Monday, August 31, 2009 Ford to supply own Super Duty diesel engines Bryce G. Hoffman / The Detroit News Ford Motor Co. today announced plans to produce its own diesel engine for Ford Super Duty pickups. The 6.7-liter turbocharged V-8 will debut on the next-generation 2011 F-Series Super Duty and is expected to offer "significant improvements in torque, horsepower and fuel economy while adding more fueling flexibility and easily meeting stringent new emissions requirements," the company said. "This all-new diesel engine has been so extensively tested both in the lab and in the real world that we're confident we're giving our customers the most reliable and productive powertrain available today," said Derrick Kuzak, head of global product development at Ford. "Our Super Duty customers demand reliability and durability in their trucks so they can deliver the best results for their business and their customers. That's exactly what this engine delivers." Advertisement Ford's diesel engines will replace the current ones being supplied by Navistar International Corp. Wonder how big a truck they plan to put it in? 650 750 too?
This has been known for about a year. Well maybe not a year but 6 months or better.
I wouldn't be surprised to see it in the 650 as the base engine, maybe even the 750 with optional upgrades available. I sure hope Ford has done their homework on this engine, the last two PowerStroke engines were junk. Ford has built diesels in the past in their agricultural division. One of the six cylinder diesels from the tractors was adapted to serve in the medium duty trucks like the F-750 and L-8000, so they do have some past experience with these engines. I've got my fingers crossed.....
They better hope so with all the bad press and expense they put in the last few. I have a 04 Ford 6.0 in an Excursion and it has been decent with a few gremlins with check engine light. I heard rumors of this as they fought with Ford but mever saw a Ford press release. Wonder if it will help or hurt sales now if people wait or want am IH?
curious about what kind of milage you get out of that 6.0 speedpup. Have yet to hear a good thing about them when it comes to mpg
55 mph on cruise 23 Towing my race car 14.9 Long Island to Pocono Trailer and car is about 7500+ = 1000 gear and tires.. New ones are worse than my 04 my dooley dodge is about the same but does not have as much power up hills.
The 2007+ are bad on mileage due to the DPF. They basically shoot some extra fuel out during the exhaust stroke to burn off the accumulated particulate matter in the filter. Thank the EPA for that one-
yea heard all the newer trucks are bad Guess I'll be running mine for a long time, and then some.
at least you don't have to pull the cab to install injectors with the new 6.7.
DPF can easy be deleted, but you will lose your warranty if caught. I wish ford luck with there new engine. It has a lot of initiative things like the new 4.5L Dmax like reverse flow heads. And I think there new turbo might be a real winner. More info
That just looks like a nightmare to me.
Why is that? I do kind of wonder with the techs have to go to school just to learn how to put the serpentine belt on though.
Not going to be any worse than the current engine, at least you won't have to pull the cab to get to it. The diesels in Ford trucks have been complex since 94, the going rumor is that "powerstroke" is a modified version of a Native American word that means "too many parts". I just resealed the HPOP on my boss's 2000 F250 PSD, it took me a couple hours, a few select words, and a large number of tools including one I had to make. It wouldn't have been so bad if I didn't have to be on a ladder to get over the nose of that SD to begin with, but still- I'll take even an old IH 6.9 with a Banks turbo kit before one of these electronic things. It was kinda nice using my 72 F250 with a nice new 360 to tow his truck home, though- Once I get rid of my axlewrap issues it'll be even nicer.
