Jump to content

New Light & Medium Duty News


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

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!

Not exactly sure what you seek...limiting factor on conv'l hitch is tongue weight rating due to max rating of the hitch which is at 1750lbs (factory supplied class IV)....the downside of BOTH conv'l hitch and 5'vers is they do affect stability of the power unit...goosenecks do not destabilize power unit which is why trailer ratings are in the 35,000lb range...5'ver are preferred for campers due to they offer the smoothest ride of all trailers while conv'l trailers have advantage in they always follow the power unit...the only reason the f450 exist with modified front axle and commercial rear axle (which is certified as is ram 3500hd) is to somewhat take advantage of a gooseneck advantage which allows it to be parked in extremly tight places (turning radius)...will the 7.3 pull a 35,000lb gooseneck...sure with 5:30 gears (best guess example) but your running down interstate at 2900 rpm (example) which is not good for mpg....PS with a much higher gear can get load moving due to max torque at 1850rpm and coast down the interstate (return far better mpg)....the whole issue with 7.3 is ability to run a numerically higher gear due torque curve (torque is everything when it comes to getting a load moving..hp is useless) when it can pull the load from dead stop with 3:73 gearing and does not need to step-up to 4:30....thats a huge factor to lessen rpm's at interstate speed (mpg increase)....potential longer engine life...etc...hope that helps

Edited by snooter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, snooter said:

Not exactly sure what you seek...limiting factor on conv'l hitch is tongue weight rating due to max rating of the hitch which is at 1750lbs (factory supplied class IV)....the downside of BOTH conv'l hitch and 5'vers is they do affect stability of the power unit...goosenecks do not destabilize power unit which is why trailer ratings are in the 35,000lb range...5'ver are preferred for campers due to they offer the smoothest ride of all trailers while conv'l trailers have advantage in they always follow the power unit...the only reason the f450 exist with modified front axle and commercial rear axle (which is certified as is ram 3500hd) is to somewhat take advantage of a gooseneck advantage which allows it to be parked in extremly tight places (turning radius)...will the 7.3 pull a 35,000lb gooseneck...sure with 5:30 gears (best guess example) but your running down interstate at 2900 rpm (example) which is not good for mpg....PS with a much lower gear can get load moving due to max torque at 1850rpm and coast down the interstate (return far better mpg)....the whole issue with 7.3 is ability to run a numerically higher gear due torque curve (torque is everything when it comes to getting a load moving..hp is useless) when it can pull the load from dead stop with 3:73 gearing and does not need to step-up to 4:30....thats a huge factor to lessen rpm's at interstate speed (mpg increase)....potential longer engine life...etc...hope that helps

Looking across the Ford specs, It looks like the 7.3 is limited to between 16,000 and 21,000 max towing 

most likely a mixture of gross combined weight Rating and purely running out of torque to move heavier loads.

 

That's why I qualified my earlier statement with towing up to 20,000 lbs the 7.3 might be an alternative to PS

when the 6.2 is stuck with a max of around 16,000 lbs. 7.3 probably ideal for bulky but lighter trailer loads.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Looking across the Ford specs, It looks like the 7.3 is limited to between 16,000 and 21,000 max towing 

most likely a mixture of gross combined weight Rating and purely running out of torque to move heavier loads.

 

That's why I qualified my earlier statement with towing up to 20,000 lbs the 7.3 might be an alternative to PS

when the 6.2 is stuck with a max of around 16,000 lbs. 7.3 probably ideal for bulky but lighter trailer loads.

I agree..it was a smart move by ford and i expect the others to follow along shortly...the 7.3 needed to be old school simple...it needed to be a far less headache/expense then the PS (epa has crushed diesels)...appears to be on all accounts...unknown is reliability...the PS and the 7.3 i suspect as well are running hotter (reason for new grill design) for slight efficiency gains so thats needs to be seen if the hype matches the reality..no biggie there but a further juiced up PS may bear wait and see...city markets and AG it should do well where buyer can save thousands over cost of PS and not need to factor in mainteance cost/repairs, etc...im not sure the 7.3 is the right fit farther up the medium duty line but its all really unknown at this time... f250/f350 buyers should really see bulk of the sales and see the most benefit from the larger engine...i certainly can see the 7.3 in the f550 tow/repo biz as well...for all of fords hose ups i think if the 7.3 has longevity reliability it will be well received in the market...6.2 was a great engine but it lacked in areas and forced a buyer to shell out the coin for the PS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, snooter said:

I agree..it was a smart move by ford and i expect the others to follow along shortly...the 7.3 needed to be old school simple...it needed to be a far less headache/expense then the PS (epa has crushed diesels)...appears to be on all accounts...unknown is reliability...the PS and the 7.3 i suspect as well are running hotter (reason for new grill design) for slight efficiency gains so thats needs to be seen if the hype matches the reality..no biggie there but a further juiced up PS may bear wait and see...city markets and AG it should do well where buyer can save thousands over cost of PS and not need to factor in mainteance cost/repairs, etc...im not sure the 7.3 is the right fit farther up the medium duty line but its all really unknown at this time... f250/f350 buyers should really see bulk of the sales and see the most benefit from the larger engine...i certainly can see the 7.3 in the f550 tow/repo biz as well...for all of fords hose ups i think if the 7.3 has longevity reliability it will be well received in the market...6.2 was a great engine but it lacked in areas and forced a buyer to shell out the coin for the PS

Couldn't agree more.

