a GCWR of at least 30,000 lb. So any comparison for any reason to an F150 with a 6.2 is piffle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 And in the F650 the diesel is the 6.7 l Cummins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 (edited) any reason to an F150 with a 6.2 is piffle. GCWR for the 6.2L equipped F350 is 22,500lbs. Which tends to support my skepticism that the 6.2 couldn't handle emissions testing for a class 3 vehicle. Diesel equipped SDs can go as high as 30,000lbs GCWR on 3.73 gears in the F350DRW, where the 6.2 tops out at 22,500lb on 4.30 gears. So obviously, the limitation is the engine/transmission, as they're carrying identical frames. However, I doubt that the 6.2L has been maxed out. I don't think the 6.8 was rated any higher than the 6.2 when it was introduced. Edited January 25, 2012 by RichardJensen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 The Ford literature does not list any GCWR values for any F650 or F750, gas or diesel. They refer you to a qualified dealer. With a GVW of 29,000 lb, it is reasonable to expect a GCWR of at least 30,000 lb. Strange huh? ..."a qualified dealer"-you would think the web site or the literature would be the defining source for the dealer-even if it had some sort of qualifier like.."subject to certain restrictions". Going back in the "archives", I have a medium spec sheet that lists a max GCW for an F-700 with a 429 for power at 60,000lbs! I also have a 2010 cut sheet for a 750 TRACTOR- note emphasis- the sheet specifies the info is for a tractor! Guess what-lists a GVW of 37,000 lbs and NO GCW rating. Anyone have an explanation for this? Richard- understand why I'm such a cynic? :shrug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.