Cummins 6.7 Gas

[Bob Rosadini]

Check this out...https://mart.cummins.com/imagelibrary/data/assetfiles/0072230.pdf

 

Looks like Ford's unique position of having the only gasoline power for class 6 and 7 is over.  And unlike Ford, you can bet International, F.liner, and Paccar will offer this motor with an air compressor!  Will it cost more than a 7.3 Godzilla?  I'm sure.  Will customers be willing to pay a premium?  Im sure.

[Rick73]

Wonder if that 6.7L turbo gasoline Cummins could also end up as a RAM heavy duty pickup option?

[iamweasel]

On 4/3/2024 at 10:41 AM, Bob Rosadini said:

Check this out...https://mart.cummins.com/imagelibrary/data/assetfiles/0072230.pdf

 

Looks like Ford's unique position of having the only gasoline power for class 6 and 7 is over.  And unlike Ford, you can bet International, F.liner, and Paccar will offer this motor with an air compressor!  Will it cost more than a 7.3 Godzilla?  I'm sure.  Will customers be willing to pay a premium?  Im sure.

 

I can tell you with certainty Freightliner has already signed up for it. 

[Bob Rosadini]

On 4/3/2024 at 3:15 PM, Rick73 said:

Wonder if that 6.7L turbo gasoline Cummins could also end up as a RAM heavy duty pickup option?

I would doubt that, if they in fact will soon have a turbo straight six of their own.  Not sure when this is supposed to be available.

[Rick73]

42 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said:

I would doubt that, if they in fact will soon have a turbo straight six of their own.  Not sure when this is supposed to be available.

Bob, Stellantis already has a twin turbo 3-liter inline six that can make up to +/- 500 HP, but in my opinion it’s way too light-duty for a 1-Ton super duty RAM pickup.  The 3L six may soon end up in 1/2-ton RAM, but for a super duty pickup towing a 20,000+ pound trailer, it would probably crater under constant heavy load; even if derated.  😆 

 

The 6.7L Cummins on the other hand should have far greater GCWR capabilities, and since it shares much with 6.7L Cummins diesel, it should be an easy fit in a RAM.  Personally, I think diesel-like performance and durability but with gasoline as fuel would attract a lot of buyers.  Just my 2 cents.

[7Mary3]

Sadly the French and Italian masters of the ruins of Chrysler Corporation seem very content to let the Ram HD's wither on the vine.  From what I understand the Hemi gas V-8 will continue in limited production for the Ram HD.

[Bob Rosadini]

9 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Bob, Stellantis already has a twin turbo 3-liter inline six that can make up to +/- 500 HP, but in my opinion it’s way too light-duty for a 1-Ton super duty RAM pickup.  The 3L six may soon end up in 1/2-ton RAM, but for a super duty pickup towing a 20,000+ pound trailer, it would probably crater under constant heavy load; even if derated.  😆 

 

The 6.7L Cummins on the other hand should have far greater GCWR capabilities, and since it shares much with 6.7L Cummins diesel, it should be an easy fit in a RAM.  Personally, I think diesel-like performance and durability but with gasoline as fuel would attract a lot of buyers.  Just my 2 cents.

Thx Rick.  did not know it was only 3 liters.  Guess they are trying to compete with Ford's 2.7 EB- which by the way, I've never heard an owner complain about the power it puts out-so for sure I would have to believe the 6.7 Gas would be a natural for Ram.  Only question is the 6.8/7.3 's in a Ford are a good choice based on price vs. a Power Stroke.  I would think the 6.7 Cummins gas will not be as big a cost savings vs a diesel in a Ram.

[Andrew L]

43 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Thx Rick.  did not know it was only 3 liters.  Guess they are trying to compete with Ford's 2.7 EB- which by the way, I've never heard an owner complain about the power it puts out-so for sure I would have to believe the 6.7 Gas would be a natural for Ram.  Only question is the 6.8/7.3 's in a Ford are a good choice based on price vs. a Power Stroke.  I would think the 6.7 Cummins gas will not be as big a cost savings vs a diesel in a Ram.

