RV.Net Open Roads Forum: Tow Vehicles: Ford 7.3L gas power numbers

RV Blog

  |  

RV Sales

  |  

Campgrounds

  |  

RV Parks

  |  

RV Club

  |  

RV Buyers Guide

  |  

Roadside Assistance

  |  

Extended Service Plan

  |  

RV Travel Assistance

  |  

RV Credit Card

  |  

RV Loans

Open Roads Forum Already a member? Login here.   If not, Register Today!  |  Help

Newest  |  Active  |  Popular  |  RVing FAQ Forum Rules  |  Forum Posting Help and Support  |  Contact  

Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Tow Vehicles

Open Roads Forum  >  Tow Vehicles

 > Ford 7.3L gas power numbers

Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Page  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 13  
Prev  |  Next
Sponsored By:
danrclem

Ky.

Senior Member

Joined: 12/25/2015

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 08/18/19 03:50pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

ShinerBock wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:



I would call it a semi closed block similar to the 6.2, but with small slots between the cylinders for coolant flow.

Link



Thanks for the video. I would consider that more of a semi-closed deck too. Most semi-closed only have support front to bottom and right to left. The 7.3L block seems to have more than that. Either way, it definitely has more structural cylinder support than the 6.2L which will go a long way in longevity and how much power it can handle.

I would not be surprised if ford does not make a blown version of this engine for smaller vehicles. The block and other internals seem well equipped to handle it.


The 6.2 is known to be a good engine so if the 7.3 will outlast it then it should be a super engine. I'm anxious to see actual tests and see what it can do.

mich800

Pontiac, MI

Senior Member

Joined: 05/30/2004

View Profile



Posted: 08/18/19 06:17pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

RoyJ wrote:

That's weird, I can both click on link by wnjj, or directly view the photo I posted.

Anyway, the L8T makes just over 400 lb-ft @ 2000 rpm, but dips sharply down to 340 lb-ft @ 1000 rpm, in a fairly linear fashion.

The 7.3 holds on much stronger at low rev.


Are you a member of that forum? Most likely it links and logs you into the forum giving you authorization. Many forums make you have an account and logged in to view users pics.

Mr Biggles

Calgary, AB, Canada

Full Member

Joined: 08/05/2013

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 09/01/19 11:27am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

I will be looking for a truck in 2 years to tow 9-10,000 lbs. The 7.3 looks on paper to be the perfect engine for that weight. I will be watching this engine’s reviews closely.


2011 F-150 FX4 5.0 3.73 Tow package
2013 Evergreen i-Go G239BH

Groover

Pulaski, TN

Senior Member

Joined: 10/17/2007

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/10/19 07:19am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

I just came across the article that has some interesting comments about the 7.3.

2020 For truck engines

My favorite part:
"The wear evident on an engine dismantled for our viewing after 3,200 hours of max-output running (that's 133 days of 24/7 flogging) is apparently so minimal that it's difficult to extrapolate a projected failure mileage."

Also:
"Built To Last Indefinitely
The 7.3-liter's forged steel crankshaft features oversized main and rod bearings, and it's fixed to the block with four vertical and two horizontal cross bolts. Many of the materials in use are upgraded to turbo-engine specifications. The roller bearings on the valve tappets are carbon-nitrided, piston-cooling oil jets are employed, the valvetrain is fed much higher rates of oil flow, and the variable-displacement oil pump is designed to be able to increase oil flow to maintain pressure as bearings wear or when viscosity drops at very high temperatures."

The are also some interesting comments about the new diesel and transmissions as well.

ShinerBock

SATX

Senior Member

Joined: 02/22/2015

View Profile



Posted: 09/10/19 07:32am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

This comment

" they drop the compression ratio from 16.2:1 to 15.8:1."

Tells me that the new Powerstroke is going to have a fairly decent power ratings upgrade. They would have to reduce the compression ratio to meet emissions at higher power levels. However, fuel mileage may be slightly effected.

dodge guy

Bartlett IL

Senior Member

Joined: 03/23/2004

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/10/19 12:32pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Sounds like it’s ready for DI and forced induction.

However I’ll wait to see how it does before I say it’s the better than the V-10. The 7.3 has big shoes to fill!


Wife Kim
Son Brandon 17yrs
Daughter Marissa 16yrs
Dog Bailey

12 Forest River Georgetown 350TS Hellwig sway bars, BlueOx TrueCenter stabilizer

13 Ford Explorer Roadmaster Stowmaster 5000, VIP Tow>
A bad day camping is
better than a good day at work!


danrclem

Ky.

