6.0vs6.6, 6.2vs7.3, 6.4 Hemi

   #1  

deerefan

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,057
Location
louisiana
Tractor
1952 8N, 2005 JD 5103
In a previous thread, I was looking at a gas 3/4 ton with the 6.0. I am finding some from all 3 with the newer gas engines for not a big money difference. What are your thoughts on the above comparisons? New are better? Junk? Let me know 🤷‍♂️
 
   #2  

4570Man

Super Star Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2015
Messages
16,046
Location
Crossville, TN
Tractor
Kubota M59, Kubota L3800, Grasshopper 428D, Topkick dump truck, 3500 dump truck, 10 ton trailer, more lighter trailers.
A 6.0 probably ranks at the bottom for power output and the top for reliability. I’d buy a 7.3 out of the rest of the options because I hate the new Chevy front end and I don’t like dodge either.
 
   #3  

Rebeldad1

Veteran Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
1,447
Location
Hughett Bend Washington
Tractor
Kioti Tractor, John Deere Mower,New Holland Mini Excavator
op is talking about gas engines.... are you? there are so many engine sizes its hard to keep them straight.
 
   #5  

coobie

Super Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
6,283
Location
S.Michigan
Tractor
Kubota RTV 1100c, JD 740,Kioti DK 40 with KL401 loader .
In a previous thread, I was looking at a gas 3/4 ton with the 6.0. I am finding some from all 3 with the newer gas engines for not a big money difference. What are your thoughts on the above comparisons? New are better? Junk? Let me know 🤷‍♂️
My 2016 ram 2500 with the 6.4 hemi was flawless and pulled great up to 12,000 lbs.

Attachments

  • IMG_0345.jpg
    IMG_0345.jpg
    5.1 MB · Views: 77
I have the 6.2 in my 2020 Yukon with the 10 speed but towing is only at 8600 lbs.

Attachments

  • tempImagejhqOp6.jpg
    tempImagejhqOp6.jpg
    4.3 MB · Views: 188
 
  
  • Thread Starter
#6  
OP
deerefan

deerefan

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,057
Location
louisiana
Tractor
1952 8N, 2005 JD 5103
op is talking about gas engines.... are you? there are so many engine sizes its hard to keep them straight.

Yes gas only. No need for a diesel.
 
   #8  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
My opinion:

The GM 6.0L is the most proven, but leaves a lot to be desired in regard to towing.

The new GM 6.6L is a beast, but has only been out a couple of years. It’s paired to a six speed transmission.

The Ram 6.4L is a good puller, but anything with cylinder deactivation starts out with a giant reliability weakness. The first version came out in MY 2014 and required 89 octane fuel. It is similar to, but very different than the 6.4L used in the Dodge sports cars. I believe it was in MY 2019, Ram moved from a six speed to eight speed transmission.

The Ford 7.3L is the current big dog, but has only been out around as long as the new GM 6.6L. In regard to purely towing capability (legal), this is the best.

The Ford 6.2L has been around, in the “Super Duty” line, since MY 2011. For MY 2017, the engine was revised and produced more torque at a lower RPM. This engine has a great reputation, for reliability. Prior to being used (in a de-tuned setup) in the SD line, it was used in the MY 2010 Harley Davidson F-150 and SVT RAPTOR. From MY 2011-2014, you could get the (full power) 6.2L in a regular F-150, as well.

The GM 6.6L, Ram 6.4L, and Ford 7.3L are used in the larger chassis cabs. The 6.2L never was used above an F-350. Prior to the 7.3L, the 6.8L V10 was used, in the F-450/F-550’s. The 6.8L V10 was put in F-250 to F-350 trucks, prior to MY 2011.

The 6.2L is a SOHC type. The rest listed are the old school pushrod.


With any of these, getting the biggest numerical value rear end ratio is a good idea, if you’re towing. My Ford 6.2L has the 4.30. None of them will get good fuel mileage, towing heavy. Gasoline engines make their power higher in the revolution range, these are large engines. Put that together and you get poor overall fuel economy.

My 2014 is a crew cab chassis cab with a ten feet long flatbed. It weighs around 9k pounds, with me driving and no load. My dump trailer is just over 5k, empty. It’s rated to around 15k and I’m frequently around that weight. I’ve pulled a few trailers over 20k and it does fine. I wouldn’t recommend the 6.2L, for that weight, everyday, but the Ford 7.3L is rated for it. One thing I like about the F-350, with the 6.2L, is it uses the same transmission as the much more powerful turbo diesel (a couple of small parts are different). I believe you will find this is true of the other brands, but I’m not sure. Note, the F-250 uses a “weaker” transmission, but it’s still highly regarded.


