Opinions on a Ford 7.3 turbo diesel

[DieselPower]

My '88 E350 (~150K) had these "major" problems:
Steering pump rebuild/replacement at about 12 years, had been leaking for 5
Auto (C6?) transmission has been leaking for over 10 years, about $3K to rebuild or $10 to $20 of fluid a year. So your father may just want to fil 'er up.
Water pump failure at highway speed on a trip

And don't get me started about the A/C - For a couple of years Ford put in O ring gaskets with springs. It was a great "engineer idea". But they leaked down in three years routinely.

A quick slip and you could pop them out and replace them, then add Freon at 75 cents a can.
BUT on the van (not the truck) two, back up on the firewall, are almost impossible to replace unless your hands are the size of a munchkin and your arms as long as Wilt Chamberlain.

So - I haven't had A/C in about 10 years.

However, nock on wood, it's been a remarkable beast for 21 years.
/edit and it tows my tractor.

If it's a 88 then it's a completely different engine. It is a 7.3L IDI (indirect injection) where the newer ones are 7.3L DI (direct injection), ones electronic and ones a mechanical.

Whoever told you it would cost $3,000 to rebuild a C6 is trying to rob you blind 2 times over. I can buy rebuilt ones all day long for half that and they have a 5 year warranty. It shouldn't cost that much to fix it if it's leaking. C6's are very easy to work on. About the only thing that will leak externally on them is the output shaft seal, pan gasket or front pump/input shaft seals. The pan gasket or output seal can be repaired in vehicle, both in under a hour and the front pump/input shaft seal and o-ring need the transmission pulled but still are rather simple repairs.

As for the spring couplers on the A/C system that to can be fixed by a competent repair shop that makes A/C hoses. The best thing to do is get rid of those spring loaded abomination of a couplers and get them to make up some hoses with either 45 SAE fittings or screw together compression type fittings. While your at it have them make the hose out of modern lined hose and just convert the system over to R134A so you can get rid of the liquid gold that is in there now. A couple hoses, about 3 pounds of R134A and a couple ounces of Ester oil and you'll be chillin' again.

 

[newbury]

<snip>
Whoever told you it would cost $3,000 to rebuild a C6 is trying to rob you blind 2 times over. I can buy rebuilt ones all day long for half that and they have a 5 year warranty. It shouldn't cost that much to fix it if it's leaking. C6's are very easy to work on. About the only thing that will leak externally on them is the output shaft seal, pan gasket or front pump/input shaft seals. The pan gasket or output seal can be repaired in vehicle, both in under a hour and the front pump/input shaft seal and o-ring need the transmission pulled but still are rather simple repairs.

I've had a couple of shops tell me that, however I'm in the Washington DC area and have found prices high here for quality, guaranteed, diesel van work. Compared to if I get it down to Mississippi. And like I said - it's <$20/yr for fluid.

As for the spring couplers on the A/C system that to can be fixed by a competent repair shop that makes A/C hoses. The best thing to do is get rid of those spring loaded abomination of a couplers and get them to make up some hoses with either 45 SAE fittings or screw together compression type fittings. While your at it have them make the hose out of modern lined hose and just convert the system over to R134A so you can get rid of the liquid gold that is in there now. A couple hoses, about 3 pounds of R134A and a couple ounces of Ester oil and you'll be chillin' again.

That sounds like what I may be doing if I start to haul family in it in the summertime, but my "traveling family" has gone from 4 children, dog and SWMBO to SWMBO, and although I like the rumble the 16MPG cannot compare to my 40MPG Jetta station wagon.

 

[crashz]

My father had a 95 F350 dump, PS diesel, auto and 4x4. We went from an 86 GMC with a 350 gas engine to the Ford. What a huge power difference! Took a while to get used to it, but it was really a good truck.

No major issues with the Ford other than the cam postion sensor, dual tank switch, and rear lights by the case full. He sold the truck two years ago and has been wanting a 1 ton ever since. He's alread got big plans for my (new to me) GMC.

