New Light & Medium Duty News

[edselford]

GM at 6.6 liters and Ram at 6.4 liters !

unlikely ford would do a base engine smaller than 6.5 for mid range trucks.

A 5.8 liter would work well for the F150 though!

edselford

[jpd80]

5 hours ago, edselford said:

GM at 6.6 liters and Ram at 6.4 liters !

unlikely ford would do a base engine smaller than 6.5 for mid range trucks.

A 5.8 liter would work well for the F150 though!

edselford

Not without some form of cylinder deactivation,

CAFE was the main reason the 6.2 was ended in F150 .....that and the overwhelming embrace of the Ecoboost V6

 

[7Mary3]

12 hours ago, jpd80 said:

The answer is that their intended audience wanted the.most basic simple engineering.

 

Developed at minimal cost basically sums up Gm strategy, I have a hunch that what they did is probably not the best path but we’ll see, I’m sure there will be plenty of head to dead comparisons coming.

 

If I were a GM engineer or executive, developing the new 6.6L gas engine from the existing LS family is exactly what I would have done.  Judging by the success of their 6.0L in commercial applications a 'new and improved' version with increased H.P. and torque is a logical move.  One thing I might have done would be to offer their Allison 10 speed with the 6.6L gas as an option though.  

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, 7Mary3 said:

 

If I were a GM engineer or executive, developing the new 6.6L gas engine from the existing LS family is exactly what I would have done.  Judging by the success of their 6.0L in commercial applications a 'new and improved' version with increased H.P. and torque is a logical move.  One thing I might have done would be to offer their Allison 10 speed with the 6.6L gas as an option though.  

But you just mentioned the in built restriction, it’s based on LS architecture but with a longer stroke and no increase in deck height. So they obviously wanted to reconfigure the existing 6.0 iron block engine line with the least changes as possible. Combine that with no 10-speed auto and it’s really GM offering an evolution of the existing range. Just remember, that Ford absolutely kills GM and RAM in heavy duty truck sales so they must be doing things right or at least better than the other two.

You could equally argue that Ford needed to develop the new pushrod 7.3 to cure a bundle of miss steps with S D and MD that had gone on for more than a decade with the 6.2 and 6.8. Most of that is a mixture of legacy from the 1990s MOD decision and the yes-no-yes Hurricane/Boss 6.2 in the 2000s. This time, it  seems like Ford really soul searched and researched what it’s SD and MD truck buyers wanted in a gas engine. Let’s hope so.

 

I don’t know whether Ford gave GM access to the heavier duty 10-speed it developed for the Super Duty 7.3. Maybe it’s a rolling change that shows up in a year or so.

Edited December 29, 2019 by jpd80

[MY93SHO]

 

 

 

 

28 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

 

 

I don’t know whether Ford gave GM access to the heavier duty 10-speed it developed for the Super Duty 7.3. Maybe it’s a rolling change that shows up in a year or so.

 

GM 10 speed is not shared with Ford.  And even though it says "Allison" on the side of the truck it is "branded". It is not built by Allison.

 

The 10 speed with the 7.3 is the same as the Powerstroke, the 7.3 transmission just has fewer plates in the clutches.

[jpd80]

I knew that the GM 10-speed is not a true Allison gearbox, I though it was part of the JV 10-speed auto project, yes?

so GM did have access to a 10AT it could have used in the 6.6 gas engine, just do the changes Ford did for the 7.3

 

Edited December 30, 2019 by jpd80

[7Mary3]

Keep in mind that GM bought Allison way back in the 30's when it was only manufacturing aircraft engines.  Allison developed the first automatic transmissions for tanks, and in the late 50's introduced heavy duty automatic transmissions for trucks and buses.  Hydra-Matic division had begun developing heavy duty highway transmission previously.  Through the years, Allison and Hydra-Matic worked closely, and many Allison transmissions were actually manufactured by Hydra-Matic.  GM sold Allison off in 2005, but the cooperation continues.  As for the new 'Allison' 10L1000 in the GM HD pickups, I am told it was primarily developed by Hydra-Matic with input from Allison and the design has been fully validated by Allison.  I don't think Allison would have agreed to put their name on it if they were not sure it was a sound design.

