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

[Hay Dude]

So much brand loyalty and opinion backed up with so little fact.

 

[coobie]

So much brand loyalty and opinion backed up with so little fact.

I hear ya.I choose whatever truck/car fits my needs with some what dependability.No brand loyalty here.

Attachments

• 
  IMG_0345.jpg

  5.1 MB · Views: 199
• 
  IMG_0283.jpg

  3.8 MB · Views: 118
• 
  IMG_1285.jpg

  5.4 MB · Views: 224
• 
  IMG_0205.jpg

  6.9 MB · Views: 172
• 
  IMG_1432.jpg

  2.2 MB · Views: 184

Attachments

• 
  tempImagejhqOp6.jpg

  4.3 MB · Views: 481

 

[Lineman North Florida]

The 1999 to early 2002'ish 5.3 with piston slap are not oil burners in any way. The piston slap does not really hurt a thing albeit it is annoying as heck when engine is cold till the engines warms slightly and the piston expands and noise disappears. Pretty much fixed and a non-factor by late 2002. Heck if it happened on a modern truck with direct injection would not be heard over the noisey direct injection system.

it is the 2008 and newer 5.3's with displacement on demand that can be the problem child oil burning engines.

I bought my wife a new 2004 GMC Yukon with a 5.3 and a 2010 Chevrolet Tahoe also with the 5.3 and both were great vehicles other than burning oil , or at least oil disappearing, I couldn't figure it out as I had never had a vehicle that burned several quarts of oil between 4000 mile oil changes , they didn't smoke and there wouldn't be a drop of oil where they were parked, several mechanic's told me that it was AFM ( Active Fuel Management ), I wouldn't have bought my 2015 Chevrolet 2500 HD if it had AFM, but the 6.0 didn't and so far hasn't burnt a drop of oil that I can tell between oil changes, many folks talk about disabling the AFM with a plug in to the OBD diagnostic port and swear that their 5.3 doesn't burn a drop of oil, that would be the route I would have tried had I had known about it back then. I have several friends who have put over 250,000 miles on the 5.3 engines and I thought that was impressive for a gasoline engine.

 

[Egon]

I still like the 383.

 

[nikerret]

So much brand loyalty and opinion backed up with so little fact.

Yep. Here’s the real truth….every brand has winners and losers. When I worked for the County, the Sheriff’s Office and Road Department were always switching brands, trying to find what did and didn’t have issues. Often, the issue was either the engine or the transmission; usually, not both.

Based on what I’ve seen, the Ford 4.6L was one of the toughest, most forgiving engines ever made. We only had one go down. Ever. That was after the idiot driving ripped the oil pan off and ignored the warning lights. Still made it over fives miles, before the car stopped. Moron.

Anything with cylinder deactivation is sketchy, at best. The GM AFM was infinitely better than the current DFM, and the AFM sucked. The Ram MDS is better, overall, than the GM system, but after 100k miles, the Ram engine has put in its two-week notice. If you get any of the “Friday afternoon” engines with cylinder deactivation, plan on a new engine, in 40k miles.

The GM 6.0L will always set the bar for a HD pickup engine, in regard to reliability.

The new Ford 7.3L and GM 6.6L are too new to know, but what I’ve seen, from the GM 6.6L’s, thus far, has much promise. Same goes for the 7.3L, but the County doesn’t currently have one.

I‘m terrible at brand loyalty. My first car was a Plymouth. The first car I chose was a Subaru. Then a Ford, then a Chevrolet, then a Ford, then a Buick. I buy what checks the most boxes, within my budget. When I bought my work truck, it just so happened the first truck I found was the Ford.

 

[nikerret]

The Ford 6.2 is a modular based engine with slightly bigger spacing between bore centers. Google anything you desire from Wikepedia to various press releases from various sources and they all pretty much state the 6.2 is a modular based design. I will say it is likely the best of Ford's modular family IMOP but that was a low bar of achievement in some cases.

Saying the Ford 6.2L is “modular-based” is more incorrect than correct. Yes, there are some similarities. There are also some big differences. Per Mike Harrison, lead engineer in the 6.2L, the 6.2L was all new, taking the best concepts from all of Ford’s previous engineering.

Ask the engineer for the new 6.2l gas engine! - Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums

1999 to 2016 Super Duty - Ask the engineer for the new 6.2l gas engine! - Similar to a recent thread, where we had the lead engineer for the new 6.7 PSD engine on here, Adam Gryglak https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/918940-a-ford-representative-joining-us.html A gentleman called Mike Harrison...

www.ford-trucks.com

Ford Motor Company 6.2 Liter V8 Engine - Big Change

Ford's newest gasoline V-8, the 6.2-liter, is an interesting development. Architecturally it doesn't much resemble other Ford engines once above the head gasket

www.motortrend.com

I know of a lot of issues with the 5.4L, but the 4.6L was incredibly tough.

I personally do not like the country mile of cam chains, chain guides, phasers, etc. Very expensive to fix when it goes bad. Also do not like the huge physical size of the engine of the modular family even when the displacement itself is small. For example Ford's new 7.3 gasser which is a borderline big block is physically smaller in physical size than even the 5.0 Coyote engine.

You have a point about expensive fixes, when a SOHC does go bad. However, based on the actual history of the Ford 6.2L, it seems that’s more theoretical than real (of course, some will have any issue you name, but the 6.2L isn’t known for any real inherent issues).

It is huge and heavy. No getting around that. Just another reason why the Ford 7.3L gas is such a big win.

