Fullsize V-6 Pickup Comparison

[Raspy]

I'm not a fan of V6 engines in general.

They either fire unevenly or they are mechanically out of balance and require a balance shaft to correct it.

If someone needs a modern truck with 300 HP, why buy a V6 instead of a V8? The V6 will be at a very high state of tune or turbo charged and require premium fuel. Where the V8, with more displacement will be better suited for heavy work.

Of course, for heavy work, the diesel is best. Seems like the V6 is best for cars

 

[Raspy]

Robert,

Thanks for the info on the GMC V6s. I didn't know there were so many sizes!

 

[Dmace]

I'm not a fan of V6 engines in general.

They either fire unevenly or they are mechanically out of balance and require a balance shaft to correct it.

If someone needs a modern truck with 300 HP, why buy a V6 instead of a V8? The V6 will be at a very high state of tune or turbo charged and require premium fuel. Where the V8, with more displacement will be better suited for heavy work.

Of course, for heavy work, the diesel is best. Seems like the V6 is best for cars

Exactly! Like I said earlier, what's the point of paying such a premium for Ford's high strung 300hp V6 when you can get a solid long running V8 from the other two for less money and those are engines that have been used for years in various vehicles. Unlike the Ford engines which seem to change every couple of years...
Sure you can argue that the V6 gets better gas mileage but put a load in that truck and I bet it will drop mpg's like a bad habit. The overall average of fuel mileage loaded and unloaded will be much closer to the V8's and probably less.
I want to see more inline engines, they just make more sense mechanically and tend to provide broader power curves.

 

[Diamondpilot]

Exactly! Like I said earlier, what's the point of paying such a premium for Ford's high strung 300hp V6 when you can get a solid long running V8 from the other two for less money and those are engines that have been used for years in various vehicles. Unlike the Ford engines which seem to change every couple of years...
Sure you can argue that the V6 gets better gas mileage but put a load in that truck and I bet it will drop mpg's like a bad habit. The overall average of fuel mileage loaded and unloaded will be much closer to the V8's and probably less.
I want to see more inline engines, they just make more sense mechanically and tend to provide broader power curves.

I actually agree with everything you just said. I know, must have woke up on the wrong side of the bed or something. :laughing::laughing:

The issue is these engines are going to be the standard in the near future with all the Government crap. CAFE has killed the big displacement gas engines like the Ford and Dodge V-10 and the 8.1L GM. From all the reading I have been doing the only way to get emissions under control is to make higher revving smaller displacement engines. They stroke must be shorter to accomplish this and give more complete fuel burn. This kills the low end grunt that I have always liked. Turbos and Super Chargers is the only way to bring this back with CURRENT TECHNOLOGY.

Technology is what this is all about. Things are going to have to change and new ideas are going to have to come to the market.

Chris

 

[ModMech]

The 3.5L DuraTech has PROVEN to be an excellant and willing powerplant in many Ford product lines since it's introduction in about 2006 (Edge as I recall).

The 3.5L Eco-Boost uses well proven technology but Ford has stumbled badly with V-6 products in the past, such as the 3.8L (T-Bird, Mustang, Lincoln, Taurus, Windstar etc) and still has somewhat of a black eye from that.

Virtually all engines offered now make more HP and most mkae nearly as much Tq as the "Big Block" engines of yester-year while obtaining nearly twice the fuel efficiency in a heavier more equipped vehicle. That's IMPRESSIVE!

The talk about the EcoBoost is mute, you can't get one according to Ford's website, at least not yet, they are not even listed as an option for ANY F-150.

Ford - Cars, SUVs, Trucks & Crossovers | Ford Vehicles | The Official Site of Ford Vehicles | FordVehicles.com

Personally, no 1/2 ton is a work truck that I would use for towing etc in business or on a farm/ranch, they will not take that level of abuse.

 

[Raspy]

I'm not one to jump on the bandwagon of new tech until it has has at least some time to prove itself. This especially hold true with Ford and all their new engines. The 3.8 Fords blew head gaskets, then their V8s blew spark plugs out. The diesels from them have changed over and over and have turned into the biggest warrantee disaster in Fords history. Cabs had to come off the trucks to work on them, etc. No thanks!

More inline engines would be very nice in trucks. But I'm afraid they are not likely to be popular unless they have big HP numbers and snappy performance. New, lighter and quick reving stuff seems to be the order of the day.