 

The GM 6.6L gas V-8 seems to be near it's displacement limit given it inherits standard production LS bore spacing and deck height.  Nonetheless I think 6.6L will be plenty big and powerful enough for trucks up to the lower end of class 6.  GM is reported to be working on a much larger V-8 for larger commercial trucks.   

[jpd80]

The issue is with fuel efficiency not peak power and I suspect that’s why Ford went with the 7.3, to give that extra capacity for greater efficiency when the throttle is pushed deeper.... well that’s the theory anyway.

 

[SteelyD]

8 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

Keep in mind that GM bought Allison way back in the 30's when it was only manufacturing aircraft engines.  Allison developed the first automatic transmissions for tanks, and in the late 50's introduced heavy duty automatic transmissions for trucks and buses.  Hydra-Matic division had begun developing heavy duty highway transmission previously.  Through the years, Allison and Hydra-Matic worked closely, and many Allison transmissions were actually manufactured by Hydra-Matic.  GM sold Allison off in 2005, but the cooperation continues.  As for the new 'Allison' 10L1000 in the GM HD pickups, I am told it was primarily developed by Hydra-Matic with input from Allison and the design has been fully validated by Allison.  I don't think Allison would have agreed to put their name on it if they were not sure it was a sound design.

 

The GM 6.6L gas V-8 seems to be near it's displacement limit given it inherits standard production LS bore spacing and deck height.  Nonetheless I think 6.6L will be plenty big and powerful enough for trucks up to the lower end of class 6.  GM is reported to be working on a much larger V-8 for larger commercial trucks.   

You seem to be well informed on GM business. Why do you post on BON?

[snooter]

4 hours ago, jpd80 said:

The issue is with fuel efficiency not peak power and I suspect that’s why Ford went with the 7.3, to give that extra capacity for greater efficiency when the throttle is pushed deeper.... well that’s the theory anyway.

 

More likely if gm is prepping larger engine ford pushed development to get out in front...there is zilch argument i would prefer the allison trans over anything offered by ford or ram...just no way in hell i will ever own another chebby

[snooter]

1 hour ago, SteelyD said:

You seem to be well informed on GM business. Why do you post on BON?

Mainly because like it or not we are all in this together...now go ask mommy for a pop tart

[MY93SHO]

2 hours ago, snooter said:

More likely if gm is prepping larger engine ford pushed development to get out in front...there is zilch argument i would prefer the allison trans over anything offered by ford or ram...just no way in hell i will ever own another chebby

It's not an Allison 10 speed, it's "Allison branded".

[RichardJensen]

11 hours ago, 7Mary3 said:

As for the new 'Allison' 10L1000 in the GM HD pickups, I am told it was primarily developed by Hydra-Matic  

 

Curious, then, that Ford's been the engineering lead on the past two JV RWD transmissions.

[Bob Rosadini]

21 minutes ago, RichardJensen said:

 

Curious, then, that Ford's been the engineering lead on the past two JV RWD transmissions.

Agree on the JV issue.  I thought the transmissions were very similar  except for  the  electronics associated with the control of the transmission shift  characteristics?  And I may have that description wrong as to the differentiation between the two but the finished product that goes into a GM vs a Ford is not the same beyond the basics.

 

In any case, If you go  to Allisons website, the 1000 is listed as a 6 speed.  Weight is very  close to at least the Ford heavy trans that is going into Super Duty.

If  I had to  guess,  I  would say GM is paying Allison some sort of fee for the right to use their name.  If you are old enough to remember early Allison's in class 7 and 8, they were far from bullet proof.  Times have  changed.  Today the name has value.  I can hear a Chevy sales guy now...." Yeah but Ford  uses their own automatic,  we  use the Allison, same that is  in the big rigs".