 

A friend of mine has an F150 with the 2.7 and loves it.  I had a 2.7 F150 rental a while back and it moved pretty well.  

[Rick73]

40 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Thx Rick.  did not know it was only 3 liters.  Guess they are trying to compete with Ford's 2.7 EB- which by the way, I've never heard an owner complain about the power it puts out-so for sure I would have to believe the 6.7 Gas would be a natural for Ram.  Only question is the 6.8/7.3 's in a Ford are a good choice based on price vs. a Power Stroke.  I would think the 6.7 Cummins gas will not be as big a cost savings vs a diesel in a Ram.

Agree cost of a 6.7L Cummins gas would likely be significantly higher than Ford’s 7.3L Godzilla, but to be fair, I think buyers would probably see a Cummins turbo gas engine as more capable for heavy towing in a 1-Ton truck.  I doubt it would get same tow rating as a comparable HD diesel but Cummins is a massive engine weighing almost twice as much as 7.3L Ford, and with turbo increasing torque and power at low RPMs, it could bridge gap between present-day HD gas and diesel.

 

Just guessing, but expect a 6.7L Cummins gas engine itself won’t be that much cheaper than a diesel, though savings in exhaust emissions equipment could be significant.

[Bob Rosadini]

2 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Agree cost of a 6.7L Cummins gas would likely be significantly higher than Ford’s 7.3L Godzilla, but to be fair, I think buyers would probably see a Cummins turbo gas engine as more capable for heavy towing in a 1-Ton truck.  I doubt it would get same tow rating as a comparable HD diesel but Cummins is a massive engine weighing almost twice as much as 7.3L Ford, and with turbo increasing torque and power at low RPMs, it could bridge gap between present-day HD gas and diesel.

 

Just guessing, but expect a 6.7L Cummins gas engine itself won’t be that much cheaper than a diesel, though savings in exhaust emissions equipment could be significant.

Also not fooling with regen cycles could be another attraction in particular if less power is not an issue.  My concern is in any case, this is not good news for Ford.

[jpd80]

9 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Thx Rick.  did not know it was only 3 liters.  Guess they are trying to compete with Ford's 2.7 EB- which by the way, I've never heard an owner complain about the power it puts out-so for sure I would have to believe the 6.7 Gas would be a natural for Ram.  Only question is the 6.8/7.3 's in a Ford are a good choice based on price vs. a Power Stroke.  I would think the 6.7 Cummins gas will not be as big a cost savings vs a diesel in a Ram.

Hey Bob, the part I’m seeing is where Cummins says the new 6.7 gas engine shares many of the diesel’s parts,

that would be akin to Ford doing a gasoline version of the 6.7 Powerstroke….in that respect, the 7.3 is way in front

in terms of $$$ but if Ford was to compete maybe a high deck long stroker V8 is an easier proposition 

getting the 7.3 to 8 litres would need some work (4.5” stroke and higher deck block) but not impossible.

^^^^^^^^I don’t see Ford doing this by the way but interesting topic to explore if diesels are under threat.

 

 

 

Edited April 5 by jpd80

[Rick73]

On 4/5/2024 at 6:15 PM, jpd80 said:

Hey Bob, the part I’m seeing is where Cummins says the new 6.7 gas engine shares many of the diesel’s parts,

that would be akin to Ford doing a gasoline version of the 6.7 Powerstroke….in that respect, the 7.3 is way in front

in terms of $$$ but if Ford was to compete maybe a high deck long stroker V8 is an easier proposition 

getting the 7.3 to 8 litres would need some work (4.5” stroke and higher deck block) but not impossible.

^^^^^^^^I don’t see Ford doing this by the way but interesting topic to explore if diesels are under threat.

 

 

 

Diesels are definitely under threat, so would not be surprising if Ford reacts to the new Cummins turbo gas engine in one way or another, particularly if they end up in a RAM SD pickup.

