Jump to content

New Light & Medium Duty News


Recommended Posts

On 1/3/2020 at 4:05 PM, jpd80 said:

Ford those suggesting that a second smaller gasoline engine be added to F Series  after

the  6.2 V8 ends in a few years time, I refer to 2020 E Series with 7.3 V in two power levels.

This would seem to be Ford's future plan to simplify power trains by offering different power

levels of the same engine in commercial vehicles.

 

On 1/3/2020 at 4:11 PM, twintornados said:

 

I wonder if the lower power rated engines yield better MPG's.

 

On 1/3/2020 at 4:23 PM, jpd80 said:

More than likely, at first I thought it was just some sort of load dependent rating but  it seems to be

more akin to better fuel efficiency using the same engine. So I wonder if F250/F350 end up with a

base 350 hp  7.3 engine that's more capable (better torque curve)  than the 6.2 it replaces.

 

  

 

1 hour ago, theoldwizard said:

My gut says it is NOT related to MPG !  More likely it is related to packaging (they need to modify the intake or exhaust manifold in order to "fit the hole") and/or a heat issue.  Ride shutgun in an older E-series with a modular engine and you feet get warm after awhile !

 

I do know there is a lot of interest in the Class A and Class C RV market for the new powertrain.  The V10 was reliable, but fuel economy wasn't great.  Many consumers complained that to make power, you had to spin the engine up to pretty high RPM.  The engine could take it, but the drivers were concerned (noise), especially if you lost momentum going up hill and the transmission had to downshift an extra gear.

 https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2019/08/01/ford-73-liter-V8-best-in-class-gas-power-torque-heavy-duty-pickup.html

 

A dyno-certified version of the 7.3-liter V8 producing 350 horsepower at 3,900 rpm and 468 lb.-ft. of torque at 3,900 rpm will be standard on F-450 chassis cab, F-550, the new F-600, F-650 and F-750 Medium Duty trucks, and F-53 and F-59 stripped chassis models. The upgraded E-Series will also feature the 7.3-liter V8. An optional calibration intended to help customers reduce their fuel consumption will also be offered; more information will be made available at a later date. 

 

So it looks like you could end up with 3 different power ratings in an E-Series depending on if you end up >14,000lb GVWR (which requires dyno certification).  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Flying68 said:

 

 

 

 https://media.ford.com/content/fordmedia/fna/us/en/news/2019/08/01/ford-73-liter-V8-best-in-class-gas-power-torque-heavy-duty-pickup.html

 

A dyno-certified version of the 7.3-liter V8 producing 350 horsepower at 3,900 rpm and 468 lb.-ft. of torque at 3,900 rpm will be standard on F-450 chassis cab, F-550, the new F-600, F-650 and F-750 Medium Duty trucks, and F-53 and F-59 stripped chassis models. The upgraded E-Series will also feature the 7.3-liter V8. An optional calibration intended to help customers reduce their fuel consumption will also be offered; more information will be made available at a later date. 

 

So it looks like you could end up with 3 different power ratings in an E-Series depending on if you end up >14,000lb GVWR (which requires dyno certification).  

The literature I saw had a 300 hp 7.3 option for the E Series, that must be the fuel efficiency version your highlighted passage was referring to.

I saw 300 hp and 350 hp versions for E Series and 350 hp and 430 hp versions for F53 & F59.

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, RichardJensen said:

350 hp in an E-Series.

 

Three hundred and fifty horsepower in an E-Series.

 

(Insert appropriate 'back in my day' quote about 1980s engines.)

 

80's?  Try '60's for me!  My first real job was as a parts deliverer for an auto parts store, the company truck was a 1st gen, mid-engine Econoline, solid front axle and all.  We got so good at replacing kingpin bushings on the front axle in the parking lot, probably did it within a hour or so.

 

Scored my first home run in that truck too,,,,,,  hahahaha, HRG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll just place this here for discussion purposes....