Also, I think, it's easier to meet emission requirements with a lot of small cylinders vs a few big ones because there is more cool cylinder wall surface per hot volume of gasses to keep the Nox down. Lower average temp.

But wouldn't it be nice if we could at least order a 300 inch inline, cast iron six? Or a mid sized inline 5 cylinder turbo diesel like the Sprinters used to be offered with. Or the 2.8 inline 4, turbo diesel that came in the Jeep Liberty. All great engines.

 

[_RaT_]

Robert, rebuilt one those in my 1963 GMC. Mine even had Scotch plaid valve covers! The engine was very good in the low RPM's, sucked on gas like crazy, maybe 10-11 mpg. I drove mine to Maine back in 1986. My engine was the 305E. It also was available in a 350, 401 and 478 and of course the V12 which used many of the componets from the V6 like pistons rods etc as I recall. The crank on that was longer then my Ford 351 V8 that was also getting a rebuild at the time (it was in my boat). My 63 had the 4 speed manual with the non synchronized 1st gear. Mark

Just looked at the Wiki Link you attached. Was not familiar with the 379 or 432 as those were not in my repair book. Later versions.

Here are links to Chevy V6 trucks. Stump pullers.... Hook a chain from these trucks to one of the new ones, and the early one would drag the new one acrss the parking lot...

My olf high school drafting teacher had a '66 GMC> That truck would pull like most modern diesels. It was a beast!

GMC V6 engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GMC Big Block V6 Engines

http://www.cardomain.com/ride/3323302/1962-gmc-c-k-pick-up-patterson-ca-us

 

[_RaT_]

I would really like a small diesel truck. Toyota has a decent one that the US does not allow. Its not for pulling stumps, but I have better tools for that anyway. It does get over 30 mpg. With no question we will indeed see gas/diesel taxes go up in the near future, prepare to pay more for everything, you can bank on that!

I'm not one to jump on the bandwagon of new tech until it has has at least some time to prove itself. This especially hold true with Ford and all their new engines. The 3.8 Fords blew head gaskets, then their V8s blew spark plugs out. The diesels from them have changed over and over and have turned into the biggest warrantee disaster in Fords history. Cabs had to come off the trucks to work on them, etc. No thanks!

More inline engines would be very nice in trucks. But I'm afraid they are not likely to be popular unless they have big HP numbers and snappy performance. New, lighter and quick reving stuff seems to be the order of the day.

Also, I think, it's easier to meet emission requirements with a lot of small cylinders vs a few big ones because there is more cool cylinder wall surface per hot volume of gasses to keep the Nox down. Lower average temp.

But wouldn't it be nice if we could at least order a 300 inch inline, cast iron six? Or a mid sized inline 5 cylinder turbo diesel like the Sprinters used to be offered with. Or the 2.8 inline 4, turbo diesel that came in the Jeep Liberty. All great engines.

 

[ModMech]

Ford's warranty costs with the 2002 up diesels stems more from their last-minutes changes to something that worked and more importantly, much longer warranty periods, than anything else. The 6.0L/6.4L engines proved to be VERY good overall, however neiter are forgiving of bad "tooning" by the aftermarket.

Ford has TONS of diesel engine products in ROW that they could sell in the USA, but that would take market share from the most profitable lines, not something they are likely to do.... until someone else does.

Taking the cab off is for speed, not necessity in most cases and actually results in a better quality repair. Ford is not the only one doing it and not the first, by a long shot.

 

[RobertN]

Part of the reason the V10's came about, was emissions. It was easier to get a clean burn with 10 smaller cylinders than 8 larger ones. Part of it was the stroke ratio as mentioned, part of it was the flame characteristics over a larger bore size.

Some things are going to have to change. One might be, a move away from the behemoth loads we in the US(myself included) try to haul.

The other is, we really do not need 400hp/600ftlbs torque to haul. Over the years, I have seen some of the older v8's, and even a i6, haul loads like discussed in the many threads here. They just did it a lot slower...

Getting an American to take a step back in power is about impossible, barring a full on embargo...

If you(we) took a step back with that new V6, dropped the HP/Tq, significantly upped the MPG, that motor could still pull a nice load. In the slow lane. Same as the diesels. Why not have a 200hp/350tq motor, kinda like the older 12V Cummins, that got MPG in the 20-27mpg range. More time in the slow lane, but better mileage.