The International engines have not evolved well as used in the Ford vehicles. That and the fact that Ford and International have wasted tons of bucks in court over the last several years led Ford to decide enough is enough. The fact that GM and Cummins engines were waxing Ford royally may have contributed as well. However, like others mentioned here, Ford has not had good luck with their own diesels in past years. I for one, would never buy any Ford diesel. Just went over a hundred thousand miles with my 08 Chev HD2500. One rear seal, a minor oil leak, a couple of bad senders were the only problems. The DPS exhaust parts are coming off soon...... I also just discovered that the odometer in my truck is off by 6 miles every 350 actual, as recorded by my GPS. I knew the speedo was off by 2 miles per hour. This is a lot of miles to lose for warranty purposes. I'm currently running up to 2500 miles a week with the Chev. With good #2 fuel at 68 MPH, I'm getting about 21.5 MPG running unloaded/no trailer. With trailer full of tires and parts, 8.5-11 is the norm. B99.9 Biodiesel causes loss of 1.5-2 MPG. The DuraMax could use some tweeking, but overall, it's a fine engine and I'm pleased with it.
Joe, I went back and read this thread again and found that I'm the only one here to have mentioned previous Ford built diesels, and I certainly didn't say anything negative about them. In fact, my opinion of the 6 cylinder Ford's in the intermediate duty trucks is they were a very good engine for their intended purpose. They took the proven 6 cylinder diesel from their agricultural division and suited it for truck use and it worked out well. It was never meant to be a powerhouse, it was for medium duty service to replace big cube gas engines, getting better fuel mileage and longer service life than their gas counterparts. It was a far better option than the Cat 3208 that was used before its introduction. I'll wait and see how this works out before judging it. There sure are a lot of technical developments in this motor, I hope they've done a lot of testing in real world conditions. I personally would prefer that Ford have gone to another inline 6 instead of the V8. If there are two engines of the same displacement in both a V8 and I6 configuration, the I6 will make more torque at lower RPM than the V8. I could care less what a pickup or small chassis truck does at a drag strip, I buy them for hauling and towing and an I6 does a better job of that. Did anyone notice that Ford is dropping the standard transmission and will only offer a 6 speed automatic? That has me very concerned as Ford has yet to build a durable automatic suited for truck use. Outside a pickup, I've always spec'd a stick in my small chassis trucks.
Steve, Where the engines you talked about here Ford or another maker? I'm just asking because I don't know enough about them and this is a negative comment on PowerStrokes.
The Ford diesel program since 1982 has been in a partnership with International Harvester, IH has supplied the long block assemblies and then Ford fitted their own injection system to it. The earliest versions were naturally aspirated and had some cavitation problems, they didn't make a lot of power but got phenomenal fuel mileage and outside the cavitation issue were very reliable. Mid 1995 Ford introduced the PowerStroke which had a new injection system and turbocharger and made some serious torque numbers. They had some minor issues with them with oil leaks and cam sensors, but were a pretty reliable engine and made good power. In mid 1998 they added an intercooler which brought more power yet and introduced it as a '99 model with the SuperDutys. The engines I refer to are the 6.0 PowerStroke introduced in '03 and the 6.7 which came in '07. Both were designed to meet the EPA requirements of those periods, the 7.3 couldn't be made to conform. The 6.0 had a variable vane turbo which had a habit of grenading and contaminating the engine crankcase. Fred Pickering has had 3 of them that I know of in his fleet blow, one on the way home from the dealer brand new! In the quest to play the horsepower race with the other manufacturers, they have raised the RPMs beyond what IH ever intended and have seen a high failure rate as a result. I've driven an IH 4200 with the 365 which is the same engine as the 6.0 PowerStroke built to IH specs and it runs very well. Ford tweaked them for horsepower numbers and lost reliability as a result. The 6.7 has a dual turbocharger system in place to meet emissions requirements and generates a tremendous amount of heat under the hood. It also has an exhaust gas recirculation emissions system that regenerates by injecting raw fuel into the exhaust to burn out collected soot. There were problems with this system too, if you look around youtube you'll find videos of these trucks shooting flames out the tailpipe as they regenerate. There has been a pretty high failure rate on these engines too, and a number of them have caught fire due to the high heat retention.