Senior Member

Joined: 12/25/2015

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/10/19 12:44pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

I've been thinking that there may be a turbo in the future for this engine. If a 3.5 can make the power that it does I have to wonder where a turbo would take this engine. Are there any reasons why a turbo wouldn't work with this engine?

The 7.3 as is would have more than enough power to do anything I'd want it to do so fuel mileage would be my only concern. I do expect it to have better mileage than my 6.2 but only time will tell.

ShinerBock

SATX

Senior Member

Joined: 02/22/2015

View Profile



Posted: 09/10/19 01:07pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

danrclem wrote:

Are there any reasons why a turbo wouldn't work with this engine?



This is a copy and paste of what I stated in another thread about this topic.

"Let me first state that I am a big fan of the 3.5L Ecoboost engine. I had one in both my personal F150HD and F150 work truck putting over 250k miles combined on both.

The main problem with putting a gasoline turbocharged engine into an SD is heat. Gasoline turbocharged engines create a lot of it when worked hard for a sustained period of time. This is why the 3.5L Ecoboost has an open deck block even though most turbocharged gasoline engines put in cars are closed or semi-closed such as the infamous Supra 2JZ block which is known for handling high psi and over a thousand horsepower. This is needed to carry away the cylinder heat when you are under a sustained high load such as towing. Most gasoline turbocharged engines in cars are not under high loads for a long duration of time like a truck is when towing so a closed or semi-closed will offer enough cooling in these applications.

Most HD/SD V8 gas are iron closed deck designs for a reason. This aides in long term durability in their duty cycle. These engines can have a closed deck block and still remain cool because they are generally at high rpm when under load which is moving air in and out of the cylinders at a high rate which aides in cooling. While turbocharged engines move a lot of air into the cylinder to compress it(which creates more heat), they generally operate at much lower rpm which causing more heat buildup in the cylinders and block.

Diesels are an iron(CGI) closed deck design, but even though diesels are turbocharged like the Ecoboost they retain a lot less heat within their blocks due to their higher thermal efficiency. It is much more efficient at converting thermal energy into mechanical energy so an open/semi-closed deck is not needed to keep them cool under high constant load.

There is much more to it than slapping any ole engine into an SD/HD truck application and calling it good. Many things would have to be considered. I am not saying it will never be done(especially with the new cooling tech that was just discovered) or that the Ecoboost is not a long lasting durable engine. I am just saying that the cooling requirements of an SD/HD duty cycle is probably the reason why Ford has not put a small 4.X V8 Ecoboost in an SD."

Bionic Man

Colorado

Senior Member

Joined: 04/03/2009

View Profile



Posted: 09/10/19 03:54pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

danrclem wrote:

I've been thinking that there may be a turbo in the future for this engine. If a 3.5 can make the power that it does I have to wonder where a turbo would take this engine. Are there any reasons why a turbo wouldn't work with this engine?

The 7.3 as is would have more than enough power to do anything I'd want it to do so fuel mileage would be my only concern. I do expect it to have better mileage than my 6.2 but only time will tell.


Forced induction on this engine would lead to absolutely TERRIBLE MPG.


2012 RAM 3500 Laramie Longhorn DRW CC 4x4 Max Tow, Cummins HO, 60 gallon RDS aux fuel tank, Reese 18k Elite hitch
2003 Dodge Ram 3500 QC SB 4x4 Cummins HO NV5600 with Smarty JR, Jacobs EB (sold)
2002 Gulf Stream Sea Hawk 29FRB with Honda EV6010

FishOnOne

The Great State of Texas

Senior Member

Joined: 02/12/2011

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 09/10/19 08:45pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

dodge guy wrote:

Sounds like it’s ready for DI and forced induction.

However I’ll wait to see how it does before I say it’s the better than the V-10. The 7.3 has big shoes to fill!


I would say the V10 was a good engine but not a great engine. I don't see any reason why the 7.3 won't exceed the V10's performance and durability.


'12 Ford Super Duty FX4 ELD CC 6.7 PSD 400HP 800ft/lbs
"Built Ford Proud"
'16 Sprinter 319MKS "Wide Body"


Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Page  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 13  
Prev  |  Next

Open Roads Forum  >  Tow Vehicles

 > Ford 7.3L gas power numbers
Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Tow Vehicles


New posts No new posts
Closed, new posts Closed, no new posts
Moved, new posts Moved, no new posts

Adjust text size:

© 2019 CWI, Inc. © 2019 Good Sam Enterprises, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Terms of Use | PRIVACY POLICY | YOUR PRIVACY RIGHTS