Heaven forbid, the rest of the world survives that way...

The issue is these engines are going to be the standard in the near future with all the Government crap. CAFE has killed the big displacement gas engines like the Ford and Dodge V-10 and the 8.1L GM.

Technology is what this is all about. Things are going to have to change and new ideas are going to have to come to the market.

Chris

 

[Diamondpilot]

Taking the cab off is for speed, not necessity in most cases and actually results in a better quality repair. Ford is not the only one doing it and not the first, by a long shot.

2 summers ago I was overseeing work on my Dads Corvette while he was at his other home in San Diego. We were having about $6,000 worth of work done to it. Anyway they had 3 Dmax trucks in there all with cabs off for repairs. So like you said, its not just Ford.

Chris

 

[Raspy]

ModMech,

I just have to disagree.

The 6.0 Ford was a disaster. It led to a lawsuit with Navistar because Ford wanted them to share in the cost of the huge warrantee problems. When Ford refused to pay Navistar in order to recoup some of the costs, Navistar stopped production. The result was a law suit and a court order to keep producing the engines. This problem was not from aftermarket tuners, but from Fords cost cutting, poor quality and the relentless HP race. The cabs had to be removed to fix stuff like injectors and it wasn't done to make the job go faster. It adds 10 to 12 hours to the repair to R&R the cabs and they did a lot of them. They also bought a lot of them back.

Now the 6.7 is being touted by Ford as the latest and greatest, and it might be, but time will tell. Meanwhile they are using Diesel exhaust fluid to meet emission requirements.

Bottom line is there are a lot of well documented problems with Ford engines and they were not suited to the body that Ford had available. They have gone from the 6.9 to the 7.3 to the 6.0 to the 6.4 to the 6.7. Out of all of them the 7.3 seems to be the best, but slow. Meanwhile Dodge has simply refined the 5.9 Cummins and had the luxury of designing two body generations around it. The Cummins a third fewer parts and are all cast iron. They can actually be worked on by simply reaching in and the new 6.7 (bored and stroked 5.9) does not use exhaust fluid to meet the smog requirements.

Ford knows how to make stuff, but they continuously cheapen stuff to the failure point and, once out of warrantee, let the cost fall on the owner of a bad design. They have been under a lot of pressure to come up with their own, in house, diesel after the recent problems that they created. So, let time tell if the new ones are good or not. But I won't be spending my money on their experiments.

Most buyers seem to just be loyal to Ford and don't care about doing any research. I have a friend that just bought a brand new one. I asked him about the risk and the exhaust fluid and his response was, "it's got 400 Horsepower and that's way more than a Cummins". I know two other guys that make their living with Ford diesels, or are trying to. One is suing Ford and the other is just very patient with all the problems. They've both lost a lot of money. Another guy was curious why there were so many Ford cabs sitting around at a local dealer. The answer was they were working on the engines and had to pull them off. Others have complained about squeaks and rattles after the cab R&R. Another trip to the dealer to fix that.

Thanks, but no thanks.

 

[RobertN]

I am a big Cummins fan.

I can tell you though, I had to change my lift pump. There was no simple reaching in. For a straight six, in a larger engine compartment, that was a pain in the patootsie! I had to get my arm in to all kinds of contortions to get that pump changed. And mine is an '01, which I suspect has better room than the newer ones(just a guess, but...).

Out of all of them the 7.3 seems to be the best, but slow. Meanwhile Dodge has simply refined the 5.9 Cummins and had the luxury of designing two body generations around it. The Cummins a third fewer parts and are all cast iron. They can actually be worked on by simply reaching in and the new 6.7 (bored and stroked 5.9) does not use exhaust fluid to meet the smog requirements.

 

[ModMech]

ModMech,

I just have to disagree.

The 6.0 Ford was a disaster. It led to a lawsuit with Navistar because Ford wanted them to share in the cost of the huge warrantee problems. When Ford refused to pay Navistar in order to recoup some of the costs, Navistar stopped production. The result was a law suit and a court order to keep producing the engines. This problem was not from aftermarket tuners, but from Fords cost cutting, poor quality and the relentless HP race. The cabs had to be removed to fix stuff like injectors and it wasn't done to make the job go faster. It adds 10 to 12 hours to the repair to R&R the cabs and they did a lot of them. They also bought a lot of them back.

