Hemiman Posted April 8, 2019 Share Posted April 8, 2019 Thanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loubif Posted July 22, 2019 Share Posted July 22, 2019 Any details of the power and torque from this thing yet??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted July 23, 2019 Share Posted July 23, 2019 13 hours ago, loubif said: Any details of the power and torque from this thing yet??? No, not a word. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Rumor is specifications will be released 8/1/2019. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JZ150 Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 https://www.motor1.com/news/362862/2020-ford-f-series-engines/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ANTAUS Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Autoblog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Big horsepower de-rating on Medium Duty ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JZ150 Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 https://www.tfltruck.com/2019/08/we-finally-have-official-2020-ford-f250-7-3l-v8-power-numbers-and-they-are-lower-than-expected-video/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MY93SHO Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 31 minutes ago, theoldwizard said: Big horsepower de-rating on Medium Duty ! Tried to compare it to the new GM 6.6 gas in the Chev 4500/5500. Since there is no gas version in those trucks there is no comparison. Ram 5500 6.4 has 370hp and tq stays at 429. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 The derating in 450 and up makes sense to me. Reasonable expectations for a truck application where durability will be key. I think those numbers exceed the old 401 and 477 Super Duty V-8s in terms of HP and torque and exceed the 534 on torque. And those engines were used on a regular basis in tandem chassis that had rears that were as big as 65,000lbs! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MY93SHO Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 (edited) 6.7 Powerstroke gets steel pistons. Edited August 1, 2019 by MY93SHO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
probowler Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Two words: Super Bronco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jcartwright99 Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 24 minutes ago, probowler said: Two words: Super Bronco One word: Excursion Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 (edited) It’s obvious that many don’t understand the difference between a power rating given to a Super Duty is about 30 hp / 30 left less than the same engine would get in F150 with no difference to the actual tune. It is a rating achieved at sustained heavy load where F150 rating is short term peak power. The MD engine is basically the same tune again but rated even lower because of the even heavier sustained load, it normally gets more hot side stainless steel bits to combat increased heat load. Keep in in mind the 7,3 is achieving all of this without being given ideal 12-7 to 1 full power air fuel ratio, pretty sure Ford has kept it near Stoic or 14.7 to 1 for max fuel efficiency under full load. It’s a great effort and will be well received by people looking for reliable sustained fuel efficient power. Edited August 1, 2019 by jpd80 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loubif Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Not sure if this has been answered but do we know what this monster weigh? @jpd80 any idea or hint that Ford may be at least considering a higher performance variant of this engine, alum block maybe, something to give us hope to us high performance junkies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MY93SHO Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 (edited) 20 minutes ago, loubif said: Not sure if this has been answered but do we know what this monster weigh? @jpd80 any idea or hint that Ford may be at least considering a higher performance variant of this engine, alum block maybe, something to give us hope to us high performance junkies? Watch the TFL video above, they said it's lighter than the 6.2. No actual weight is given. Edited August 1, 2019 by MY93SHO 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lfeg Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Looking at the torque and power ratings on the one link, the derating for the mediums is due to the lower speed (3900 rpm for both torque and power). This is what I have seen in the past for MD and HD engines to ensure longevity in severe service applications. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2005Explorer Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 It has less HP and TQ then the 3.5 V6 EcoBoost. It's pointless. They should just put the 3.5 in the SuperDuty. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve557 Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 21 minutes ago, 2005Explorer said: It has less HP and TQ then the 3.5 V6 EcoBoost. It's pointless. They should just put the 3.5 in the SuperDuty. The 3.5 would melt if you put it in a SD and asked it to do what a 6.2 or 7.3 can do at maximum capacity. Never mind the long term reliability or the fact that the MPG would be worse than the V8’s. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 Respectable numbers, about what I would expect. The engine does look remarkably compact. Something I Noticed in the video, around 3:54. The F stripped chassis appeared to have a galvanized frame. That is something UPS has had in their spec for package car chassis, and a reason Ford for some time was not providing chassis to UPS. Ford didn't want to offer a galvanized chassis, so a lot of UPS's business was going to Freightliner. Looks like Ford may be trying to get some UPS business, a galvanized chassis and a gasoline engine is just what they want these days. BTW- since the F series has an aluminum cab, if Ford would offer a galvanized chassis on the Super Duty I bet a lot of customers in the northeast would pay a lot of money for that option. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 2 hours ago, Steve557 said: The 3.5 would melt if you put it in a SD and asked it to do what a 6.2 or 7.3 can do at maximum capacity. Never mind the long term reliability or the fact that the MPG would be worse than the V8’s. I think he was being sarcastic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 54 minutes ago, 7Mary3 said: Respectable numbers, about what I would expect. The engine does look remarkably compact. Something I Noticed in the video, around 3:54. The F stripped chassis appeared to have a galvanized frame. That is something UPS has had in their spec for package car chassis, and a reason Ford for some time was not providing chassis to UPS. Ford didn't want to offer a galvanized chassis, so a lot of UPS's business was going to Freightliner. Looks like Ford may be trying to get some UPS business, a galvanized chassis and a gasoline engine is just what they want these days. BTW- since the F series has an aluminum cab, if Ford would offer a galvanized chassis on the Super Duty I bet a lot of customers in the northeast would pay a lot of money for that option. I've seen several UPS F-650 box trucks (sorry, I don't know the proper terminology) running around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MY93SHO Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 7 minutes ago, jpd80 said: I think he was being sarcastic Then he forgot the: s/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7Mary3 Posted August 1, 2019 Share Posted August 1, 2019 2 hours ago, rmc523 said: I've seen several UPS F-650 box trucks (sorry, I don't know the proper terminology) running around. That's a different spec for them. It's the step-van type vehicles they want a galvanized chassis under. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Rosadini Posted August 2, 2019 Share Posted August 2, 2019 3 hours ago, rmc523 said: I've seen several UPS F-650 box trucks (sorry, I don't know the proper terminology) running around. For sure- I think they use them when the normal package car route would lose to much cube with a couple of big commercial stops. So they use trucks like the 650-and 4400 Internationals to group a bunch of these big volume stops. 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.