 

Ford stroking the gas 7.3L V8 makes sense to a point in that it would provide greater low-end torque, but even if Ford stroked it to 9 liters (based on same stroke as Cummins), it would not equal the Cummins’ torque unless Ford added turbocharging; and if Ford was going the turbo route, then they wouldn’t need greater displacement than 7.3L to start with.  For this reason I think you’re correct that a stroked 7.3L is very unlikely, though Ford has history with large-displacement truck-specific gas V8s.  The huge 534 cubic-inch Super Duty V8 from the past is a reminder that larger gas engines are possible and can meet large-truck requirements.

 

If Ford follow Cummins lead, they may indeed develop a gas version of Power Stroke diesel V8, but as you say, that would likely cost more than stroked 7.3L.  Another unlikely opinion would be for Ford to develop a large-truck heavy duty engine using EcoBoost technology.  With DOHC and Dual VVT, Ford may be able to equal Cummins torque with smaller engine, and be more fuel efficient and with lower emissions; though hard to say how buyers would react or compare to a larger Cummings.  

 

IMO all Ford new engine scenarios above are very unlikely because of low volume requirements.

[jpd80]

21 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Diesels are definitely under threat, so would not be surprising if Ford reacts to the new Cummins turbo gas engine in one way or another, particularly if they end up in a RAM SD pickup.

 

Ford stroking the gas 7.3L V8 makes sense to a point in that it would provide greater low-end torque, but even if Ford stroked it to 9 liters (based on same stroke as Cummins), it would not equal the Cummins’ torque unless Ford added turbocharging; and if Ford was going the turbo route, then they wouldn’t need greater displacement than 7.3L to start with.  For this reason I think you’re correct that a stroked 7.3L is very unlikely, though Ford has history with large-displacement truck-specific gas V8s.  The huge 534 cubic-inch Super Duty V8 from the past is a reminder that larger gas engines are possible and can meet large-truck requirements.

 

If Ford follow Cummins lead, they may indeed develop a gas version of Power Stroke diesel V8, but as you say, that would likely cost more than stroked 7.3L.  Another unlikely opinion would be for Ford to develop a large-truck heavy duty engine using EcoBoost technology.  With DOHC and Dual VVT, Ford may be able to equal Cummins torque with smaller engine, and be more fuel efficient and with lower emissions; though hard to say how buyers would react or compare to a larger Cummings.  

 

IMO all Ford new engine scenarios above are very unlikely because of low volume requirements.

Also consider that the Ford 7.3 was not developed as a 6.7 Powerstroke replacement but as an affordable

gasoline variant that is priced considerably less. The 7.3 MD is also an extension of the Super Duty application.

 

By contrast, Cummins looks to be in a different situation and developing  the 6.7 gasoline engine for a different

purpose, as a replacement  for the diesel version. It seems to have considerably more torque than the Ford 7.3,

much closer to the rating of the diesel version (keeping mind the conservative  rating system in Medium Duty)

It looks like Cummins really needs the 6.7 gas engine to be a success in a much wider market…..
 

 

 

Edited April 7 by jpd80

[Bob Rosadini]

17 minutes ago, jpd80 said:

Also consider that the Ford 7.3 was not developed as a 6.7 Powerstroke replacement but as an affordable

gasoline variant that is priced considerably less. The 7.3 MD is also an extension of the Super Duty application.

 

By contrast, Cummins looks to be in a different situation and developing  the 6.7 gasoline engine for a different

purpose, as a replacement  for the diesel version. It seems to have considerably more torque than the Ford 7.3,

much closer to the rating of the diesel version (keeping mind the conservative  rating system in Medium Duty)

It looks like Cummins really needs the 6.7 gas engine to be a success in a much wider market…..
 

 

 

Well guys it seems Cummins recognizes a need for a gasoline engine-think California/Oregon and Ford in their infinite wisdom says,,"nah, who needs that volume".  How many cubes  could you  get oiut of a 300 six?  I've seen some hyou tube videos where guys play with that engine and get big power out of it.

[jpd80]

31 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Well guys it seems Cummins recognizes a need for a gasoline engine-think California/Oregon and Ford in their infinite wisdom says,,"nah, who needs that volume".  How many cubes  could you  get oiut of a 300 six?  I've seen some hyou tube videos where guys play with that engine and get big power out of it.

With respect, I think California’s legislation is going to impact Cummins engine sales more than Ford.