ETA: I forgot to mention the Ford offers a 10-speed transmission, now. The six speed is still available, but limited.
 
Last edited:
   #9  

Hay Dude

Super Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
9,389
Location
The Corrupt Rust Belt
Tractor
Case-IH MX-270, MF7495, Kubota M135XTDSC, Kubota M126XTDC, Kubota F3680, Kubota ZD331
A 6.0 probably ranks at the bottom for power output and the top for reliability. I’d buy a 7.3 out of the rest of the options because I hate the new Chevy front end and I don’t like dodge either.
It’s been Ram for like 4 years now, but whatever
 
   #10  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
Here are a couple of threads to read through:




And a link to your thread, which is worth rereading:



If you have specific 6.2L questions, I’m happy to help in any way I can.
 
   #11  

Hay Dude

Super Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
9,389
Location
The Corrupt Rust Belt
Tractor
Case-IH MX-270, MF7495, Kubota M135XTDSC, Kubota M126XTDC, Kubota F3680, Kubota ZD331
My opinion:

The GM 6.0L is the most proven, but leaves a lot to be desired in regard to towing.

The new GM 6.6L is a beast, but has only been out a couple of years. It’s paired to a six speed transmission.

The Ram 6.4L is a good puller, but anything with cylinder deactivation starts out with a giant reliability weakness. The first version came out in MY 2014 and required 89 octane fuel. It is similar to, but very different than the 6.4L used in the Dodge sports cars. I believe it was in MY 2019, Ram moved from a six speed to eight speed transmission.

The Ford 7.3L is the current big dog, but has only been out around as long as the new GM 6.6L. In regard to purely towing capability (legal), this is the best.

The Ford 6.2L has been around, in the “Super Duty” line, since MY 2011. For MY 2017, the engine was revised and produced more torque at a lower RPM. This engine has a great reputation, for reliability. Prior to being used (in a de-tuned setup) in the SD line, it was used in the MY 2010 Harley Davidson F-150 and SVT RAPTOR. From MY 2011-2014, you could get the (full power) 6.2L in a regular F-150, as well.

The GM 6.6L, Ram 6.4L, and Ford 7.3L are used in the larger chassis cabs. The 6.2L never was used above an F-350. Prior to the 7.3L, the 6.8L V10 was used, in the F-450/F-550’s. The 6.8L V10 was put in F-250 to F-350 trucks, prior to MY 2011.

The 6.2L is a SOHC type. The rest listed are the old school pushrod.


With any of these, getting the biggest numerical value rear end ratio is a good idea, if you’re towing. My Ford 6.2L has the 4.30. None of them will get good fuel mileage, towing heavy. Gasoline engines make their power higher in the revolution range, these are large engines. Put that together and you get poor overall fuel economy.

My 2014 is a crew cab chassis cab with a ten feet long flatbed. It weighs around 9k pounds, with me driving and no load. My dump trailer is just over 5k, empty. It’s rated to around 15k and I’m frequently around that weight. I’ve pulled a few trailers over 20k and it does fine. I wouldn’t recommend the 6.2L, for that weight, everyday, but the Ford 7.3L is rated for it. One thing I like about the F-350, with the 6.2L, is it uses the same transmission as the much more powerful turbo diesel (a couple of small parts are different). I believe you will find this is true of the other brands, but I’m not sure. Note, the F-250 uses a “weaker” transmission, but it’s still highly regarded.


ETA: I forgot to mention the Ford offers a 10-speed transmission, now. The six speed is still available, but limited.

I would suggest not just assuming “more gears is better”. I’m not saying you are, but some people have a “more is always better” mentality.
Vehicles are very complex and seemingly more so every year.

Simplicity to make repairs more affordable is not even considered anymore.
I have early 2000’s farm tractors. They still break and they still cost plenty to fix, but the new ones???? Wow!

Ive pretty much reached the point where if you buy a new vehicle, you better make sure it’s got ample warranty coverage, because you can’t fix much of anything anymore.
 
   #12  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
I would suggest not just assuming “more gears is better”. I’m not saying you are, but some people have a “more is always better” mentality.
Vehicles are very complex and seemingly more so every year.

