surveyorjp
Missouri
Senior Member
Joined: 09/05/2005
View Profile
 Offline
|
If this has already been posted, I apologize. I just found this article and found it interesting, especially if your are a Ford fan.
http://www.pickuptrucks.com/html/news/fo........rpion-diesel-said-to-have-big-sting.html
390 horsepower, 720 lb/ft of torque, and better fuel mileage! Very impressive! It just might be the shot in the arm Ford needs and I am sure they are anxious to end the soured relationship with Navistar after the 6.0L PSD debacle.
2005 Surveyor SV-291 Tows smooth as silk!
1995 Dodge Ram 1500 Laramie SLT 4x4 5.9L V8 low miles, It ain't pretty, but it's paid for!
|
Bearnkat
Fort Worth, Texas
Senior Member
Joined: 07/30/2004
View Profile
|
Personally I love my 6.0 PSD and my Ford F250 Lariat. It's an incredible combination for towing. I'm anxious to see what the new engine is going to be like for a future tow vehicle.
Chuck & Terry
2005 Pilgrim 281RB-S
2006 Ford F250 Lariat CC 4x2 PSD
My Lap-Band Journey!
Chuck and Terry's Pilgrim Adventures
C & T's Photos
North Texas Camping Association
Lone Star Dutch Oven Society
|
Perrysburg Dodgeboy
Perrysburg, Ohio USA
Senior Member
Joined: 12/06/2003
View Profile
|
That sounds cool but why up the HP/Torque? Why not get the mileage up to were a diesel should be? Sounds like Ford still has not pulled their heads out from their backsides, along with the other Two of the Domestic Companies. Come on guys we need MPG NOT MPH get it right for a change! I know your reading this!
Don
Perrysburg Dodgeboy
2004 Dodge Ram 2500 Quad Cab SLT Cummins HO
2005 Keystone Cougar 304 BHS
pics
|
Cabriolet86
Rochester, MN
Senior Member
Joined: 09/16/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
Quote:That sounds cool but why up the HP/Torque? Why not get the mileage up to were a diesel should be? Sounds like Ford still has not pulled their heads out from their backsides, along with the other Two of the Domestic Companies. Come on guys we need MPG NOT MPH get it right for a change! I know your reading this!
Don
The new Scorpion is for the HD trucks. If you want the gas MPG, you can get the new light duty diesel that will be available in the F150. I believe that will have HP in the high 200s, torque in the low 500s with gas mileage in the low-mid 20s on the highway.
|
SoCalDesertRider
SanDiego, CA, USA
Senior Member
Joined: 12/14/2003
View Profile
|
I agree! The current crop of diesel engines in the 3/4-ton and 1-ton trucks have plenty more than enough horsepower and torque with their 300-350 HP and 600-650 lb-ft for anything these trucks are capable of towing or hauling.
The trucks had enough power 5 years ago when the output was 250 and 500. And why go even larger on the engine displacement?
Why not drop it back down to around 6 liters, keep the power in the 300/600 range, and instead of only getting 3 mpg more, which is barely enough to offset the decrease in mileage between the 6.0 and the 6.4, then get 6 mpg difference instead, with is still plenty of power to tow or haul anything the chassis is capable of!
Ford just doesn't 'get it', yet...
92F350 CrewCab 4x4 351/C6
LoadNGo service body
69Bronco ATC250R CR500
20' BigTex flatbed carhauler
B&W TurnoverBall g-neck Curt Magnum rr DrawTite ft
HD springs Rancho9000s Bilsteins poly sway bushings
285/75-16E BFG AT on 16x8 Stocktons
4.56's & Lock-Rite rear
|
|
|
pronstar
The LBC
Senior Member
Joined: 11/20/2007
View Profile
Offline
|
It's not that a company "gets it" or not. Believe me, if automakers could flick a switch and give us the high-efficiency we want tomorrow, they'd all do it. But the state of the economy and high fuel prices are a relatively recent development.
It takes a LONG time for automotive product to reach market from the development stage. This engine made sense several years ago when it was in development.
Current trends (high fuel prices and a focus on MPG) will take a long time to affect the products we can buy.
2007 Dodge Ram 2500 CTD 4x4/QC/LB
2008 Stellar 23' Toy Hauler
|
surveyorjp
Missouri
Senior Member
Joined: 09/05/2005
View Profile
Offline
|
I actually agree with all of you, anything more than about 550 to 600 lb/ft of torque is really a waste in a pickup truck.
I just thought the increased numbers and better fuel mileage was something that Ford could really use because the Superduty line of trucks is very heavy when compared to the competition and as a result it pulls the hills slower and uses more fuel than the others. An increase in fuel mileage and some more power is a good thing for them at this point, not to mention getting away from the recent history with the 6.0L PSD.
It would be great if all manufacturers would offer at least 2 different diesel engines in their heavy duty pickups. A lower output engine around say 250 to 300 horse and 450 to 550 lb/ft. of torque with 20 to 25 mpg highway mileage would be suitable for most recreational pullers, and a higher output version 300 to 350 horse and 600 to 650 lb/ft of torque for those who want maximum pulling power and don't care so much about fuel mileage. JMHO.
|
no_bytes
Wisconsin
Full Member
Joined: 03/06/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
The truck/engine combinations the big 3 are putting out now get GREAT MPG, heads and shoulders above the combinations they put out just 5 years ago.
What kills the mpg's is EPA stuff; ultra-low sulfur, catalytic, dpf etc.
The big 3 are making great strides against some really tough regulations by the EPA. In my opinion it is a good balance, cleaner air, better vehicles and similar mpg's.
I hope they never make the MPG's the focus on the 3/4 to 1 ton trucks. I want them to continue to focus on what they are intended to be used for and that is towing and hauling heavy loads. MPG's can be a secondary target. If you want MPG's buy a Smart car, don't whine that the 3/4 to 1 ton trucks need to focus on MPG's. Too many of these vehicles were bought as grocery getters by soccer moms the last 15 years because fuel was cheap, now they complain it costs them too much money. Duuhhh!!
My mpg's suck on my 2008 F250 6.4 PSD, but there were some issues with the truck. I've got those fixed and I expect them to go up a little. I would like 16 mpg's around town empty, and 12 mpg's while towing. I'll have to wait and see how I do these next couple trips. It's tough to judge now because it is parked and only used occasionally.
|
surveyorjp
Missouri
Senior Member
Joined: 09/05/2005
View Profile
Offline
|
no_bytes wrote:The truck/engine combinations the big 3 are putting out now get GREAT MPG, heads and shoulders above the combinations they put out just 5 years ago.
Sorry, but in the area of Diesel engines, this is false. The current Dodge/Cummins can't even compare to the more fuel efficient Dodge/Cummins engines of the mid 90s to early 2000s. Sure they are more powerful, but many of us miss the days of a diesel pickup getting 20 mpg or more on the highway.
Ford and GM have the same problems. They have all engaged themselves in a torque war, and have forgotten the fact that one of the primary benefits of a diesel engine is the combination of torque AND fuel economy.
I stand by my earlier post and say it would be great to have two different diesel engines in the 3/4 and 1 ton trucks. One for economy and still good power, and one for maximum pulling power.
|
SoCalDesertRider
SanDiego, CA, USA
Senior Member
Joined: 12/14/2003
View Profile
|
Maybe they could put the smaller diesel in the F250/350 SRW trucks that are often used for dual purposes and put the bigger diesel in the F350DRW/450/550 trucks, where max power is more important and the trucks are seldom used for daily commuting.
|
|
|