But you are right, Ford will wait until the last moment before deciding which way to go and whatever

costs them less is they way they will swing.
 

Would Ford entertain converting Powerstroke to 6.7 gas turbo or expand the Godzilla range with turbo?

Or would they do nothing……

[Rick73]

14 hours ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Well guys it seems Cummins recognizes a need for a gasoline engine-think California/Oregon and Ford in their infinite wisdom says,,"nah, who needs that volume".  How many cubes  could you  get oiut of a 300 six?  I've seen some hyou tube videos where guys play with that engine and get big power out of it.

The Cummins 6.7L gasoline engine is listed with power ratings from 220 to 325 HP, which is already matched by Ford 7.3L V8.  I think the bigger issues are torque ratings, which Cummins list at 600 and 660 pound-feet, and durability, whether real or perceived.  I am not a big fan of turbo gas engines because they don’t deliver the economy they were originally suppose to, but there is little doubt they deliver much greater torque for a given engine displacement, and also much higher power and torque at high elevations compared to naturally aspirated engines.

 

The famous Ford 300 cubic inch inline six you mention were only good for about 150 HP in later years, so while they had great reputation, they were very underpowered by today’s standards.  As a teenager I got to drive a couple in F-600 trucks and they were no comparison to the Ford V10 I owned in a motorhome, and the newer and simpler 7.3L V8 is even better.  It will be interesting to see which customers the new Cummins attracts.

[Bob Rosadini]

15 hours ago, jpd80 said:

With respect, I think California’s legislation is going to impact Cummins engine sales more than Ford.

But you are right, Ford will wait until the last moment before deciding which way to go and whatever

costs them less is they way they will swing.
 

Would Ford entertain converting Powerstroke to 6.7 gas turbo or expand the Godzilla range with turbo?

Or would they do nothing……

JP-  Agree 100% with your first comment.  That is my point- 6.7 PS Sales in 650/750 in those two states are I'm sure a fraction of the 6.7 Cummins sales in Internationals and Paccars.-so they (cummins) really have an incentive to have a gasser.  Ford HAS a serviceable gasser but instead of tweaking that-and most importantly adding air brakes as an option that would make the 650/750 all that more attractive/competitive, they do nothing.  Ford Pro is a one dimensional effort IMO based on the success of the Transit.

 

1 hour ago, Rick73 said:

The Cummins 6.7L gasoline engine is listed with power ratings from 220 to 325 HP, which is already matched by Ford 7.3L V8.  I think the bigger issues are torque ratings, which Cummins list at 600 and 660 pound-feet, and durability, whether real or perceived.  I am not a big fan of turbo gas engines because they don’t deliver the economy they were originally suppose to, but there is little doubt they deliver much greater torque for a given engine displacement, and also much higher power and torque at high elevations compared to naturally aspirated engines.

 

The famous Ford 300 cubic inch inline six you mention were only good for about 150 HP in later years, so while they had great reputation, they were very underpowered by today’s standards.  As a teenager I got to drive a couple in F-600 trucks and they were no comparison to the Ford V10 I owned in a motorhome, and the newer and simpler 7.3L V8 is even better.  It will be interesting to see which customers the new Cummins attracts.

Rick- I get it on the 300's "as is" configuration.  My question is how many cubes could you get out of it- I'm sure you couldn't get it to 6 L, but better yet as good as the 300 was, does the architecture lend itself to a bigger version...if in fact Ford Pro recognizes the value of class 4,5, 6,7 if they really want to hold Ford's position as the commercial leader.

[Rick73]

34 minutes ago, Bob Rosadini said:

Rick- I get it on the 300's "as is" configuration.  My question is how many cubes could you get out of it- I'm sure you couldn't get it to 6 L, but better yet as good as the 300 was, does the architecture lend itself to a bigger version...if in fact Ford Pro recognizes the value of class 4,5, 6,7 if they really want to hold Ford's position as the commercial leader.

The 300 was close to maxed out in displacement, so it couldn’t be enlarged much anyway.  I’ve read articles of engines being bored and stroked slightly, but not enough to make a difference in this context of powering large trucks and other heavy vehicles.  It would be limited to approximately 5 liters (from original 4.9L).