The 7.3 is a breath of fresh air and addresses the needs of gasoline buyers by offering increased towing capacity.

The 6.2 was OK, offering roughly half the towing capacity of the Powerstoke but fell short of the 20,000 lb mark

which is roughly 60% of the PS with taller gearing...I really sense Ford struggled with competing interests here

and sought to cover as many bases as possible but left the F450 and up a little short in  towing capacity.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Couldn't agree more.

The 7.3 is a breath of fresh air and addresses the needs of gasoline buyers by offering increased towing capacity.

The 6.2 was OK, offering roughly half the towing capacity of the Powerstoke but fell short of the 20,000 lb mark

which is roughly 60% of the PS with taller gearing...I really sense Ford struggled with competing interests here

and sought to cover as many bases as possible but left the F450 and up a little short in  towing capacity.

 

 

 

 

The f450 (PS only choice) is an anomoly really and is just a rv market grab attempt by ford...truth is the f450 has less payload than comparable equipped f350...f450 does have certified commercial grade rear axle (weight - hence decrease payload) which f350 does not get and a warmed over front axle to help the rv guys have easier time parking there house on wheels...possibly some f550's sold to smaller rural fire departments it could also find its way into...f550 makes a great first responder rig but most departments probably go with PS...many of those trucks are on 15 year life cycle (or more)...i agree, above/include f550 it may be a hard sale...ford would have hard a hard time justifying throwing any money at 7.3 if it was not for mainly f250/350 market buyers...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, fordmantpw said:


Try pulling a 13'+ tall 13k fifth wheel west across South Dakota with a 20+ MPH headwind.

 

Yep. My grandfather (from Saginaw, Michigan) used to say "we must be in South Dakota, the wind just picked up" whenever he came out to visit us.

 

Of course we explain it thus: It's always windy here because Minnesota sucks & Wyoming blows.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, snooter said:

The f450 (PS only choice) is an anomoly really and is just a rv market grab attempt by ford...truth is the f450 has less payload than comparable equipped f350...f450 does have certified commercial grade rear axle (weight - hence decrease payload) which f350 does not get and a warmed over front axle to help the rv guys have easier time parking there house on wheels...possibly some f550's sold to smaller rural fire departments it could also find its way into...f550 makes a great first responder rig but most departments probably go with PS...many of those trucks are on 15 year life cycle (or more)...i agree, above/include f550 it may be a hard sale...ford would have hard a hard time justifying throwing any money at 7.3 if it was not for mainly f250/350 market buyers...

Than you

A lot of that makes sense and explains why F 450 exists.

It also raises the question of whether a larger gasoline 

engine is warranted in those larger trucks.

Bob R has mentioned many times that the MDs could use

a much larger gasoline/ gas prep engine.  I was thinking 

arounf 9.0 or 10 litres...to get max towing up around 

28,000 lb mark to more choice for moderately loaded trucks.

A nd then I thought about all those beverage trucks the guys 

have mentioned recently, there must still be lots of gasoline

truck sales going begging up around F600 F650 let alone 

mths limitation of the 6.7 PS and the perception of Ford’s 

drivetrains and axles versus options like Cummins, Allison 

man the like not being available.

 

The European cargo’s 9.0 diesel and transmission would be 

a welcome addition especially if it can be converted to a large 

gasoline /  LPG CNG gas prep engine 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bob R's thinking process on a much larger gasser needed in true MD chassis is a valid point and warrants a look see by ford marketing...i could see POTENTIAL of 26' or less box truck fleets, flat bed tow trucks, stake bed landscapers doing local LTL POSSIBLY showing interest....again the larger gasser has to be simple, reliable and above all else far cheaper than the biodiesel...if ford could punch into the "sweet range" 25,000lb trailer weight range with a gasser it may interest many....RV 5'ver are growing in size and weight compared to 10 years ago...the biggest downside to all of this is of course longevity...diesels run hundreds of thousand of miles over there life and gassers simply cannot compete.....it always bothers me that ford marketing never really starts screaming about what is needed...may be they have been gutted to the point they do not exist and a cetralized management structure exists at ford which "knows best" with solid ideas and markets  simply being discounted/ignored...

Edited by snooter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/7/2020 at 3:48 PM, 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...

 

On 1/7/2020 at 4:47 PM, 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!