 

 

 

stock-7.3-vs-6.2.thumb.jpg.08fc394ba2adea229f81e70657e911a1.jpg

 

Looks like the torque cnverter on the 7.3 locks in a lot earlier than the 6.2,

this could come in real handy when cruising on the flat with a load.....

 

On another note Keep in mind that Super Duty advertised power and torque numbers

are generally 30 hp/30 lb ft less than F150 numbers, so 7.3 is more like 460 hp/505 lb ft.

 

 

 

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not seeing anything of particular value in that chart...other than it may be possible to get the load moving without use of 4:30 gears which is really the whole point of the 7.3 in the first place...better gas mpg in the gasser and you can save nearly $10k as well...course u can throw it all out in the mountains...nobody knows yet what that dam motor can return until the rv crowd starts posting up real world numbers of use....7.3l with 3:73 rear end gearing is reason for me to consider purchase and still maintain a load i may hook up behind it..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, snooter said:

Not seeing anything of particular value in that chart...other than it may be possible to get the load moving without use of 4:30 gears which is really the whole point of the 7.3 in the first place...better gas mpg in the gasser and you can save nearly $10k as well...course u can throw it all out in the mountains...nobody knows yet what that dam motor can return until the rv crowd starts posting up real world numbers of use....7.3l with 3:73 rear end gearing is reason for me to consider purchase and still maintain a load i may hook up behind it..

 

Truthfully, all the graphs in the world won't replace real world seat of the pants experience...

 

The 7.3 can be all things to all gas buyers,  a nice cruiser than can still tow with 3.7 gear and give good economy

or a maximum effort setup with 4.3 gears for those looking for something cheaper than a Powerstroke diesel.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jpd80 said:

The 7.3 can be all things to all gas buyers,  a nice cruiser than can still tow with 3.7 gear and give good economy

or a maximum effort setup with 4.3 gears for those looking for something cheaper than a Powerstroke diesel.

 

 

Interesting that the 7.3 gives up nearly 15K# of 5th/gooseneck capacity to the 6.7, even with the same gearing.

 

HRG

7.3 vs 6.7.JPG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

Interesting that the 7.3 gives up nearly 15K# of 5th/gooseneck capacity to the 6.7, even with the same gearing.

 

HRG

 

You are looking at it "backwards"...its not that it gives up anything to the diesel, it gains more towing ability than its "standard" gas motor 6.2L sibling.

Edited by twintornados
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, twintornados said:

 

You are looking at it "backwards"...its not that it gives up anything to the diesel, it gains more towing ability than its "standard" gas motor 6.2L sibling.

 

My apologies, I thought the conversation above was discussing the $10K upcharge for the 6.7 diesel, not if the 7.3 was stronger than the 6.2.  I've never been in Marketing or Sales, so I've never learned the "art" of the spin.

 

HRG

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And yet with conventional towing, the 7.3 has  similar tow rating to the diesel...

if you're only going to tow between 17,000 and 20,000 lbs then it's going to be OK.

 

Of course the diesel is going to be superior, it has almost three times the torque at the rear wheels.

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

And yet with conventional towing, the 7.3 has  similar tow rating to the diesel...

if you're only going to tow between 17,000 and 20,000 lbs then it's going to be OK.

 

Of course the diesel is going to be superior, it has almost three times the torque at the rear wheels.

 

The diesel also having engine braking factors into the braking test on J2807, so that probably accounts for some of the increase in capacity.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Flying68 said:

 

The diesel also having engine braking factors into the braking test on J2807, so that probably accounts for some of the increase in capacity.

 

Good point, and that is one of the things I absolutely love about my diesel.  Coming down a big hill with 12-13k in tow and I don't even have to touch the brakes.  Actually, I have to touch the go pedal to keep from slowing down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

Interesting that the 7.3 gives up nearly 15K# of 5th/gooseneck capacity to the 6.7, even with the same gearing.