As most TBN'ers know, I drive Fords, let's be completely forthcomming about that.

What most don't know, is I have far more information on the 6.0L and in fact all of the Power Stroke engines than most - even the mechaincs.

The 6.9L was better than anything else available at the time in a pickup and even a decent MD engine but not suited for long highway drives in them. The 7.3L was a BIG improvement, more HP and Tq and none of the problems that the 6.9L had (leaks etc). The Cummins "B" of that day, well there was nothing better in terms of durability or mileage.... unitl the 7.3L PSD. The PSD started the HP race, it made more HP and more Tq than the Cummins but not the economy. I can assure you, the 7.3L PSDs were NOT slow especially compared to the competition of the day.

The 6.0L replaced the 7.3L and there is no doubt, it does not enjoy the good repuation that the 7.3L does. The '02/3 6.0L was pretty good, a few injector issues early and turbo actuators but overall, not bad for the first year. The '04/5s, well not so good. They again had injector and fuel system problems. By 2006, according to Ford, the 6.0L was the lowest warranty cost per engine product in the USA.

The 6.4L was better than the 7.3L and even moreso than the 6.0L and is still proving to be very reliable, but not particularly efficient.

Now, you say that removing the cab adds a lot of time to a repair, hmmm, have you ever done it? It doesn't take much more than 3 to 4 hours, depending on the tech, to R&R a body. I really don't know where the 10-12 hours came from, other than an inept mechanic.

Once the cab is off, you have TOTAL access to the engine, jobs that would be 8 hours with the cab on are now doable in fewer than 5 with less risk of an error because you can work cleanly. Now, if it were my truck and someone said "Hey, we can remove your cab and do an excellant job including careful inspection of our work or leave it on and pray", you better KNOW which I would choose!

Bottom line is there are a lot of well documented problems with Ford engines and they were not suited to the body that Ford had available. They have gone from the 6.9 to the 7.3 to the 6.0 to the 6.4 to the 6.7. Out of all of them the 7.3 seems to be the best, but slow.

Really? Name them. Obviously you have never driven a fully loaded E350 7.3L PSD against a fully loaded E350 with a 460 or 6.8L, or a G3500 with a 6.5L turbo. I have operataed a LOT of 7.3L PSDs and 5.9L Cummins mills, until the advent of the 24V Cummins B, Dodge boys were being passed by everything.

Meanwhile Dodge has simply refined the 5.9 Cummins and had the luxury of designing two body generations around it. The Cummins a third fewer parts and are all cast iron. They can actually be worked on by simply reaching in and the new 6.7 (bored and stroked 5.9) does not use exhaust fluid to meet the smog requirements.

Hmm, refined? Like the VP-44 and Killer Dowel Pins? How about the failed #1 injectors Cummins refused to warrant that trashed the cylinders? How many HGs have I replaced in Cummins "B"s, dozens, maybe a hundred.

BTW, for the record, the Ram with a 6.7L DOES use SCR (urea), but not in every model of truck.

Ford can prove the "tooners" are the major responsible party for in-warranty major failures. At one time, Ford was revolking the warranty on over 1,000 trucks per month because of these tooners.

Oh, yes the LAWSUIT. Did you care to read the findings of the Judge? He thru it out, case closed Ford go home. You see, Ford KNEW it was the tooners and maintenance issues that were the biggest problem with the HEUI fuel system and tried to lay the blame on their vendor, they shot craps. Navistar also sued Ford and won, but that's a story for another thread.

 

[RobertN]

Well, now that we are definitely off topic(V6?)...

For all the +/- of motors, one thing that sticks out to me, is I have not seen much in the way of the various Power Strokes or Duramax's in other vehicles.

I have though, seen Cummins transplants in various Ford and Chevy trucks that were originally gas motor pickups. I have also seen the F250 PS replacement with Cummins motors.

Even in 'Oz, they take the 4 cylinder Cummins from bread/delivery trucks, to put in Landcruisers.

I have operataed a LOT of 7.3L PSDs and 5.9L Cummins mills, until the advent of the 24V Cummins B, Dodge boys were being passed by everything.

Hmm, refined? Like the VP-44 and Killer Dowel Pins? How about the failed #1 injectors Cummins refused to warrant that trashed the cylinders? How many HGs have I replaced in Cummins "B"s, dozens, maybe a hundred.

