Sherminator98 Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 3 hours ago, 7Mary3 said: The 7.3L reportedly uses the exact same lifter that non-AFM GM LS/LT V-8's have used for years. I saw something that GM is having issues with the 6.2L shitting the bed too.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 21 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said: I saw something that GM is having issues with the 6.2L shitting the bed too.... The issue with the GM 6.2L seems to be coming from the AFM system, specifically the special lifters that inable the cylinder shut-off feature. Some are under the impression that the lifter itself really isn't the issue, it's overly optomistic oil change intervals. Dirty oil is a real problem for the special lifters, and I personally know of AFM equipped GM V-8's that have gone well over 100,000 miles with 3000 miles oil change intervals. I also have good reason to believe some 'quick' oil change outfits use the cheapest off-spec. conventional motor oil in every vehicle they service. And that's not good for any engine. Regardless, GM's trouble with the 6.2L has resulted in a few class-action lawsuits, and I expect Ford will soon be faced with similar suits against the 7.3L if they have not already. Have to wait and see if they have any merit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 3 hours ago, twintornados said: I can see more 6.8L in lower end E-Series to free up 7.3L production for F-Series. Correct Whichever way they go, Ford could build the second plant as just extra 7.3s and rebalance existing plant production for 6.8 vs 7.3 to suit demand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe771476 Posted January 30 Author Share Posted January 30 On 1/25/2025 at 4:44 PM, akirby said: Is this true? WTF? Can't be! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick73 Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 On 1/28/2025 at 10:15 PM, jpd80 said: Correct Whichever way they go, Ford could build the second plant as just extra 7.3s and rebalance existing plant production for 6.8 vs 7.3 to suit demand. Do you think Ford would use either 6.8 or 7.3 in a hybrid Super Duty? Just curious. Also curious if you think the rumored hybrid Super Duty will be postponed due to expected regulatory changes? I tend to associate new engines with new hybrid powertrain applications but know that may not necessarily be the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 I figure as far as a hybrid Super Duty is concerned, if no one is pushing the issue why bother. The 6.8L would probably work well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 16 hours ago, Rick73 said: Do you think Ford would use either 6.8 or 7.3 in a hybrid Super Duty? Just curious. Also curious if you think the rumored hybrid Super Duty will be postponed due to expected regulatory changes? I tend to associate new engines with new hybrid powertrain applications but know that may not necessarily be the case. 13 hours ago, 7Mary3 said: I figure as far as a hybrid Super Duty is concerned, if no one is pushing the issue why bother. The 6.8L would probably work well. I tend to agree, a hybrid Super Duty sounds like a good idea but does it really make sense to a fleet owners…that the big unknown here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 5 hours ago, jpd80 said: I tend to agree, a hybrid Super Duty sounds like a good idea but does it really make sense to a fleet owners…that the big unknown here. One big advantage of a hybrid is it allows use of a smaller more fuel efficient engine with electric power providing the missing low end torque. With SD that’s not an issue because the engines already have low end torque in spades. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motorpsychology Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 7 hours ago, jpd80 said: I tend to agree, a hybrid Super Duty sounds like a good idea but does it really make sense to a fleet owners…that the big unknown here. Maybe if the ICE was used only as a range extender, a smaller ICE and reserve battery could be used. It might make sense in class 4-6 or 7 city trucks. A fleet owner could benefit by not necessarily having to install chargers as well as realizing fuel savings. The ICE would run with a near constant load and a narrow rpm range which potentially would dercease service intervals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 1 hour ago, Chrisgb said: Maybe if the ICE was used only as a range extender, a smaller ICE and reserve battery could be used. It might make sense in class 4-6 or 7 city trucks. A fleet owner could benefit by not necessarily having to install chargers as well as realizing fuel savings. The ICE would run with a near constant load and a narrow rpm range which potentially would dercease service intervals. But that’s a BEV with a range extender. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 6 hours ago, akirby said: One big advantage of a hybrid is it allows use of a smaller more fuel efficient engine with electric power providing the missing low end torque. With SD that’s not an issue because the engines already have low end torque in spades. Correct, the advantages of regen braking help fuel efficiency when the vehicles are subject to variable speeds especially stop and go driving. When the vehicle is driven at highway speeds where there’s less variability, the electric side is less useful. The interesting part for me is the continued sales strength of gasoline engines in SD trucks and vans, less up front cost vs diesel and lower maintenance are always attractive to buyers especially when maximum loading or hauling is not required. Yes, those owners would be interested in a hybrid option but how many sales are we actually looking at? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 (edited) 5 hours ago, Chrisgb said: Maybe if the ICE was used only as a range extender, a smaller ICE and reserve battery could be used. It might make sense in class 4-6 or 7 city trucks. A fleet owner could benefit by not necessarily having to install chargers as well as realizing fuel savings. The ICE would run with a near constant load and a narrow rpm range which potentially would dercease service intervals. 3 hours ago, akirby said: But that’s a BEV with a range extender. Again correct. I guess Chrisgb’s point was to maximise fuel efficiency by making the ICE as small as possible. The problem is that once there is not direct connection to the wheels at highway speeds where the ICE/Generator/Battery/ electric drive becomes less efficient compared to the traditional mechanical connection to the wheels. This is going to be an interesting conundrum for automakers to solve and I look forward to what they offer, knowing that the first few attempts may be hit and miss. Edited January 31 by jpd80 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted January 31 Share Posted January 31 2 hours ago, jpd80 said: Again correct. I guess Chrisgb’s point was to maximise fuel efficiency by making the ICE as small as possible. The problem is that once there is not direct connection to the wheels at highway speeds where the ICE/Generator/Battery/ electric drive becomes less efficient compared to the traditional mechanical connection to the wheels. This is going to be an interesting conundrum for automakers to solve and I look forward to what they offer, knowing that the first few attempts may be hit and miss. Yes, it is going to be fascinating, the RamCharger will be the first one to watch. I think they will be well suited for city/urban use, but very disappointing if used for long hauls. You can't overcome the physics involved with a heavy truck, a heavy load, long distances and a small ICE. