DFW Mustang Forums banner

6.7 PSD power rating. Suck it cummin lovers

583 Views 30 Replies 15 Participants Last post by  X86X
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
I know I hope these are real world numbers when it does come out.
Wait till they add all the emission bullshit on and see what it does.
Power isn't the reason I own a 5.9....it's b/c I want to get to my destination, and b/c I've heard way too many stories about $3K-$4K repair bills on the shitty fuel systems in those later model PSDs.

Don't get me wrong, I still prefer the Ford truck over the Dodge truck, but their powertrain has a terrible track record ever since they mistakenly went away from the good ole 7.3.

I've owned three 7.3 trucks, and I loved every one of them. I'll admit that my current Dodge has been giving me some heartache, but it has nothing to do with the Cummins engine that is in it.

Navistar is going to have to do a lot more than post some good horsepower numbers to win back my confidence.
Power isn't the reason I own a 5.9....it's b/c I want to get to my destination, and b/c I've heard way too many stories about $3K-$4K repair bills on the shitty fuel systems in those later model PSDs.

Don't get me wrong, I still prefer the Ford truck over the Dodge truck, but their powertrain has a terrible track record ever since they mistakenly went away from the good ole 7.3.

I've owned three 7.3 trucks, and I loved every one of them. I'll admit that my current Dodge has been giving me some heartache, but it has nothing to do with the Cummins engine that is in it.

Navistar is going to have to do a lot more than post some good horsepower numbers to win back my confidence.
I totally agree. I won't by another diesel unless ford can not replace the 7.3 in my 97 truck.
Power isn't the reason I own a 5.9....it's b/c I want to get to my destination, and b/c I've heard way too many stories about $3K-$4K repair bills on the shitty fuel systems in those later model PSDs.

Don't get me wrong, I still prefer the Ford truck over the Dodge truck, but their powertrain has a terrible track record ever since they mistakenly went away from the good ole 7.3.

I've owned three 7.3 trucks, and I loved every one of them. I'll admit that my current Dodge has been giving me some heartache, but it has nothing to do with the Cummins engine that is in it.

Navistar is going to have to do a lot more than post some good horsepower numbers to win back my confidence.
No Navistar involved in this one. The Ford / Navistar partnership ended in January and Ford kept the rights to the Powerstroke name.

This is all Ford... their first in-house diesel ever.
I totally agree. I won't by another diesel unless ford can not replace the 7.3 in my 97 truck.
then why do you always seem to boast about the newer diesel engines? :confused:
then why do you always seem to boast about the newer diesel engines? :confused:
Just the newer ford diesel engines. They are not worth a fuck.
No Navistar involved in this one. The Ford / Navistar partnership ended in January and Ford kept the rights to the Powerstroke name.

This is all Ford... their first in-house diesel ever.
Hmm...well then, this could get interesting.

<----thinks back to when GM attempted to build their own diesel....er....I mean convert a gasser to diesel.
Sounds good on paper, but it's the real world where it really counts. Ive always liked the styling of the fords better than chevy or dodge but you just can't beat the cummins in reliability.
but you just can't beat the cummins in reliability.
I think the biggest thing is the fact that there is no SCR on the 2010+ Dodge trucks.
What is scr?
It's the new answer to lowering nox. Basically it's a cat that they inject urea into. It's another thing to go wrong and it's just something else you will have to remember to fill. From what I have heard the urea additive will not be cheaper per gallon and I'm not sure how much the systems hold.
...

It looks like they test the shit out of the engine, trying to find its weaknesses.

Ford says it has put the 6.7-liter engine through a vigorous testing scheme to identify any potential weaknesses or quality concerns before the first units wind up in the hands of customers.

A 250,000 mile durability test looks for structural fatigue points. It simulates the driving habits of 95th percentile Super Duty customers who pull the heaviest loads. The engines are placed in a dyno cell where they spend nearly 6 hours running continuously at peak torque and then 3.5 hours at peak grade power to prove out connecting rod and rotating mass strength. The cycle repeats for 1,200 hours, or 50 days of running.

A thermal fatigue test is used to prove out the engine assembly process by stressing the head gasket, joints, radiator connections and other seals. For this test cycle, the engine is idled and then throttled up to peak power for about 14 minutes. That’s enough time for the engine to get red hot. It’s then shut off and 16-degrees below zero coolant is pumped in and allowed to soak for a few moments before the engine is fired back up to rated power. The shock loop is 150 hours long, or 75 cycles.