 

In fact last week Mack built the last Mack manual.  If you want a manual in a Mack now, your option is an Eaton.

[jpd80]

4 hours ago, snooter said:

More likely if gm is prepping larger engine ford pushed development to get out in front...there is zilch argument i would prefer the allison trans over anything offered by ford or ram...just no way in hell i will ever own another chebby

But you’re not even getting that Allison 10-speed with the 6.6 gasoline engine and that could be a costly miss when Ford offers the 7.3 with 10-speed that’s a deranged version from the 6.7 diesel.

 

maybe you attitude towards Chevrolet is one shared by many other former HD Silverado and Sierra buyers. Ram HD gets a heavy duty ZF automatic that is a commercial grade gearbox.

 

GM plus Allison is a highly respected combination so perhaps that 10-speed for the 6.6 gas engine is on the way.

 

An 8.0 or even 9.0 liter gas engine would be the ticket in class 6 & 7 and I expect that GM is onto this and will buy in an engine in that range rather than developing a new one.

 

Everything about the Ford plan screams class 5 & 6 as its sweet spot for its bigger trucks and the Class 7 is just tiny incremental sales (approx 10% of F650 sales). The F600 is entirely about maximising that sweet spot and perhaps leaving the spot above to others. GM’s has 6.6  5500 and 6500, those  will still be a good trucks keeping Ford honest, no doubt Navistar will have a hand in the bigger stuff.

Edited December 30, 2019 by jpd80

[SteelyD]

5 hours ago, snooter said:

Mainly because like it or not we are all in this together...now go ask mommy for a pop tart

Hmmm! Haven't brought any with me at Ford Powertrain Engineering lately.  FYI The profit center for the 7.3 is F Super Duty. The Med Duty as you know it has a short life.

 

[MY93SHO]

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

  I  would say GM is paying Allison some sort of fee for the right to use their name.  

 

 

Yep, they're paying for the right to put "Allison" on the side of the truck.

 

No different than Ford paying to use the "King Ranch" name.

[Bob Rosadini]

29 minutes ago, SteelyD said:

Hmmm! Haven't brought any with me at Ford Powertrain Engineering lately.  FYI The profit center for the 7.3 is F Super Duty. The Med Duty as you know it has a short life.

 

Wow- so you work at Powertrain Engineering? And you say MD has a short life? I guess then all the trade journal articles in which Ford spokesmen never mention 650/750 are not "clueless" as I have suggested-rather they are "clairvoyant"?

 

And to think, some of these dealers that have expanded their businesses to handle class 6 and 7 trucks, will be in for a big shock when they find out those bays they are building with 14' door heights to accommodate high cube box trucks will be wasted-unless they get a Hino flag.

 

Oh well headed down to barn to look at "wall art"?

[fordmantpw]

1 hour ago, SteelyD said:

Hmmm! Haven't brought any with me at Ford Powertrain Engineering lately.  FYI The profit center for the 7.3 is F Super Duty. The Med Duty as you know it has a short life.

 

 

15 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Wow- so you work at Powertrain Engineering? And you say MD has a short life? I guess then all the trade journal articles in which Ford spokesmen never mention 650/750 are not "clueless" as I have suggested-rather they are "clairvoyant"?

 

And to think, some of these dealers that have expanded their businesses to handle class 6 and 7 trucks, will be in for a big shock when they find out those bays they are building with 14' door heights to accommodate high cube box trucks will be wasted-unless they get a Hino flag.

 

Oh well headed down to barn to look at "wall art"?

 

Bob, you missed the part of his post that I underlined for you.  He didn't say it was going away, just the MD 'as you know it' is going away.  Sounds rather exciting to me, and could explain why they aren't pushing it real hard right now.  They will wait for the big push until the NEW MD comes along.

 

Love the wall art, BTW!