We have a couple 6.2's in our landscaping fleet. While they have been as reliable or more so than the older v10s we had, they are absolutely gutless down low. Even the old 6.4 psd will walk away from it with a heavy load. Hell, my 7.3psd will walk away from it (not stock). You can definitely tell when there's a load behind the 6.2 and we're almost at sea level here. I wouldn't want to venture into the mountains with 12-13k on a 6.2.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Captainp4 said:

We have a couple 6.2's in our landscaping fleet. While they have been as reliable or more so than the older v10s we had, they are absolutely gutless down low. Even the old 6.4 psd will walk away from it with a heavy load. Hell, my 7.3psd will walk away from it (not stock). You can definitely tell when there's a load behind the 6.2 and we're almost at sea level here. I wouldn't want to venture into the mountains with 12-13k on a 6.2.

 

Always good to get some first-hand experience.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some owner feedback is starting to dribble in on the 2020 7.3l....gripes so far is they lowered SD height compared to the 19's....mpg  running around 12.5 w/10sp (its a real truck, will be thirsty)...interior still as low class as ever (my take on new 20 i sat in)....why the hell on stx package they dont throw in 2 buckets with center console is beyond me...adding chrome and scrape up in 5 minutes in the corn field rims is ludicrous....stx should be a decent sport package and not just we add chrome....most are stating the 7.3 should find its sweet spot under 20klb trailer movers...the engine is legit...it moves quick....floats down interstate at 85mph with aplomb

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, snooter said:

Some owner feedback is starting to dribble in on the 2020 7.3l....gripes so far is they lowered SD height compared to the 19's....mpg  running around 12.5 w/10sp (its a real truck, will be thirsty)...interior still as low class as ever (my take on new 20 i sat in)....why the hell on stx package they dont throw in 2 buckets with center console is beyond me...adding chrome and scrape up in 5 minutes in the corn field rims is ludicrous....stx should be a decent sport package and not just we add chrome....most are stating the 7.3 should find its sweet spot under 20klb trailer movers...the engine is legit...it moves quick....floats down interstate at 85mph with aplomb

 

I would love to have the slightly lower height compared to my '17.  It's just does not need to be as high as it is.

 

Low class interior?  ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Joe771476 said:

Up until today, the only Asplundh Tree Co.  Ford medium duty bucket trucks were Blue Diamonds.  But lo and behold I just saw an Avon Lake!  I did!  I really did!

I saw a convoy of Asplundh Ford mediums rolling down I-44 the other day. They were led by an F-150 or F-250 (can't recall which). I remember looking for the PSD badge, but I don't remember seeing it. There was one medium of another make in the convoy (I don't recall what it was), but there were four or five Ford mediums, at least F-550s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/17/2020 at 2:54 PM, Joe771476 said:

Ford should buy the rights to this!

 

28) Watch - Discover


I’ve seen that before, and thought it was really cool. I wondered about long-term Durability though. One thing Ive disliked about Ram’s compartments on there beds is that it affects the lines in the truck.  I wouldn’t mind having some compartments, but only if they are hidden or blended into the natural lines of the truck somehow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did my monthly drive through the Altech facility the other day. Nothing but Fords in class 4, 5.  Surprisingly no JV GM/Internationals.  As for big trucks looks like F'liner continues  to predominate-both FL and W'stars.  Also the number of tandems continues to surprise me.  Maybe this Altech facility specializes in these heavy  trucks.  Can't say that I have seen any in service with the New England utilities.  A couple had been partially completed with very heavy rear mount hydraulic goose neck booms so perhaps some of these are not typical bucket trucks- quite a few also had driving front axles so maybe they are being set up for off road work on transmission lines.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/18/2020 at 8:48 PM, Bob Rosadini said:

Did my monthly drive through the Altech facility the other day. Nothing but Fords in class 4, 5.  Surprisingly no JV GM/Internationals.  As for big trucks looks like F'liner continues  to predominate-both FL and W'stars.  Also the number of tandems continues to surprise me.  Maybe this Altech facility specializes in these heavy  trucks.  Can't say that I have seen any in service with the New England utilities.  A couple had been partially completed with very heavy rear mount hydraulic goose neck booms so perhaps some of these are not typical bucket trucks- quite a few also had driving front axles so maybe they are being set up for off road work on transmission lines.

My son tells me that the Roanoke shop has yet to get one of the GM Cornbinders.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 351cid said:

My son tells me that the Roanoke shop has yet to get one of the GM Cornbinders.

Ah- 351 thx- I remembered one of the regular posters had a son that worked for Altech but I forgot who.  Ask him if his shop is running through a lot of big trucks like the Lancaster shop is.  Not only tandems but quite a few triaxles are in the lot.  Has your son seen any 650 or 750's go through?  Haven't seen one at Lancaster since the Bluediamond  era.

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...