As for the 6.6 GM gasser: Time may prove it to be a great engine simply do not know yet. I personally do not like siamese bores myself. I am old enough to remember how that failed back in the 70's when GM utilized Siamese bores to punch out the otherwise outstanding 350 small block to attain a 400 small block from the factory. The 400 was pretty much an utter failure. I do realize Cummins uses Siamese bores on the 6.7 so it can be done successfully but I still do not like it. Additionally I like Direct Fuel injection on an economy throw away cheap car but it is not my first pick for a heavy duty gasser truck. May prove out fine though as GM seems to have less issues with valves coking from direct injection systems as compared to some other manufacturers.

This is a question/guess, based on my very limited knowledge of Siamese bores, but I thought GM did some sort of extra cooling to offset the lack of traditions passages. Maybe I read it wrong or it was talking about something else. Either way, GM has a couple of years of R&D, since the 400 problems.

The DI is definitely a question. I seem to recall some growing pains, when they brought it to the 5.3L, in MY 2014. I haven’t kept up on it, though.

It will be interesting to see how the Ford 7.3L and GM 6.6L compare to their predecessors. With the current markets, it will be harder to compare. On paper, the Ford 7.3L is unbeatable, for a HD gas pickup. Simple and effective.

 

[deerefan]

Yep. Here’s the real truth….every brand has winners and losers. When I worked for the County, the Sheriff’s Office and Road Department were always switching brands, trying to find what did and didn’t have issues. Often, the issue was either the engine or the transmission; usually, not both.

Based on what I’ve seen, the Ford 4.6L was one of the toughest, most forgiving engines ever made. We only had one go down. Ever. That was after the idiot driving ripped the oil pan off and ignored the warning lights. Still made it over fives miles, before the car stopped. Moron.

Anything with cylinder deactivation is sketchy, at best. The GM AFM was infinitely better than the current DFM, and the AFM sucked. The Ram MDS is better, overall, than the GM system, but after 100k miles, the Ram engine has put in its two-week notice. If you get any of the “Friday afternoon” engines with cylinder deactivation, plan on a new engine, in 40k miles.

The GM 6.0L will always set the bar for a HD pickup engine, in regard to reliability.

The new Ford 7.3L and GM 6.6L are too new to know, but what I’ve seen, from the GM 6.6L’s, thus far, has much promise. Same goes for the 7.3L, but the County doesn’t currently have one.

I‘m terrible at brand loyalty. My first car was a Plymouth. The first car I chose was a Subaru. Then a Ford, then a Chevrolet, then a Ford, then a Buick. I buy what checks the most boxes, within my budget. When I bought my work truck, it just so happened the first truck I found was the Ford.

We had the 4.6 in a 1997 F150 4x4 extended cab. Not the most powerful, but absolutely reliable. I miss that truck. Owned it 21 years. Was our farm truck the last few years, then I gave it to a coworker who was going through hard times and needed a truck.

 

[nikerret]

We had the 4.6 in a 1997 F150 4x4 extended cab. Not the most powerful, but absolutely reliable. I miss that truck. Owned it 21 years. Was our farm truck the last few years, then I gave it to a coworker who was going through hard times and needed a truck.

Yeah, it wasn’t going to win any race it had to be fast, but could win an endurance challenge. I had three patrol cars with that 4.6L. Sounded great, but took a while to get to top speed. Once it got there, it could hold it as long as the road held out. My first and third car would top out around 130 MPH. My second car was limited to 120 MPH, but held it solid, regardless of wind or hills.

The Undersheriff, at one time, decided we were spending too much money, on oil changes. The shop bought 15-40 diesel oil, by the barrel and it was much cheaper than the 5w-20 that was supposed to be used. We ran the Motorcraft semi-synthetic 5w-20, during the warranty, but after 36k miles, we went to 6k mile changes and the 15w-40 diesel oil. Other than killing fuel economy a bit (probably about the same dollar worth as the right oil would have been), they ran fine. We did this, for years, until I gathered enough data to show we should just use the right oil.

 

[kenmac]

Now thats funny I have/had the 6.4 hemi with no issues.

Attachments

• 
  IMG_0807.jpg

  6.9 MB · Views: 200

did you look up the issue ? It's pretty well known these days.
Sadly, my son didn't research those issues when he bought the truck

The Dreaded Cam/Lifter Failure

www.ramforumz.com

 

[deerefan]

Yeah, it wasn’t going to win any race it had to be fast, but could win an endurance challenge. I had three patrol cars with that 4.6L. Sounded great, but took a while to get to top speed. Once it got there, it could hold it as long as the road held out. My first and third car would top out around 130 MPH. My second car was limited to 120 MPH, but held it solid, regardless of wind or hills.

The Undersheriff, at one time, decided we were spending too much money, on oil changes. The shop bought 15-40 diesel oil, by the barrel and it was much cheaper than the 5w-20 that was supposed to be used. We ran the Motorcraft semi-synthetic 5w-20, during the warranty, but after 36k miles, we went to 6k mile changes and the 15w-40 diesel oil. Other than killing fuel economy a bit (probably about the same dollar worth as the right oil would have been), they ran fine. We did this, for years, until I gathered enough data to show we should just use the right oil.

I ran 10w-30 dino in mine, changed it every 5k miles. With over 250k miles, it still had the original transmission. I serviced it every 50k miles. The engine was replaced at about 170k miles. It had developed a crack in the head. For 1k more than replacing heads, they put a new motor in with 5yr/100k mile warranty. The truck still ran good, but would blow coolant from the tank due to exhaust pressure from the crack.