The Super Duty is not a heavy duty truck. Looking at the track record of Fords diesels from 03.5'-10' is enough of a reason but there are a lot of others.

 

I'd much rather show up at my destination a few minutes late in a gasser, rather than not at all in a diesel.

Ford's diesels from '03-'10 have a very bad track record. I actually passed on buying my "dream truck" last weekend. 2008 F350 4x4 dually, reg-cab long-bed, 6.4L, 6-spd manual. Only 22k miles on the truck!
I passed on buying it because of the 6.4L. If the truck was a V10, I would have bought it right then and there. It seems that when these 6.0 & 6.4 Powerstrokes leave you stranded on the side of the road (I said when, not if), then it usually costs many thousands of dollars to fix it. Then, you start the break-down clock over again.

I am actually looking at a 2013 F350 4x4 6.2L Dually. I hate to buy an automatic...but how long am I going to wait for a 2010 V10 6-spd?

 

I'm sure that Ford has already played with other engines in superduty trucks just to see what a reasonable alternative would be. Dumping the extremely reliable 6.2L is dumb especially since Ram has recently come out with a 6.4L gasser and GM still uses what ever junk they use.

I can see the 3.5L EB as a base engine in the lightest available superduty truck but I think the MPG's would be horrid, worse than the 6.2L.

If it were my chessboard, I'd make the 6.2L the base, develop a boosted V-8 as a great alternative to the 6.7L and of course, offer the 6.7L as the premium engine.

 

Honestly ive always felt that if your buying a 1 ton or a three quarter ton truck it should be diesel, however the prices seem a bit steep so i think it would be kinda cool to see some super duty gasers with a ecoboost 5.0.

 

5.2 EB V8 as an option. The 5.2 could be borrowed from the future Mustang GT500. Keep the 6.2 as the base engine. It is solid and handles CNG and propane as well as gasoline. Ford has a lot of fleet customers running CNG now.

 

"Give me a 7.0+L motor that produces it's max HP under 4500 RPM, and torque under 4k."
If you don't have one now, you'd better get one soon!

 

I do. I have a mild-built 460 (466ci) that's quite impressive.

All ford needed to do was bump the V10 up to 7.2L or so...direct inject, and whatever the new motors are doing with variable valve timing. Easy 400hp and 500ft-lbs at a lower RPM

 

The 6.2 is a solid engine that isn't going anywhere anytime soon. Poll is pointless.

 

I wonder when they will put the 2.7L Ecoboost in them?

 

Don't give Ford any ideas, though they probably thought of it already.

 

Early Superduty 5.4L: 235hp/335ft-lbs tq (@ 3000rpm)

Ford 2.3L 4cyl Ecoboost: 285hp/305ft-lbs tq (@ 3000rpm)

With an aluminum body and a 10-spd transmission I'm waiting for Ford to introduce their 4-cyl Superduty!

 

And watch the CHT and EGT of the 2.3l rise, rise and rise.

It is pretty worthless just to compare power output and think it will be hunky dory. Ever notice how engines used in medium duty and heavy duty trucks often have fairly low output vs engine size compared to an SUV or LD truck? There is a reason for that. Weight, heavy drivetrain, towing and etc for longer periods of time gives the powertrain a workout.

 

Just bought a new 2015 F250 6.2L... so far I like it, but only has 500 miles on it. 12.1 MPG ain't the greatest, but you don't buy these suckers for the fuel economy!....I need a heavy work truck and $8000.00 for the diesel and $.80 more per gallon for fuel persuaded me to go gas this time around.

 

As long as we are dreaming....6.2L....forced induction! 450-500 HP, 550-600 lb-ft torque. Might as well go big or go home

 

Sorry, too much and somewhat off-topic, but here goes...

The 6.2L is proving to be a reliable workhorse over the long-term. I see the standardized towing tests on YouTube that compare the time to tow 15,000 lbs. up a challenging hill show the 6.2L performing right up with best of recent and current Ford engines. Many people in YouTube videos and forum threads seem surprised with the capability of the 6.2L. Also, its design is somewhat based on the proven aspects of the Triton line, but having a larger block, improved breathing, changes to prevent the old Triton spark plug ejection troubles, etc. The post featuring “mike-v8ford”, the 6.2L development lead engineer ( https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/9...as-engine.html ), explains some impressive design features for power, durability, and economy. It was planned right from the start to be a dedicated truck engine, a “big-block” (by modern standards), not to be also used in taxis and cop cars. The R&D and tooling-up costs invested in deploying the 6.2L are probably starting to be returned. It’s in its fifth year of use, apparently with few fixes / changes having been required. It seems to complement the 6.7L Diesel nicely as the gas alternative in the Super Duty line. I’m looking forward to see if it’s used in a new generation of the Super Duty Econolines.

I think the 6.2L will be in use for quite a while yet. As a previous reply stated, there are only so many MPG you can get with a gas engine in a truck this size. A certain amount of energy is required to bring ten or fifteen thousand lbs. from a stop to 60 MPH. Innovations need to get pretty extreme to get one or two more MPG, and as yet, I think the Super Duty line is not included in the CAFE standards (note that there are no EPA MPG ratings on Super Duty window stickers) because they are classified as fully commercial vehicles. Super-tech turbocharging and high pressure direct injection seem to predict a lot more systems to malfunction and $$$ in repair eventually. I just can’t imagine running a half-size maxed-out engine at full turbocharged power for extended periods of time without getting it stressed and hot. Those engines are designed for relatively brief full power output, for example, enough to accelerate Dad and Mom, two kids, and some groceries, in a chrome F-150 up the on-ramp onto the freeway. Also, will the 3.5L actually rotate the Super Duty’s Sterling 10.5 rear axle, even with the rear wheels lifted off the ground? Ha ha, sorry, couldn't help myself…

Yes, I have the 6.2L in my 2012 Super Duty, so I am no doubt biased in favor of it. It is a Super Cab short box XL, so it is one of the lightest configurations – still around 7,000 lbs. – and it really roars. Whenever I take somebody new for a ride they can’t believe the power. I got my first speeding ticket in 20 years the first week I had it! And it has that kind of effortless acceleration at legal speeds, give it a little gas and that great V-8 burble sweeps you up to speed, uphill from a stop, barely getting to 3000 RPM. Unladen I am getting 16 MPG on longer trips on the old slower highways (55 MPH = a lot less wind resistance) with lots of hills and some stop-and-go sections. I know that would drop a lot pulling a heavy trailer, but wouldn’t it decrease similarly with the small turbo? And, adding insult to injury, the F-150 V-6 has “sound enhancement”, the stereo system playing a V-8 soundtrack to cover the drone of the V-6. That really bothers me for some reason… it’s like when we were kids, putting playing cards in the spokes of our bicycle wheels for a motorcycle sound. Who wants to just pretend to be driving a V-8?