Simplicity to make repairs more affordable is not even considered anymore.
I have early 2000’s farm tractors. They still break and they still cost plenty to fix, but the new ones???? Wow!

As far as “more gears is better”, we agree. From what I’ve seen (haven’t driven one), the new 10-speeds do a lot of shifting. For my use, I don’t spend enough time at one speed to get any benefit, from the extra gears. The six speed has been great. Add to that the new “extra gears” transmissions are not proven, in regard to reliability.

As far as simplicity of repairs, it doesn’t get too much easier than a V8 pushrod. Even my Ford SOHC is easy to work on, compared to most modern vehicles. Most parts are commonly available, too, which is nice. I do my own maintenance and repairs. It’s so easy, even I can do it.

Thats one thing about the lower trim gas engine “HD” pickups. They are the easiest vehicle to repair, other than a motorcycle. The higher trims complicates that, a lot.
 
   #13  

Hay Dude

Super Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2012
Messages
9,389
Location
The Corrupt Rust Belt
Tractor
Case-IH MX-270, MF7495, Kubota M135XTDSC, Kubota M126XTDC, Kubota F3680, Kubota ZD331
I’m just saying there’s no emphasis on simplicity or giving the owner anything easy to repair. It’s going in the other direction and it’s purposeful
 
  
  • Thread Starter
#14  
OP
deerefan

deerefan

Veteran Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2005
Messages
2,057
Location
louisiana
Tractor
1952 8N, 2005 JD 5103
As far as “more gears is better”, we agree. From what I’ve seen (haven’t driven one), the new 10-speeds do a lot of shifting. For my use, I don’t spend enough time at one speed to get any benefit, from the extra gears. The six speed has been great. Add to that the new “extra gears” transmissions are not proven, in regard to reliability.

As far as simplicity of repairs, it doesn’t get too much easier than a V8 pushrod. Even my Ford SOHC is easy to work on, compared to most modern vehicles. Most parts are commonly available, too, which is nice. I do my own maintenance and repairs. It’s so easy, even I can do it.

Thats one thing about the lower trim gas engine “HD” pickups. They are the easiest vehicle to repair, other than a motorcycle. The higher trims complicates that, a lot.

Nothing higher than XL/LS/Tradesman trim for me. I prefer 3.73-4.11 gears. This truck will be used as a farm truck mainly. Cloth seats and rubber floors are just fine.
 
   #15  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
Nothing higher than XL/LS/Tradesman trim for me. I prefer 3.73-4.11 gears. This truck will be used as a farm truck mainly. Cloth seats and rubber floors are just fine.

In regard to rear ratio, the Fords come with 3.73 or 4.30. The Ram with a 3.73 or 4.10. GM only offers the 3.73, in the 2500/3500 series.

The Ford 6.2L w/4.30 is rated about the sane as the 7.3L w/3.73.

I would definitely want the 4.30, with the Ford 6.2L and the 4.10, with the Ram 6.4L. With the GM 6.6L it’s not an option, so that’s easier. With the Ford 7.3L, I would want the 4.30, but it’s less important, if you’re not going to tow over 15k, often.
 
   #17  

oosik

Super Star Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2012
Messages
17,006
Location
AMBER, WA
Tractor
2009 Kubota M6040
My 2018 Ram 2500 Power Wagon has a 6.4 L hemi. 22K miles and not a single problem.

And, YES - the newer trucks are very complex.
 
   #18  

WilliamBos

Super Member
Joined
May 1, 2004
Messages
5,249
Location
Innisfil, Ontario, Canada
Tractor
MF 1635 12x12 Powershuttle
GM 6.6 is a huge improvement over the 6.0. The 7.3 is the Godzilla Pushrod big block, I would not touch a 6.2 with a 10 foot pole. The 6.4 Hemi is a great option if you do not want or need a Cummins.
 
   #19  

coobie

Super Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
6,283
Location
S.Michigan
Tractor
Kubota RTV 1100c, JD 740,Kioti DK 40 with KL401 loader .
GM 6.6 is a huge improvement over the 6.0. The 7.3 is the Godzilla Pushrod big block, I would not touch a 6.2 with a 10 foot pole. The 6.4 Hemi is a great option if you do not want or need a Cummins.
Have a a 6.2 engine with the 10 speed tranny in my 2020 Yukon and love it.21-22 mpg,s highway 18 mpg,s city/highway.
 