 

HRG

 

 

That would kind of stand to reason, though. Wouldn't it?

 

I mean the greatest load on the engine is going to be launching from a dead stop, and you'd expect a diesel to have a lot more torque right off idle than a conventional gas engine.

 

I'd guess you could match the 5th wheel capability w/one or two extra low gears.

Edited by RichardJensen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Up to 20,000 lbs towing is still a lot for a 7.3 to tow, so I wouldn’t be surprised if the TFL guys don’t try to at least max out the Gross combined weight rating and really ask the question both up and down the Ike Gauntlet. 
 

They’ve already done that with the 2020 Silverado 2500 with the new 6.6 gas engine. Man, it was painful to watch, that thing ran out of legs and got found out trying to tow 16,000 lbs at altitude. It took nearly 12 minutes to get to the top when a Duramax 6.6 would fly up there in 8 minutes.

 

So everyone is now wondering if the new 2020 7.3 F250 can do better maxed out on the Super Ike  or will it prove too much?

 

Sorry to sound like an advertisement for TFL but a lot of folks really want to know if the 7.3 is good enough to tow 16,000 with 3.73 gears  like the Chevy Silverado had or will it need the 4.3 gears.

 

A few years ago they had a 6.2 F250 single cab maxed out on combined weight -11,400 lbs trailer and about 4,000 lbs in the tray and it flew up in about 8 mins 30 seconds.

Edited by jpd80
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, fordmantpw said:

 

Good point, and that is one of the things I absolutely love about my diesel.  Coming down a big hill with 12-13k in tow and I don't even have to touch the brakes.  Actually, I have to touch the go pedal to keep from slowing down.

Why would you ever have spent the coin on a diesel when that load capacity the 6.2l would have pulled easily and you never would have known it was back there...oh well...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, snooter said:

Why would you ever have spent the coin on a diesel when that load capacity the 6.2l would have pulled easily and you never would have known it was back there...oh well...


Because I travel quite a bit during the summer, including crossing multiple states, and I wanted the ease of towing with the diesel.  I have taken my fiver to the mountains (see my previous post about the exhaust brake) and likely will again this year. Oh, and the 6.2L would definitely know it's back there.  Try pulling a 13'+ tall 13k fifth wheel west across South Dakota with a 20+ MPH headwind.  Yeah, the 6.2L will know it's back there.  My PowerStroke got about 7 MPG's on that stretch...I can only imagine what the 6.2L would have gotten.

 

Because 'Merica!

 

Because my wife said I could!

 

And if that isn't good enough for you, because I wanted to, dammit!  It's my money and I'll spend it how I want!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:


Because I travel quite a bit during the summer, including crossing multiple states, and I wanted the ease of towing with the diesel.  I have taken my fiver to the mountains (see my previous post about the exhaust brake) and likely will again this year. Oh, and the 6.2L would definitely know it's back there.  Try pulling a 13'+ tall 13k fifth wheel west across South Dakota with a 20+ MPH headwind.  Yeah, the 6.2L will know it's back there.  My PowerStroke got about 7 MPG's on that stretch...I can only imagine what the 6.2L would have gotten.

 

Because 'Merica!

 

Because my wife said I could!

 

And if that isn't good enough for you, because I wanted to, dammit!  It's my money and I'll spend it how I want!

Well, your wife at least understands..good choice

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, fordmantpw said:


Because I travel quite a bit during the summer, including crossing multiple states, and I wanted the ease of towing with the diesel.  I have taken my fiver to the mountains (see my previous post about the exhaust brake) and likely will again this year. Oh, and the 6.2L would definitely know it's back there.  Try pulling a 13'+ tall 13k fifth wheel west across South Dakota with a 20+ MPH headwind.  Yeah, the 6.2L will know it's back there.  My PowerStroke got about 7 MPG's on that stretch...I can only imagine what the 6.2L would have gotten.