 

[DieselPower]

I've had a couple of shops tell me that, however I'm in the Washington DC area and have found prices high here for quality, guaranteed, diesel van work. Compared to if I get it down to Mississippi. And like I said - it's <$20/yr for fluid.

I understand prices are high in DC, I get there quite often since I live just up 270/15 a little way's. I'm not sure where you have asked but those are complete rip off prices and I mean really really bad rip off prices. I can get you a C6 built that can withstand 1,000 HP engines in all out drag vehicles that would still only cost $1975 to $2,225. A truck/RV C6 should cost you about $975 and a super duty for over 10,000 GVW should cost around $1,425 and that's with a huge list of upgrades. And these prices are for a transmission that has been dyno tested and includes a warranty. For about $100-180 it's delivered to your door.

I can't think of a C6 on the planet that would cost $3,000 other than if it had a solid gold case or something.

 

[Builder]

I have a chance to buy an 1995 F-350 dump truck with an automatic transmission and a 7.3L turbo diesel. Is this powertrain one of Ford's better ones, or one to avoid?
Anything particular to look for on this model?

Thanks

I've owned 6 of them. All of them ate transmissions like I eat lunches.
That's the E4OD tranny. It's barely able to withstand diesel torque. Pretty much another in the long list of beefed up Ford car transmissions.

The 7.3L is a decent diesel, but for its' displacement, not very powerful. 444 cubic inches oughta be able to muster more than 215HP & 485 ftlbs of torque.

Everyone will tell you to add a chip, intake and exhaust, which will add more power, but proceed to overpower the E4OD trans and shred it to pieces inside.

As was said before, cavitation is the killer on the Powerstrokes and if the additive was not added and tested at proper intervals, it's a ticking timebomb.

The truck chassis itself is the strong spot. Ford builds a sturdy framed truck.

If you could find one, I think a '95 Dodge with a Cummins and a manual trans or a IH 4700 dump with juice brakes and a DT466 would make you lots happier.

 

[Bill_C]

Cavitation was a problem on the IDI 7.3 engines but NOT usually an issue on the Powerstrokes. The 7.3 IDI was the 6.9 engine reworked, and those two had cavitation issues. The 6.9/ 7.3's are wetted liner.

The Powerstrokes are "parent bore" and not a wetted liner. Other than the same 7.3 liter displacement, they are totally different motors than their predecessors.

Proper coolant SCA levels will also help avoid cavitation issues.

Compared to todays engines, the 7.3 Powerstrokes can seem anemic. Compared to what was out there in '94, when I bought mine, they were hot rods. Exhaust and chip, and even DIY injectors, easy power gains can be had. Yes, they are hard on automatic transmissions, but those can be beefed up too.

 

[Builder]

Cavitation was a problem on the IDI 7.3 engines but NOT usually an issue on the Powerstrokes. The 7.3 IDI was the 6.9 engine reworked, and those two had cavitation issues. The 6.9/ 7.3's are wetted liner.

The Powerstrokes are "parent bore" and not a wetted liner. Other than the same 7.3 liter displacement, they are totally different motors than their predecessors.

Proper coolant SCA levels will also help avoid cavitation issues.

Compared to todays engines, the 7.3 Powerstrokes can seem anemic. Compared to what was out there in '94, when I bought mine, they were hot rods. Exhaust and chip, and even DIY injectors, easy power gains can be had. Yes, they are hard on automatic transmissions, but those can be beefed up too.

But cavitation is definately a potential problem on all 7.3's. Yes the liners are there, but if they become pitted, you have a problem. The difference with the Powerstroke is the cavitation is cheaper to fix than the 6.9L or the IDI because of the liners.

I found the whole SCA level testing to be a big PITA with the test strips and trying to match those silly strips with a paper color chart and a stopwatch, then trying to figure out how much additive was needed to match the color chart.

Then there's the whole CPS issue. Almost everyone with a Powerstroke had to keep one in the glove box for long trips.