If you think about it, any time you get more power out of the same displacement, you loose life/reliability. Consider a Cummins NT series engine, 235hp out of 855CID. Now the 6BT, same horsepower out of 360CID. Which do you think will last longer, have a lower failure rate, etc? I for one would absolutely love to have a Ford 401 straight six diesel, I drove a 135hp one in a 26' L8000 and it did decently. The 401 will -almost- fit in a pickup, if you modify the firewall and/or put the radiator somewhere else. As far as no manual option, the engine does appear to have an SAE class 2 bellhousing, (the article mentions it uses a standard SAE bell), so I see no reason to not swap in a Clark, NP, or even an NV 5600. You'd have to figure out a flywheel, but chances are very good it is a zero-balance, and would be a symmetrical bolt pattern as such. You might have to get creative for a pilot bearing, but the other parts are already on the shelf. FWIW, the EGR doesn't regen, that's the DPF. The flame issue has been tamed, but can be aggravated by running a performance tune.
Yeah, but some how thats better for the economy than the older motors??? Go figure.
Steve, no one had to mention it. I've fought Ford diesels in everything from welders, water pumps, skidders, and generators to trucks and vans and pickups since 1958. In two words: they suck! I used to carry handfuls of pushrods and other parts to get the little bustards through a shift. The Brazilian Ford diesels in trucks were a major headache. Parts in this country were non-existent as Ford decided not to support the trucks very well. The International diesels used by FOMOCO were an admittance by Ford that they did not have the know how to build a good diesel engine. I will have to agree with you that the 3208 Cat was most useful as a boat anchor. It was a little better than the GM 8.2, but not much in my book. You are also correct in that Ford never could build a reliable automatic transmission that could take a beating. The C6 was the closest, and most people that trashed those had to have them beefed up by a builder before or immediately after use. The later model light duty Ford trucks that I’ve looked over had a German transmission that was a real nightmare to work on. Never had one that would stand up to hard pulls, like in the oil patch or dirt jobs. The old Borg-Warner’s and even the Eaton’s were better. If you think I’m totally biased concerning Ford trucks, you’d be correct. Don’t care if I ever see another one.
Ford now has a great auto trans now. GM had dropped there manual option in 06 I bet even dodge will eventually.
If you maintain the engines properly and don't beat them like a rented mule, they last quite well. If you have an employee who uses the governor as a shift point or speed limiter, I don't care who made the engine, it'll have problems. As far as the C6, I guess it was -the- transmission to swap in because it was so weak. I have seen them go over 400k in severe duty (stop and go in FL) without any work other than routine maintenance. Name me even a TH400 or TF727 that can touch that- Even the GM Allison units can't handle the Dmax with even a 60hp tune.
Sorry steve its a 6.4 in the ford with egr and dpf the egr exhaust gas recirculation pipes exhaust gas from the up pipe before the turbo back into the intake. it does not rejen with fuel. The dpf filter when getting restricted has the computer dump another pulse(regen) of fuel into the exhaust stroke to raise the egt's to burn the particulates out. The new ford engine is supposed to be 6.7L just like the current cummins
Thanks 05cummins, I got all these displacements a little twisted when typing. I'm not the best on the emissions equipment, thanks for the clarification.
Hope i didnt come off as a smart _ _ _ there steve i just spend alot of time talking bout DPF and egr deletes at the races cause one of my sponsors is a performance shop
Not at all, I'm usually a stickler for details. I knew EGR is exhaust gas recirculation, can you tell us what DPF and UP pipe are? The new trucks will have SCR, Selective Catalytic Reduction where liquid urea (DEF) is injected into the exhaust to convert nitrous oxide to nitrogen and water vapor. Anyone had enough of emissions abreviations yet???