A structural test is run to make sure the engine’s build tolerances and parts acceptance criteria are set properly, so there are no surprises during production. Engines are built using actual parts with purposely incorporated defects that simulate the worst quality issues Ford has seen in production, such as low head bolt torque or inclusions in the piston casting bowl. It’s a new test that the Scorpion team determined was necessary if the engine was going to be built in-house.

Finally, there’s a real-world wear test that, like the durability test, simulates the operating conditions and applications of Ford’s 95th percentile customer. Fully assembled Super Duty engineering test mules are run over 250,000 miles of the most grueling roads in the U.S. with the toughest grades in temperatures that vary from -40 to 130 degrees. It’s the equivalent of 10 years of services in six months. Two-hundred test points are measured at peak rated power and torque over every speed range to make sure the engine’s entire real world operating spectrum is tested.

At the end of each of these tests, the engines are broken down and the team examines every component, looking for problem areas. When problems are found, they’re fixed and then the test cycles start over again.
See less See more
Just like everyone said..it looks good on paper but wait til its actually out in the real world and put to work by guys who work their trucks alot. Hopefully its not another 6.4 disaster...guess we will see soon enough.
Hopefully its not another 6.4 disaster...
...or 6.0 disaster.
What is scr?
Selective Catalytic Reduction.

Basically, there will be another aftertreatment device in the exhaust system. Exhaust will go from the turbo outlet to the DOC (diesel oxidation catalyst) / DPF (diesel particulate filter) unit just like it does now.
After that it will flow through a "decomposition tube". In the decomp tube the DEF (diesel exhaust fluid) will be injected. The DEF is a 32.5% urea solution (w/ de-ionized water). In the decomp tube the exhaust heat will break the DEF down into ammonia.
This ammonia will travel with the exhaust gasses down to the SCR unit where it will hit more catalyst beds and turn NOx into N2 (nitrogen) and H2O (water).
Expect DEF usage to be around 1-2% of fuel usage.

DEF freezes at 11*F so the tank will have to be heated with engine coolant. DEF breaks down at 120*F, so prolonged storage in hot climates will reduce it's effectiveness... and there will be NOx sensors in the exhaust feeding back to the ECM to monitor this. You can not fill the DEF tank with any other fluids, as the ECM knows the capacitance of DEF and will derate the engine if it detects anything else (or if you run out).


Right now DEF is running around $8/gal in bulk but the price is expected to drop to $2-3/gal later this year as the distribution infrastructure expands.


Here's a bad scan of the label on a drum of DEF:
(Yes, it's a Cummins/Fleetguard product, but it's for other engines. The 6.7 Cummins Turbo Diesel in the Dodge will not need it)

(click)
See less See more
Selective Catalytic Reduction.

Basically, there will be another aftertreatment device in the exhaust system. Exhaust will go from the turbo outlet to the DOC (diesel oxidation catalyst) / DPF (diesel particulate filter) unit just like it does now.
After that it will flow through a "decomposition tube". In the decomp tube the DEF (diesel exhaust fluid) will be injected. The DEF is a 32.5% urea solution (w/ de-ionized water). In the decomp tube the exhaust heat will break the DEF down into ammonia.
This ammonia will travel with the exhaust gasses down to the SCR unit where it will hit more catalyst beds and turn NOx into N2 (nitrogen) and H2O (water).
Expect DEF usage to be around 1-2% of fuel usage.

DEF freezes at 11*F so the tank will have to be heated with engine coolant. DEF breaks down at 120*F, so prolonged storage in hot climates will reduce it's effectiveness... and there will be NOx sensors in the exhaust feeding back to the ECM to monitor this. You can not fill the DEF tank with any other fluids, as the ECM knows the capacitance of DEF and will derate the engine if it detects anything else (or if you run out).


Right now DEF is running around $8/gal in bulk but the price is expected to drop to $2-3/gal later this year as the distribution infrastructure expands.


Here's a bad scan of the label on a drum of DEF:
(Yes, it's a Cummins/Fleetguard product, but it's for other engines. The 6.7 Cummins Turbo Diesel in the Dodge will not need it)

(click)
What a clusterfuck!
It's the new answer to lowering nox. Basically it's a cat that they inject urea into. It's another thing to go wrong and it's just something else you will have to remember to fill. From what I have heard the urea additive will not be cheaper per gallon and I'm not sure how much the systems hold.
We have SCR's on our Gen Sets at work (3516 Cats). They are nothing but a friggn headache.
1 - 20 of 31 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top