 

As much as I would personally like to see Ford create a new large-displacement inline-6 for trucks, I think there is essentially no chance of that happening.  It would simply have too little application because of physical size.  An inline-6 variant of 7.3L V8 would yield 5.5 liters, and maybe could be stroked to 6-liters, but without turbocharging it would be going in wrong direction compared to already-available 7.3L V8.

 

Other than designing a gas version of Power Stroke diesel V8, a lower-cost option may be a +/- 6-liter EcoBoost twin-turbo V8.  Maybe Ford could resurrect the long-stroke tall-deck Modular V8 to make a new truck-specific engine.  That same architecture minus turbos could also serve as naturally-aspirated engine for large hybrids, thereby spreading cost over greater volume.  Even if possible to design a long-stroke Coyote-based EcoBoost V8 for trucks, I doubt it would be considered.  It would likely compete well on power, torque, fuel economy and cost with new Cummins, but perceived ruggedness and durability would not be competitive in my opinion.

[Sherminator98]

3 hours ago, Rick73 said:

Other than designing a gas version of Power Stroke diesel V8, a lower-cost option may be a +/- 6-liter EcoBoost twin-turbo V8.  Maybe Ford could resurrect the long-stroke tall-deck Modular V8 to make a new truck-specific engine.  That same architecture minus turbos could also serve as naturally-aspirated engine for large hybrids, thereby spreading cost over greater volume.  Even if possible to design a long-stroke Coyote-based EcoBoost V8 for trucks, I doubt it would be considered.  It would likely compete well on power, torque, fuel economy and cost with new Cummins, but perceived ruggedness and durability would not be competitive in my opinion.

 

Given the fact that hybrids don't really improve gas mileage in larger engines, I don't think that is going to happen anyways. 

[Rick73]

21 minutes ago, silvrsvt said:

 

Given the fact that hybrids don't really improve gas mileage in larger engines, I don't think that is going to happen anyways. 

That’s not a given, or a fact.  Repeating this assumption doesn’t make it so.  I’m replying here solely for benefit of others.

[twintornados]

Just a hunch, but my guess is the 6.7L Gas Cummins will crater similar to when GM diesel-fied the 350 Oldsmobile motor back in the late 70's, early 80's. It may be a good diesel, but it don't think it will translate to a good gas motor. Only my opinion.

[Sherminator98]

4 hours ago, Rick73 said:

That’s not a given, or a fact.  Repeating this assumption doesn’t make it so.  I’m replying here solely for benefit of others.

 

CVT don't work for towing applications like this engine would be required to be doing...that is my response to that. It might work in a light duty application, but it won't for vehicle that needs to tow or haul things. 

[Captainp4]

25 minutes ago, twintornados said:

Just a hunch, but my guess is the 6.7L Gas Cummins will crater similar to when GM diesel-fied the 350 Oldsmobile motor back in the late 70's, early 80's. It may be a good diesel, but it don't think it will translate to a good gas motor. Only my opinion.

I don't know if anyone has tried making a diesel engine a gas engine before, but it sounds like a way better idea than trying to make a gas engine a diesel. Diesel engines are way heavier duty, so should make for a very strong/reliable gas engine I would think. The hp/tq curves and the rpm they make them at are pretty crazy for a gas engine.

[Sherminator98]

4 minutes ago, Captainp4 said:

I don't know if anyone has tried making a diesel engine a gas engine before, but it sounds like a way better idea than trying to make a gas engine a diesel. Diesel engines are way heavier duty, so should make for a very strong/reliable gas engine I would think. The hp/tq curves and the rpm they make them at are pretty crazy for a gas engine.

The problem is that you have all that extra weight in the engine block that isn't necessary for gas engine due to the lower compression ratios. I'd also venture to guess that the setup for the heads for a Diesel and Gas engine could be quite different also, depending on what they use. 

[GearheadGrrrl]

IIRC Cummins tried the same thing a half century ago when they converted their small diesel V8 to a "Giesel". Didn't hear any complaints about them, but that might be because they didn't sell many!