DPF diesel particulate filter it scrubs the fine particles out of the exhaust gas these fiters plug and need to be cleaned this system is automatic when the computer senses a plugging DPF it dumps raw fuel into the cyl on the exhaust stroke witch raises the EGT exhaust gas temp enough to burn the particles in the filter witch is called a dpf filter regen. All fine and dandy but number one the burn off never fully cleans the DPF filter so there is a restriction causing performance loss. 2 its using more fuel up to one litre a minute in a Regen. so in the end your truck usess more fuel then it did before some regens can last ten to fifteen min. Trucks can regen everyday three times a day or once a month depends on your driving style and Idle time. The aftermarket has developed ways to fool the computer or program it right out of the system so you can remove the DPF and EGR systems on Dodge Ford and GM giving you more power and better fuel economy rmoving the dpf or egr without a fooler or programer capable of deleting the regen will cause your truck to A go into a limp mode or B regen all the time. An uppipe on a ford and gm is just a pipe that comes up from the exhaust manifolds to the turbo witch is in the v of the motor. Sorry if there are spellin errors or somthing dont make total sense im on alot of pain killers right now
One thing I was reading on the 6.7 Ford was it has a egr bypass for when the motor is warming up. I wonder what would happen if you let it bypass all the time. I know a common mod on the 6.0's is an egr delete. If Ford has designed a bypass there may be no need for a delete. The urea injection is suppose to make the dpf much smaller as well so mileage should be much better. I still drive my 02's with the 7.3's so I haven't messed with egr's or dpf's yet, but the time will come when I have to get a new pickup. I just wish they still made the Excursion! My wife doesn't know what she will replace it with when the time comes.
All newer trucks with EGR have a valve to cycle the circulayion on and off during cold starts and other paramiters. Problem is without a programer aor fooler box to make the computer think its workin it will throw engine codes then start to derate the engines power. If you just unplug it it will read the circut as open and not functioning. There are no free or easy mods to these motors. We will have to see what the urea systems are like but i assume the cost of ownership will increase with that as well urea aint guna be free and one more system with problems to maitain. my old 99 cummins gets a true 25mph and there telling me a 6.4 ford that gets 10 on the hwy is better for the enviroment getting more then twice as bad fuel economy. I think its just better for oil companys pocket books
Like 05cummins above said, I can't understand how we are helping emmisions by burning WAY more fuel. Since 1995, every truck I have bought got less mpg than the last one, and also had more repairs done to it than the one before it. I drive 3/4 ton 4X4 diesels, and my 95 dodge got average 19mpg wet to a 99 Ford 7.3, got 17 mpg 03 Ford 7.3, 15 mpg 06 Ford with a 6.0, 13mpg I refuse to buy a Ford 6.4. I have friends with them, getting 11 mpg My company had 6 6.0 Fords. after 3 1/2 years, only one had not had major engine problems, and it got sold recently when it showed the first signs of the trouble the others have had. One has had 2 engines under warranty, 1 had 3, and got replaced under the lemon law before it had 25,000 miles. The other 3 have all had the fuel system replaced at least once, one of them 2 or 3 times, I forget. As far as I am concerned, they are a total disaster. Talking to the Ford dealer mechanics, and they say the 6.4 has 2 to 3 times the trouble of the 6.0!!!! I will never own one of them. I am thinking of buying older used trucks with low miles instead of new. They just keep getting worse, and it is a shame, becase the rest of the truck is really nice. Maybe Fords new engine will be better, but I will not even think of buying one untill it is proven for a few years.
Take a 6.0 out of a school bus they run good dont blow head gasket put that same motor in a superduty let ford tune it and you know what there like so does this tell you ford knows what there doin. Same as dodge puting 10 micron fuel filters on common rail trucks that can only handle a 4 to 5 micron particle in the fuel system
dude its a 6.4L and they dont shoot flames ne more they fixed that
the flames out the tail pipe was caused by the exhaust stroke injection pulse having to long of duration simple glitch easily fixed by a flash
I don't know how its doesn't make scene the burning more fuel can decrease pollution. Does it sound intelligent well no, but emissions for diesel is just like emission for gassers in the 70s. It blew, but it will get better. I hope the addition of Urea can help the mileage out some it shouldn't take much to of set the cost. I hear the Urea on the Baby Dmax would have to be serviced every oil change. The Dmax goes 10-12k on an oil change not that the Baby will to but... What is BS is that diesel emissions are nothing comparative to to gassers without this junk.