Worst part of the 7.3L is the mickey mouse HEUI fuel injection system. Tougher to modify for power than a common rail and VERY expensive injectors to replace.

The 7.3L is really a school bus engine adapted to fit a pickup truck. More of today's diesels are purpose built pickup/small chassis diesels with the 6.7L Cummins being the lone holdout purpose-built medium duty diesel.

Although underpowered, y 7.3's never gave me much problems, I modified one to make about 400RWHP on fuel alone, but the transmissions behind the 7.3L left much to be desired.

 

[Bill_C]

?? The Powerstroke doesn't have liners to replace. The bore is directly into the block casting itself (hence the name "parent bore").

Now, is the 7.3 liter Powerstroke obsolete from a technological standpoint? Yep. Did the early ones have some problems? Yep, absolutely. The cam sensor certainly had issues--but I've had the same one in there now since '97 (though I do keep a $30 Ebay spare in the glovebox...). The dual mass flywheel on the manuals were not a good idea. The early air intakes did not seal well.

However, by the end of the production run--early 2000's and later--IMHO this had become a very reliable engine, for a pickup truck application. The last few years were compatible with lifetime coolants like the Cat ELC, so SCA testing was no longer necessary (if the owner put in ELC). The mechanical fuel pumps had gone to electric, the engine was intercooled, the DMFW was replaced by a conventional flywheel, etc.

Many folks like me can't afford a new $50,000 truck, so I've been hanging out at thedieselstop.com forum for the last 12 years or so and learning how to improve what I've got. Coolant filters can be added aftermarket, for example. Injectors can be rebuilt and modded by the DIYer. Electric fuel can be installed. With a couple grand or so, if I do all the wrenching, this motor can reliably put out well over 350 hp at the rear wheels.

Is the motor bulletproof? Nope, but it's robust enough for me to tote my travel trailer across country (and it's likely to be far more reliable than its successor, the 6.0). Is it as fuel-efficient as the Cummins? Nope. Is it as powerful "stock" as the Duramax? Nope, far from it.

Believe me, I'd love to be able to buy a new truck. I see plenty of shortcomings with my Ford truck as well as this motor, so I don't think I can be classified as a Ford "fanboy". I could certainly understand that a fleet owner, needing a medium to heavy duty diesel, wouldn't choose the Powerstoke as their power plant.

Yet, I don't think the 7.3 Powerstroke can be painted as a bad motor.

I do agree 100% that the automatic transmissions were not able to handle the motor. A prospective buyer should be prepared to send it to a reputable shop like BTS for upgrading.

 

[DieselPower]

But cavitation is definately a potential problem on all 7.3's. Yes the liners are there, but if they become pitted, you have a problem. The difference with the Powerstroke is the cavitation is cheaper to fix than the 6.9L or the IDI because of the liners.

I worked for both International and Ford over the years and have rebuilt dozens of the early 6.9/7.3L IDI engines and the newer 7.3L DI engines and neither engine platform has replaceable cylinder liners, they are part of the block.

The cam sensor issue was solved years ago with a upgrade in sensor technology and they no longer need to be shimmed. All of the 7.3L, 466E and 530E sensors were upgraded many years ago.

Much like the cam sensor problems the injector o-ring problems have also been solved years ago. The original composition o-rings that were prone to degradation has also been fixed with a upgrade in o-ring compound. Caterpillar (who actually designed the HUEI injection system) uses the same exact injectors in some of their engines but never had a problem with the o-rings, they got it right the first time. It just took IH a little while to catch on.

 

[DieselPower]

I found the whole SCA level testing to be a big PITA with the test strips and trying to match those silly strips with a paper color chart and a stopwatch, then trying to figure out how much additive was needed to match the color chart.

I'll fix that problem for you. Back when I worked for IH they gave all the tech's a little slide chart that was used to calculate how much DCA/SCA to a cooling system depending on the cooling system capacity and test strip reading. I'll dig it out and scan it so you can print it and make your own little slide chart.