   #20  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
GM 6.6 is a huge improvement over the 6.0. The 7.3 is the Godzilla Pushrod big block, I would not touch a 6.2 with a 10 foot pole. The 6.4 Hemi is a great option if you do not want or need a Cummins.

Which 6.2L and why not?
 
   #21  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
Have a a 6.2 engine with the 10 speed tranny in my 2020 Yukon and love it.21-22 mpg,s highway 18 mpg,s city/highway.

The GM 6.2L, in the Yukon is not an engine available in a 3/4 ton.
 
   #22  

coobie

Super Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
6,283
Location
S.Michigan
Tractor
Kubota RTV 1100c, JD 740,Kioti DK 40 with KL401 loader .
The GM 6.2L, in the Yukon is not an engine available in a 3/4 ton.
I wonder why not? 420 hp with 10 speed IMHO is the sweet spot.
 
   #24  

Lineman North Florida

Veteran Member
Joined
May 12, 2008
Messages
1,113
Location
LaCrosse Florida
Tractor
Farmtrac 360 DTC with FEL & John Deere 5093E with FEL
I wonder why not? 420 hp with 10 speed IMHO is the sweet spot.
My wife has a 6.2 in her Yukon and I wondered the same thing, so I asked a GM mechanic, and he told me that those engines were like comparing apples and oranges, he said the 6.2 would never hold up to regular heavy towing like the old cast iron block GM 6.0 , my wifes 6.2 has been flawless but it only pulls itself, I wonder if the new 6.6 gas motor has Active Fuel Management? I sure hope not.
 
   #26  

WilliamBos

Super Member
Joined
May 1, 2004
Messages
5,249
Location
Innisfil, Ontario, Canada
Tractor
MF 1635 12x12 Powershuttle
My wife has a 6.2 in her Yukon and I wondered the same thing, so I asked a GM mechanic, and he told me that those engines were like comparing apples and oranges, he said the 6.2 would never hold up to regular heavy towing like the old cast iron block GM 6.0 , my wifes 6.2 has been flawless but it only pulls itself, I wonder if the new 6.6 gas motor has Active Fuel Management? I sure hope not.
No AFM/DFM or start/stop.


 
   #27  

LD1

Epic Contributor
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
21,013
Location
Central Ohio
Tractor
Kubota MX5100
If you look hard enough on the internet, you will find good opinions and bad opinions for all of those engines and each of the big 3 brands.

At the end of the day, they all have their pros and cons....and cost of ownership over the lifetime of the vehicle is likely gonna be similar no matter what route you take. I have found that vehicle reliability/durability is more a function of who is driving and how its taken care of rather than the name on the front and the engine under the hood.

One thing is for sure....all the modern 3/4 tons are quite capable trucks, even with gassers. And any combination you choose will likely serve you very well. For me, my decision wouldnt come down to whats under the hood or what name is on the truck. But rather what I like, driving, handling, ergonomics, options, and price.
 
   #28  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
I wonder why not? 420 hp with 10 speed IMHO is the sweet spot.

It is a light duty engine, it is not designed for heavy duty work. The new 6.6 gasser has 401 HP/464 torque.

WilliamBos beat me. The short version is the GM 6.6L is made to make its power all day, each day, at a lower performance per dollar cost versus the GM 6.2L light duty engine.


The GM 6.2L is designed to get higher horsepower numbers at higher RPM, at a higher compression ratio. The GM 6.6L has a lower compression ratio and uses 87 octane, instead of the Premium fuel the GM 6.2L uses.

In this case, we are comparing the L87 (6.2L light duty engine) versus the L8T (6.6L HD engine).

Here are some key differences:
Detail - L87(6.2L) - L8T(6.6L)
Compression - 11.5:1 - 10.8:1
Block - Aluminum - Iron
Fuel - Premium - 87 octane
Cylinder Deactivation - Yes - No
Redline - 6,000 - 5,600

The big difference between the L87 and the previous GM 6.2L L86 is Dynamic Fuel Nanagement versus the previous Active Fuel Management.
 
Last edited:
   #29  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
Well, I accidentally hit post, but wasn’t done.

Here is a factory dyno graph of the GM 6.2L L86 (looks the same as the L87):

FBA8987C-8093-434F-94F1-7E70587ED74B.jpeg


All you could want to read on the L86/87:


Here is the factory dyno graph for the GM 6.6L L8T:

FAF97566-3EBE-4406-A9B1-CEEF13D9A44E.jpeg



All you could want to read on the L8T:

An article comparing the two:


Notice how the L8T/6.6L makes more torque at lower RPM versus the L87/6.2L that does make more power, overall, but takes more RPM to make the same power, in the lower ranges.