I thought they killed the baby Dmax.
What kills diesels is the smoker crowd. The greenies see these guys out there with twin 6" stacks on a late 90s Ram, belching tons of smoke, then suddenly all diesels are these noisy dirty things. While NOx is a problem with diesels, it's just as much of a problem with the pet hydrogen engines. At least biodiesel is a net-gain process, rather than hydrogen or alcohol. What's funny is that nearly any emissions equipment, except for an EGR and PCV in a gas engine, decreases fuel mileage.
you would meen like this YouTube - NADP August Blackout 2009 vid 1 and its not the greenies doing it to stock trucks cause of this i they know we just take that stuff off to its just a money grab from oil companys funding the epa so to make more stringent regs and then making deals with auto makers to use systems that burn more fuel
Ha ya the evil oil companies I'm sure
Why do you have to pick on the old dodges. I see more new trucks out there blowin smoke than old dodges. The new truck you just throw a chip on it and put your foot to the floor. Today alone i saw 2 ford 6.0h no's belching smoke as the floored it by us while we were working on the side of the highway. I try and keep my smoke for the track with the puller. But no matter what its all goin down hill now. Emissions get tighter, trucks get more exp. fuel gets more exp. and the govnt gets worse and worse everyday.
The early 24v Cummins were some of the first diesel pullers to be exploited. Before that, it was mostly supercharged gas V8s and gas V8-based engines.
Gentlepersons A query if you don't mind the item pictured below is a belt tensioner from a 4.2l TCA MWM navistar sprinter engine. We have one of these engines ; they are not sold here but came fitted aftermarket to an item of plant, the fitting company are now defunct and we need one of these tensioners it was manufactured by a company "litens ina" and the numbers on it are 4378-9607-0341,we are lead to believe that this engine was fitted to the Ford's F250 in certain parts of the planet as well as some nissans pathfinders .if someone can get me a ford/ nissan part number I would appreciate it . mwm manual
I can't wait till this new engine comes out. Ford has been working on it since I think 03 or 04. I believe its going to be right up there with the 7.3. Ford always lowers the engine specs from what they really are but the #'s so far are 400HP and 720 foot pound of torque. Fuel milage up 3 mpg. For the most part all the 6.0 problems are customer related. From everyone I hear if you chip or tune you are asking for problems. If you leave them alone the problems go down.. And for most ppl its easy to blame ford for their mistakes. A few guys pull more then what the truck is recommended and some times leads to problems. Its all in how you take care of it. I dog my 05 6.0 and have not had the first problem with a little over 141000 miles on her. The ZF made auto trannies are holding out better then the ones that was mated to the earlier 7.3 and 6.o's For the 6.4, hardly any complaints besides fuel milage and the first reflashes. And you still can get a manual but not for long. GM and dodge is going this same route because autos are becoming better equipted to handle these heavier duties.
They have just postponed it. Ford ruined the 6.0 the problems ain't from customers. Just like any truck there are good and bad ones, but they had a lot of bad one.
Is the tensioner broken or does it need a new bearing? 99% of the time you can press a new bearing in and be on your way. Otherwise, if you have a Parts Plus or Napa close by, see if you can compare some of their tensioners off the shelf to yours, they should also have a catalog as well.
The bearing is fine it appears that the arm is worn resulting in the pulley is twisting and throwing off the belt.
At work we have 7 05-07 F-350 6.0's and not a trouble with them. The 05 has 279,680 on it and all it does is pick up and deliver anything from a Cat skidsteer to a D4 and the 5spd Torque-Shift is by far better than any other transmission out there. Ford should of taken the Cat C7 I-6 that was developed for Ford by Cat back in 02. Not enough hp (290hp) Ford said. It was rated by Cat at 290hp 770 Lbs-Ft torque. Cat uses that 7.2-liter six in their 950 series loaders and its that same spec motor that they developed for Ford. That motor is bullet proof, its slow turning tho, only a 2400 rpm engine.