[jpd80]

10 minutes ago, fordmantpw said:

 

 

Bob, you missed the part of his post that I underlined for you.  He didn't say it was going away, just the MD 'as you know it' is going away.  Sounds rather exciting to me, and could explain why they aren't pushing it real hard right now.  They will wait for the big push until the NEW MD comes along.

 

Love the wall art, BTW!

Correct and as I see it,  the F600 is part one of the plan, gathering up most of the current F550 and F650 buyers. Almost like Class 7 and 8 could be handled better by something else that’s coming.....

Edited December 30, 2019 by jpd80

[Bob Rosadini]

Well JPD and Fordman, I just went off suicide watch. ? I guess I have the glass half empty look some days.  By the way,  the wall art?  Did not have any nice 2020 calendars so I asked siri  what years replicate 2020?  Answer 64 and 92.  Well I'm not that old but did have a Mack National Accounts 92 in my collection- recycling can be good! 

 

That 87 LT-9000 says it all about what Ford was in class 8.  Rescuing a big Cat!

[jpd80]

Makes me wonder if cab over Cargo lends itself to lengthened frame / conventional cab design.

But even Cargo as a line of vocational trucks may be a better fit  than F750 and it’s tiny sales. Lots of questions flow from that discussion.

Edited December 30, 2019 by jpd80

[Bob Rosadini]

2 hours ago, jpd80 said:

Makes me wonder if cab over Cargo lends itself to lengthened frame / conventional cab design.

But even Cargo as a line of vocational trucks may be a better fit  than F750 and it’s tiny sales. Lots of questions flow from that discussion.

For sure-in particular the 9 L motor.  As for F-750's low numbers, I  think the 7.3 in a couple of months will help that.  But I understand you STILL can only get air brakes with the Power Stroke .  What logic could possibly support that -other than Ford's constant quest to keep ATP up.

In any case put the 9 L in it and that would be a big  help-be it a Cummins or the Turk Duratorque.

[jpd80]

1 hour ago, Bob Rosadini said:

For sure-in particular the 9 L motor.  As for F-750's low numbers, I  think the 7.3 in a couple of months will help that.  But I understand you STILL can only get air brakes with the Power Stroke .  What logic could possibly support that -other than Ford's constant quest to keep ATP up.

In any case put the 9 L in it and that would be a big  help-be it a Cummins or the Turk Duratorque.

And this is why I’m thinking two things here,

1. The original premise of the F650/F750 was flawed and biased towards maximising F650 gas sales.

2. The arrival of the F600 threatens to undermine the F650’s 2,000 odd per month gas sales. Clearly Ford letting those buyers choose which they want.

 

Surely Ford wouldn’t spend funds on new gas engine in the two MDs to then undercut them, it must be expecting an overall increase in sales even if the numbers are a rebalance thanks to the 7.3.
 

Bottom line, I’m waiting for the other shoe to drop, the MDs aren’t going away but how and when is Ford going to change them. We probably won’t get any intel on that until the F600 has time in the market and the data is in.

 

 

[7Mary3]

First off, about these new 10 speed automatics:  According to what I have been told, the light duty 10 speed RWD automatic was a JV between Ford and GM, with Ford taking the lead in development.  The JV resulted in the Ford 10R80 and GM 10L80 and they are each manufactured by their respective users.  Ford based their new 10 speed Torq-Shift 10R140 on the basic 10R80 design, but it is 'scaled up' and has significantly higher capacity.  Many of the components are identical in design and function, and only differ in size and strength.  The new 'Allison' 10L1000 is GM designed and manufactured, and not a version of the Torq-Shift 10R140.  However, it is very similar in many respects to the other 10 speed automatics particularly in power flow and holding devices.  Best way to describe the similarities is to think of the old Ford C4, Turbo-Hydramatic 350, and Chrysler TorqFlite:  All three were 2 clutch/2 band Simpson geartrain 3 speed automatics.  The older Allison 1000 series is a 6 speed and not related to the 'Allison' 10L1000.