Under the same conditions, the L8T will outlast the L87 due to having an iron block, lower compression ratio, a regular pushrod (no DFM), and being able to do more work at a lower RPM. And it will do it on less expensive fuel.
 
Last edited:
   #30  

WilliamBos

Super Member
Joined
May 1, 2004
Messages
5,249
Location
Innisfil, Ontario, Canada
Tractor
MF 1635 12x12 Powershuttle
Which 6.2L and why ?


In my original post I was refering to the Ford 6.2, I will not own one, not a fan of their Triton engines In a HD application. I would take an F250 7.3 Godzilla in a heartbeat.

In a truck application, I will never own a GM 6.2, no need nor use for a truck engine that requires premium fuel, especially at $5.96 a gallon.
 
Last edited:
   #31  

coobie

Super Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
6,283
Location
S.Michigan
Tractor
Kubota RTV 1100c, JD 740,Kioti DK 40 with KL401 loader .
In my original post I was refering to the Ford 6.2, I will not own one, not a fan of their Triton engines. I would take an F250 7.3 Godzilla in a heartbeat.

In a truck application, I will never own a GM 6.2, no need nor use for a truck engine that requires premium fuel, especially at $5.96 a gallon.
Actually the owners manual states 93 oct.fuel preferred NOT required in the 2020 Yukon with the 6.2 motor.$5.96 for imperial gal.I assume? It's $3.85 per gal where I live.
 
   #32  

WilliamBos

Super Member
Joined
May 1, 2004
Messages
5,249
Location
Innisfil, Ontario, Canada
Tractor
MF 1635 12x12 Powershuttle
Actually the owners manual states 93 oct.fuel preferred NOT required in the 2020 Yukon with the 6.2 motor.$5.96 for imperial gal.I assume? It's $3.85 per gal where I live.
No, $1.583/L which is $7.20/Imperial gallon, $5.95/US gallon.

Even so, I have no need/use for the 6.2. I'm looking at a gas HD/SD truck next.
 
   #33  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
In my original post I was refering to the Ford 6.2, I will not own one, not a fan of their Triton engines In a HD application. I would take an F250 7.3 Godzilla in a heartbeat.

I get not liking Triton engines, but what does that have to do with the Ford 6.2L? The last Tritons in an F-250/F-350 were the 5.4L V8 or 6.8L V10. The 6.8L V10 was used in the F-450 and up, as the heavy duty gas option, until MY 2020, but in 2011, the new 6.2L became the F-250/F-350 gas engine.

The 6.2L is a vast improvement over any Triton. One of the Ford forums hosted an engineer from the build team. I don’t recall all the particulars, but other than being SOHC and in a V, they share very little.

One of the big differences is the 6.2L is over square versus the Tritons, which were undersquare. The bore centers of the 6.2L are 115mm, versus the 110mm of the Tritons.
Another big difference is the Tritons use one spark plug, per cylinder. The 6.2L uses two spark plugs, per cylinder.

Per the forum reports, the Ford 6.2L competes with the Ford 6.8L, a lot of people preferred the 6.2L over the other. Ford putting the 5.4L in the “HD pickups” was stupid. That engine never could compete, if someone actually wanted to get work done. Also, the narrow oil channels that cause major issues for the Tritons was addressed with the new engine design.

There are several Ford 6.2L commercial vehicles with over 300k miles on routine maintenance. “Flatbed Ed” got around 417k miles on his first 2012 F-350 6.2L engine. He reported over 300k, on his second engine, earlier this year. When he posted that, he had nearly 750k miles, on the chassis and original transmission. He is a hotshotter, from one of the Ford forums.

8A9BDB28-8055-4AA0-A0CC-0ADFA14C3CE6.png







I posted all that to ask for clarification on why, specifically, you don’t like the Ford 6.2L engine. Mine has been great, but it is low mileage. Mine is also the first generation, with lower torque at a higher RPM. If there is something I don’t know about, but should, I’d like to know what it is.
 
Last edited:
   #34  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
Actually the owners manual states 93 oct.fuel preferred NOT required in the 2020 Yukon with the 6.2 motor.$5.96 for imperial gal.I assume? It's $3.85 per gal where I live.