 

Because 'Merica!

 

Because my wife said I could!

 

And if that isn't good enough for you, because I wanted to, dammit!  It's my money and I'll spend it how I want!

Of course.

we don't live in a perfect world but if you do a lot of towing then the diesel makes perfect sense for a fuss free experience. Generally the diesel gives about 30% better fuel economy than a gas engine, so if you're down to like 7 mpg with a diesel then that would be like 5.0 to 5.5 mpg with a gas 6.2.... you could work that out in gallons per 100 miles, 20 gallons gasoline vs 14 gallons of diesel, a saving of at least $20 every 100 miles. If you tow lots, it doesn't take long for the savings to rack up.

 

50,000 miles of towing like that and your diesel pays for itself and that's besides the joy of fuss free towing, I knew there was a reason why the 6.8 V10 went away in F350.....

Edited by jpd80
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a perfect world, but.....  Case in point we have a 2011 F-550 with the 6.7L.  Looks like the turbo seals or bearings (or both) went out, and it pumped a bunch of oil into the cat and DPF.  Out of warranty on time, but less than 60,000 miles.  A little over $6000 to repair.  So, whatever we saved in fuel economy went right out the window.  The power is nice, but the loads we carry with it are nothing the V-10 couldn't have done.  I suspect overall cost-of-ownership is now more than it would have been if we bought the V-10, so in this case the Powerstroke was a mistake.  This is not to say the 6.7L Powerstroke is any worse than similar diesels, because we have seen similar expensive problems with those as well. 

 

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, 7Mary3 said:

In a perfect world, but.....  Case in point we have a 2011 F-550 with the 6.7L.  Looks like the turbo seals or bearings (or both) went out, and it pumped a bunch of oil into the cat and DPF.  Out of warranty on time, but less than 60,000 miles.  A little over $6000 to repair.  So, whatever we saved in fuel economy went right out the window.  The power is nice, but the loads we carry with it are nothing the V-10 couldn't have done.  I suspect overall cost-of-ownership is now more than it would have been if we bought the V-10, so in this case the Powerstroke was a mistake.  This is not to say the 6.7L Powerstroke is any worse than similar diesels, because we have seen similar expensive problems with those as well. 

So wooed the 7.3 be on the company's radar instead of a diesel?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, jpd80 said:

And yet with conventional towing, the 7.3 has  similar tow rating to the diesel...

if you're only going to tow between 17,000 and 20,000 lbs then it's going to be OK.

 

Of course the diesel is going to be superior, it has almost three times the torque at the rear wheels.

JP-  I  didn't dwell on the chart but I need an education please.  Why would  "conventional towing" vs fifth wheel result in such a disparity?  GCW is GCW.  Granted in the case of the fifth wheel set up, axle and tire  ratings have to be greater but again, weight that is being pulled is the issue.

 

 As for capability, no doubt the PS has the numbers and should do the job.  But when one questions the capability of the 7.3, unless today's definitions of torque and HP are calculated far differently, the 7.3 is very close to the old Super Duty V-8's -in particular the early ones before they became hog tied with emissions controls. Example the 477, 224 HP net @ 3400 RPM, Torque 416 net @ 1500-2000RPM .  And that motor by the way in a single axle F-1000 had a GVW of 34,000 and a GCW of 65,000!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jpd80 said:

So wooed the 7.3 be on the company's radar instead of a diesel?

 

Yes.  In addition, a lot of our purchases these days are CNG powered and I suspect there will be gaseous fuel conversions of the 7.3L available soon.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, 7Mary3 said:

 

Yes.  In addition, a lot of our purchases these days are CNG powered and I suspect there will be gaseous fuel conversions of the 7.3L available soon.   

Yes, probably rolled out first in E series where 7.3 is now the only gasoline engine.

one they have E Series underway, more Gaseous prep 7.3 in the F Series, maybe F53 and F59 as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...