 

[_RaT_]

I like the old Cummins as well. If they kept the old 12 valve, got the noise down to the current levels and of course, had it in a more updated cab (just never got into the Dodge cab) and kept the same old power #'s/fuel economy, they would have me. I simply don't care about being passed by bigger, more powerful diesels but then, I don't feel I have to compensate for anything either! :laughing: I am still driving my old anemic 1993 Terd 7.3L non turbo, IDI with a major saggy front end. I'm looking for a used truck and will donate mine when the time comes. This Ford replaced my 1963 GMC so as you can see, I'm not one to give up on a vehicle quickly.

I am a big Cummins fan.

I can tell you though, I had to change my lift pump. There was no simple reaching in. For a straight six, in a larger engine compartment, that was a pain in the patootsie! I had to get my arm in to all kinds of contortions to get that pump changed. And mine is an '01, which I suspect has better room than the newer ones(just a guess, but...).

 

[Egon]

What most don't know, is I have far more information on the 6.0L and in fact all of the Power Stroke engines than most - even the mechaincs.

Hmmm??

Now me, I don't know much about engines so way back in 96 I asked the heavy Duty Mechaincs what 3/4 ton I should buy. They all said Dodge with the Cumins. And that's what I did and I'm still happy!:thumbsup:

 

[ModMech]

Hmmm??

Now me, I don't know much about engines so way back in 96 I asked the heavy Duty Mechaincs what 3/4 ton I should buy. They all said Dodge with the Cumins. And that's what I did and I'm still happy!:thumbsup:

Nothin wrong with their advice, not at all

 

[Renze]

Ford knows how to make stuff, but they continuously cheapen stuff to the failure point and, once out of warrantee, let the cost fall on the owner of a bad design.

Same here, my dads 2001 Ford Mondeo was cheap to buy as a used car, but he's jealous of the low maintenance cost of my 1998 S70 TDI... He spends more than 1500 euro per year on maintenance where i havent spent anything yet...
Of the mondeo, doors rot (luckily the paint is the same black as bituminous underbody coating ) shocks fail prematurely, brakes go, and injector pumps fail. Oh, and the starter fails because there is no hole in the bellhousing for it to loose any clutch wear dust, so it seized the starter...
Overall i'm not impressed with Fords cost cuttings... I wont buy a Volvo S40 or V50 either because they are based on a Ford Focus: The Dutch police used 850's and V70's for years, but after their recent Ford based V50's brake pads turned on fire after heavy braking in police chases, they trade them all for VW's...

 

[Dargo]

I am a big Cummins fan.

I can tell you though, I had to change my lift pump. There was no simple reaching in. For a straight six, in a larger engine compartment, that was a pain in the patootsie! I had to get my arm in to all kinds of contortions to get that pump changed. And mine is an '01, which I suspect has better room than the newer ones(just a guess, but...).

Yup, me too. I absolutely laugh my rear off when self professed experts start spouting off about all the problems the 12v Cummins engines had. The advent of the internet and a few dowel pins dropping into the timing gears created a whole panic. LOL!! By the time I sold my '96 Cummins I'd added twins to it, BHAF, head studs, 435 injectors, ringed the head and was not defueling it until nearly 6000 RPM! Running the snot out of it for years that about the only issues I had was keeping a transmission behind it!

I had a couple of 7.3 PSD trucks and I am completely unimpressed with that engine. Besides always having "issues", I've never seen any group of engines that pour engine oil on the ground like they do! Since I spent a small fortune concreting my driveway, nobody I know is allowed to drive their 7.3 PSD down my driveway because of all the oil they pour out! If you want to say "what about the '6 leaker'," I'll just laugh at you. My '06 F350 runs in the low 12's in the quarter mile, pulls loads well over it's rating on a consistent basis and it's never leaked a drop on my driveway since I had some skirt gasket fixed under warranty when I bought it about 2 and a half years ago.

If they keep things up with twin turbos on the 6 bangers, most people driving diesels won't even need their diesels unless they just like the sound (and there's plenty like that). After all, the good old 12v Cummins only has 6 cylinders. Now that I think about it, my motor coach only has 6 cylinders in it's Cat C9 engine as well. I don't have any power issues with it either.