It also says using less than 93 octane will lead to reduced acceleration and fuel economy. Yes, you can use 87 octane and the engine will retard timing, so it will run. However, it was not designed for optimal performance, at that octane and ignition timing, so it’s costing you, somewhere. In extreme cases, it can even cost you an engine.

8465A96B-9091-4D56-B2F6-60583CC986DC.png
 
   #35  

coobie

Super Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
6,283
Location
S.Michigan
Tractor
Kubota RTV 1100c, JD 740,Kioti DK 40 with KL401 loader .
It also says using less than 93 octane will lead to reduced acceleration and fuel economy. Yes, you can use 87 octane and the engine will retard timing, so it will run. However, it was not designed for optimal performance, at that octane and ignition timing, so it’s costing you, somewhere. In extreme cases, it can even cost you an engine.

View attachment 715619
I run 93 octane in my Yukon and my Dodge challenger because I am NOT cheapskate but thanks for that great advice.;)
 
   #36  

coobie

Super Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
6,283
Location
S.Michigan
Tractor
Kubota RTV 1100c, JD 740,Kioti DK 40 with KL401 loader .
I get not liking Triton engines, but what does that have to do with the Ford 6.2L? The last Tritons in an F-250/F-350 were the 5.4L V8 or 6.8L V10. The 6.8L V10 was used in the F-450 and up, as the heavy duty gas option, until MY 2020, but in 2011, the new 6.2L became the F-250/F-350 gas engine.

The 6.2L is a vast improvement over any Triton. One of the Ford forums hosted an engineer from the build team. I don’t recall all the particulars, but other than being SOHC and in a V, they share very little.

One of the big differences is the 6.2L is over square versus the Tritons, which were undersquare. The bore centers of the 6.2L are 115mm, versus the 110mm of the Tritons.
Another big difference is the Tritons use one spark plug, per cylinder. The 6.2L uses two spark plugs, per cylinder.

Per the forum reports, the Ford 6.2L competes with the Ford 6.8L, a lot of people preferred the 6.2L over the other. Ford putting the 5.4L in the “HD pickups” was stupid. That engine never could compete, if someone actually wanted to get work done. Also, the narrow oil channels that cause major issues for the Tritons was addressed with the new engine design.

There are several Ford 6.2L commercial vehicles with over 300k miles on routine maintenance. “Flatbed Ed” got around 417k miles on his first 2012 F-350 6.2L engine. He reported over 300k, on his second engine, earlier this year. When he posted that, he had nearly 750k miles, on the chassis and original transmission. He is a hotshotter, from one of the Ford forums.

View attachment 715614






I posted all that to ask for clarification on why, specifically, you don’t like the Ford 6.2L engine. Mine has been great, but it is low mileage. Mine is also the first generation, with lower torque at a higher RPM. If there is something I don’t know about, but should, I’d like to know what it is.
Was not a big fan of the ford with 6.2 my 2012 was a turd for pulling power compared to my 2016 ram with the 6.4 hemi.Both had 3.73 gears.

Attachments

  • Ford Truck 349.jpg
    Ford Truck 349.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 154

Attachments

  • IMG_0691.jpg
    IMG_0691.jpg
    7.7 MB · Views: 246
 
Last edited:
   #37  

WilliamBos

Super Member
Joined
May 1, 2004
Messages
5,249
Location
Innisfil, Ontario, Canada
Tractor
MF 1635 12x12 Powershuttle
I run 93 octane in my Yukon and my Dodge challenger because I am NOT cheapskate but thanks for that great advice.;)
I ran a few tanks of 87 in my 17 Ram hemi, I started running 89 and it made a huge difference. They recommended 89 for the Hemi.
 
   #38  

WilliamBos

Super Member
Joined
May 1, 2004
Messages
5,249
Location
Innisfil, Ontario, Canada
Tractor
MF 1635 12x12 Powershuttle
I get not liking Triton engines, but what does that have to do with the Ford 6.2L? The last Tritons in an F-250/F-350 were the 5.4L V8 or 6.8L V10. The 6.8L V10 was used in the F-450 and up, as the heavy duty gas option, until MY 2020, but in 2011, the new 6.2L became the F-250/F-350 gas engine.

The 6.2L is a vast improvement over any Triton. One of the Ford forums hosted an engineer from the build team. I don’t recall all the particulars, but other than being SOHC and in a V, they share very little.