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick73 Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 4 hours ago, jpd80 said: Again correct. I guess Chrisgb’s point was to maximise fuel efficiency by making the ICE as small as possible. The problem is that once there is not direct connection to the wheels at highway speeds where the ICE/Generator/Battery/ electric drive becomes less efficient compared to the traditional mechanical connection to the wheels. This is going to be an interesting conundrum for automakers to solve and I look forward to what they offer, knowing that the first few attempts may be hit and miss. A simple solution to that problem is to have a lock-up clutch that connects engine directly to driven wheels at higher vehicle speeds. During city driving it acts like EREV and during steady highway cruising it’s more like a manual transmission in high gear. That’s essentially how the Honda hybrids work, and what BYD essentially copied for their Shark PHEV pickup except engine is longitudinal similar to a RWD or 4WD pickup. Because a SD pickup is so heavy, I doubt making engine much smaller than about 5 liters would save additional fuel. And for steady-state highway towing a larger engine will likely do better than one that is too small. IMO a hybrid SD could attract buyers who drive mostly in cities/traffic, and rarely tow large trailers at highway speeds for long distances. It won’t be for everyone, but if done right I’d bet demand is there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 4 hours ago, Rick73 said: IMO a hybrid SD could attract buyers who drive mostly in cities/traffic, and rarely tow large trailers at highway speeds for long distances. It won’t be for everyone, but if done right I’d bet demand is there. I thought all along that this was the killer application for the Baby Godzilla. With the hybrid powertrain, it would tow like a freight train in town, plus you could use it to power the job site when you get there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twintornados Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 7 hours ago, SoonerLS said: I thought all along that this was the killer application for the Baby Godzilla. With the hybrid powertrain, it would tow like a freight train in town, plus you could use it to power the job site when you get there. Baby Godzilla reminds me of this little guy.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akirby Posted February 1 Share Posted February 1 9 hours ago, SoonerLS said: I thought all along that this was the killer application for the Baby Godzilla. With the hybrid powertrain, it would tow like a freight train in town, plus you could use it to power the job site when you get there. I’m not sure there would be enough of a difference between the 6.8 and 7.3 fuel economy to justify using the smaller engine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick73 Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 17 hours ago, SoonerLS said: I thought all along that this was the killer application for the Baby Godzilla. With the hybrid powertrain, it would tow like a freight train in town, plus you could use it to power the job site when you get there. Pro Power Onboard is a real plus, though 6.8L doesn’t make as much sense to me if solely for Super Duty. I suppose 6.8L allows Ford to charge a premium for the 7.3L, but how much cheaper is it actually to manufacture? Buyers may not appreciate pricing strategy. Perhaps an aluminum 6.8L V8 would make sense on lighter-duty vehicles if emissions and fuel-economy regulations are relaxed enough by current administration. GM still uses pushrod V8s successfully in pickups and large SUVs, so maybe not that odd to consider. 😀 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted February 2 Share Posted February 2 6 hours ago, Rick73 said: Perhaps an aluminum 6.8L V8 would make sense on lighter-duty vehicles if emissions and fuel-economy regulations are relaxed enough by current administration. I wouldn’t expect the auto manufacturers to change course based on what this administration does, at least as far as CAFE targets go. Unless Congress acts, anything one administration does can be undone by the next, so they pretty much have to assume that current targets would come back if this administration alters them. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 Alrighty....last time I checked this isn't politicsforum.com.... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sherminator98 Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 37 minutes ago, rmc523 said: Alrighty....last time I checked this isn't politicsforum.com.... Good point and fixed. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted February 3 Share Posted February 3 34 minutes ago, Sherminator98 said: Good point and fixed. A comment here and there related to the discussion is one thing, but it was starting to go off the rails... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oac98 Posted February 4 Share Posted February 4 3 hours ago, Sherminator98 said: Good point and fixed. Fair enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe771476 Posted February 9 Author Share Posted February 9 (edited) Sheriff Buford T. Justice in "Smokey and the Bandit" said it best when he asked, "What in the heck is the world coming to?!" I just read that thieves in Texas are stealing F-series taillights! I know it's the entire assembly if they're recommending tonneau cover locks and the cost is $6000. But is it $3000 or $6000 per assembly? If either figure is true, Ford is doing something terribly wrong! Thieves Have a New Target: Ford F-Series Taillights Edited February 9 by Joe771476 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoonerLS Posted February 9 Share Posted February 9 14 hours ago, Joe771476 said: If either figure is true, Ford is doing something terribly wrong! There’s more than just light bulbs in those taillight assemblies these days. They also have sensors (e.g, BLIS), and some have indicators to tell you what your payload/tongue weight is. I’m guessing that those figures are all-in costs, though, which probably includes bodywork and harness replacement costs—it’s not like your local tweeker is going to take the time to unplug a connector when he can just cut the harness. 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.