One of the big differences is the 6.2L is over square versus the Tritons, which were undersquare. The bore centers of the 6.2L are 115mm, versus the 110mm of the Tritons.
Another big difference is the Tritons use one spark plug, per cylinder. The 6.2L uses two spark plugs, per cylinder.

Per the forum reports, the Ford 6.2L competes with the Ford 6.8L, a lot of people preferred the 6.2L over the other. Ford putting the 5.4L in the “HD pickups” was stupid. That engine never could compete, if someone actually wanted to get work done. Also, the narrow oil channels that cause major issues for the Tritons was addressed with the new engine design.

There are several Ford 6.2L commercial vehicles with over 300k miles on routine maintenance. “Flatbed Ed” got around 417k miles on his first 2012 F-350 6.2L engine. He reported over 300k, on his second engine, earlier this year. When he posted that, he had nearly 750k miles, on the chassis and original transmission. He is a hotshotter, from one of the Ford forums.

View attachment 715614






I posted all that to ask for clarification on why, specifically, you don’t like the Ford 6.2L engine. Mine has been great, but it is low mileage. Mine is also the first generation, with lower torque at a higher RPM. If there is something I don’t know about, but should, I’d like to know what it is.
Thanks for the info on the Ford 6.2, glad it takes after the V10, that is a solid engine.

I wonder if anyone has done an mpg comparison between the 6.2 and 7.3?
 
   #39  

WilliamBos

Super Member
Joined
May 1, 2004
Messages
5,249
Location
Innisfil, Ontario, Canada
Tractor
MF 1635 12x12 Powershuttle
Was not a big fan of the ford with 6.2 my 2012 was a turd for pulling power compared to my 2016 ram with the 6.4 hemi.Both had 3.73 gears.

Attachments

  • Ford Truck 349.jpg
    Ford Truck 349.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 154

Attachments

  • IMG_0691.jpg
    IMG_0691.jpg
    7.7 MB · Views: 246
Do you still have the Ram 6.4? Any issues with it?
 
   #41  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
Was not a big fan of the ford with 6.2 my 2012 was a turd for pulling power compared to my 2016 ram with the 6.4 hemi.Both had 3.73 gears.

Attachments

  • Ford Truck 349.jpg
    Ford Truck 349.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 154

Attachments

  • IMG_0691.jpg
    IMG_0691.jpg
    7.7 MB · Views: 246

Those are both good looking trucks. Every person I’ve read/heard say the Ford 6.2L was weak had the 3.73 gears or was expecting it to be at modern diesel performance. The Ram 6.4L is no slouch. I’ve been in a couple, but they were far extremes; a 2018 Ram 2500 (unknown rear axle) and a 2019 Ram 5500 (4.88 rear ratio really does a lot). I figured the 2500 would feel like a rocket ship, compared to my heavy as Hell F-350, but it wasn’t much different (using the butt dyno). My only gripe about the Ram 6.4L is the damned MDS. As of now, Range Technologies dies have a workaround. If they did, I would recommend it.
 
   #42  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
I run 93 octane in my Yukon and my Dodge challenger because I am NOT cheapskate but thanks for that great advice.;)

Just to make sure we are in the same page….I was not suggesting YOU were, but many people read these forums and many ARE the type to buy an expensive piece of equipment and cheap out on everything after the purchase.
 
   #43  

coobie

Super Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
6,283
Location
S.Michigan
Tractor
Kubota RTV 1100c, JD 740,Kioti DK 40 with KL401 loader .
Those are both good looking trucks. Every person I’ve read/heard say the Ford 6.2L was weak had the 3.73 gears or was expecting it to be at modern diesel performance. The Ram 6.4L is no slouch. I’ve been in a couple, but they were far extremes; a 2018 Ram 2500 (unknown rear axle) and a 2019 Ram 5500 (4.88 rear ratio really does a lot). I figured the 2500 would feel like a rocket ship, compared to my heavy as Hell F-350, but it wasn’t much different (using the butt dyno). My only gripe about the Ram 6.4L is the damned MDS. As of now, Range Technologies dies have a workaround. If they did, I would recommend it.
From my understanding there is some way to turn off the MDS in the Ram 6.4 hemi.I never took the time to figure it out.
 
   #44  

coobie

Super Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
6,283
Location
S.Michigan
Tractor
Kubota RTV 1100c, JD 740,Kioti DK 40 with KL401 loader .
Just to make sure we are in the same page….I was not suggesting YOU were, but many people read these forums and many ARE the type to buy an expensive piece of equipment and cheap out on everything after the purchase.
I hear ya these trucks/cars new are to dang expensive to cheap out on oil/gas products.
 
   #46  

Quickster2

Silver Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2005
Messages
115
Location
Michigan
Tractor
2005 Kioti DK45, Rhino FEL
My 2015 Ram Laramie 6.4L coming up on 60K miles trouble free. Original brakes still 30%, 4:10, and rear air suspension. I just wish it was newer with the 8 speed ZF tranny. Mainly used for towing and not my daily driver after it's 1st year.
 
   #47  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
Thanks for the info on the Ford 6.2, glad it takes after the V10, that is a solid engine.

I wonder if anyone has done an mpg comparison between the 6.2 and 7.3?

It takes after the 6.8L, in performance, but the 6.8L is a Triton. The 6.2L is not. Completely different builds.


From the forums, it seems the fuel mileage is comparable, between the two current Ford HD gas engines.
The 6.2L w/4.30 and a six speed is damn near the same, hauling specs and fuel mileage as the 7.3L w/3.73 and the ten speed. It seems the 7,3L owners are actually doing a bit better, when towing heavy, since the engine isn’t working as hard to do the same work.

As of now, the only new trucks to have the six speed are the F-250 with the 6.2L. The ten speed comes with all F-350’s and all 7.3L F-250’s.

It’s hard to make a case for a new 6.2L over a 7.3L engine. More power and the same/similar mileage is a Hell of a deal. The one case for a 6.2L F-250 is the proven TorqShift G six speed developed specifically for the 6.2L in the F-250, starting in MY 2017. Though not as robust as the regular TorqShift found in all the other six speed F-250/F-350’s, it still is more than capable and the gearing favors the F-250.

I plan to run my 6.2L several more years. After the 7.3L and ten speed get all the bugs worked out, I’ll likely move to that setup. Hopefully, Ford will bump the numbers a bit, on the 7.3L. There has to be a lot left on the table.
 
   #48  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
I hear ya these trucks/cars new are to dang expensive to cheap out on oil/gas products.

My brother and his group of friends thought they could save some money using E85 in their non-“FlexFuel” engines. Why? Because it was cheaper. They made it a lot longer than I expected. Today, all of those vehicles are in a junk yard or parted out. Dumbasses.
 
   #49  

Hoho223

Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2020
Messages
25
Tractor
Bobcat CT120
Yes gas only. No need for a diesel.
2016 F150 XLT 3.5L 6 cyl. EcoBoost. I don’t tow other than a dump trailer on occasion. However I know that when the pedal goes down in a need for speed, it takes off like a Jack rabbit.
 
   #50  

nikerret

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
725
Location
Kansas
Tractor
Kubota BX25D-1
Sold it last winter with 50,000 care free miles.

My 2015 Ram Laramie 6.4L coming up on 60K miles trouble free. Original brakes still 30%, 4:10, and rear air suspension. I just wish it was newer with the 8 speed ZF tranny. Mainly used for towing and not my daily driver after it's 1st year.

All of the Ram MDS-related failures I personally know of happened between 90k-125k miles. These we’re all fleet-maintained and our maintenance shop is well supplied, well funded, and well educated.

Personally, I wouldn’t keep a Ram with MDS longer than 100k miles, unless it had MDS disabled right out the gate. Even then, it’s an unknown, since I have zero experience with that setup.

Still better than the GM cylinder deactivation. The previous Actuve Fuel Management cut the cylinders in half. These were known to develop oil consumption issues around 40k-70k miles. The easier the driver treated the vehicle, the worse it was. Due to this, I put the Range Technologies on my 2013 Silverado 5.3L at 3,500 miles, right when I bought it. I traded it at 41k miles and it never had any oil consumption issues.

The current GM Dynamic Fuel Management is capable of using a combination of any cylinders. This system will let the V8 run on one cylinder, if it thinks it can do it. The only good thing about this system versus the older AFM is the AFM always stopped the same cylinders. The DFM can alternate what cylinders it stops.

The shop bought a few new GM 5.3L half tons with DFM. The first engine to go was at a little over 40k. After that engine was replaced, they started having trouble with another truck. That truck had fewer miles, but also got a new engine. It has now been decided no more half tons will be purchased, at all. They will exclusively buy F-250/2500 series in place of half tons, to stay away from the stuff that breaks.
 
 
Top