I've been waiting for something very particular to reach the truck market. We see hints of it with Tow/Haul and multiple transmission strategies, but I'm waiting for multiple PCM strategies.

Dodge does it in the Hellcat with the "red key". I don't see why Ford couldn't produce multiple tunes for the 6.7L; they already do for the de-rated medium-duty engines (a few hard parts are different). We're used to having AWD-RWD-4hi-4Lo switches in vehicles, there have been two transmission programs since 2005, traction control, hill-start/braking assist, and a bunch of other 100% computer-controlled programs are entirely normal now. Where's the tow-haul-eco **** for the engine?

The biggest worry is burning up the engine with EGTs right? The sensors are already there on the 6.7L to watch, and none of the three tunes need to be super-duper power heavy over what is now the "stock" tune if the focus is increasing economy while maintaining a high power cap.

 

600 ft-lbs is way more than you need. It's absolutely ridiculous that you would even suggest such a high number. The 350 ft-lbs of the 2-valve 5.4L is more than enough to do whatever your 3/4- or 1-ton truck needs to do.

Sounds like you should be looking at the Ram 1500 diesel or Nissan Titan HD Diesel. Or even just a Super Duty gasser. For 2017 the 6.2L makes 150 more HP than the good ol' 7.3L and only 70 fewer ft-lbs of torque.

 

It sure would be nice if you could conduct yourself with some manner of respect for those who disagree with you. Snarky, sarcastic comments do nothing to further the discussion.

How about you respond to what I said on the previous page, that you seem to be ignoring?

Here it is again, so you don't have to go looking...

"Yes, some people tuned the crap out of the 7.3, for the exact same reason that manufacturers are in this arms race with power numbers. The consumers want the biggest, baddest truck on the road, even if it's not necessary for what they're trying to do. They sure as Hell weren't tuning and modding the crap out of them because the 7.3L in stock form wasn't enough truck. Like you just said, your K2500 with the small block could tow your fifth wheel just fine, even if you'd rather have a bigger truck.

Once again, the (two-part) question is this: Because truck manufacturers have effectively surpassed the needs of their target market, as well as the capabilities of the light duty truck class, both of which have been conceded multiple times in this thread alone, with their diesel engine development, what is the impetus at this point to pursue still higher power numbers, other than being able to say you have the most powerful diesel engine?

And, when will they instead turn their focus to developing higher MPG numbers and lower maintenance costs (higher reliability) instead of higher HP/TQ numbers, when 99.99% of their target market, meaning those who own and operate light duty trucks, will never notice ANOTHER increase in HP/TQ but they WILL notice an increase in MPG, and a decrease in repair bills?"

 

I wasn't being sarcastic about looking at the 6.2L gasser. Seems like you'd be happier.

And if you'd keep up with all the discussions, more power isn't just more fun, it's safer and provides more versatility.

 

I'm perfectly happy with the couple of diesels I own now. I rather enjoy being able to do almost anything that could possibly be done to the truck, in my own driveway. Can't say that about the 2017 6.2L.

I'm not the one that needs to keep up. The "more fun" aspect has been thoroughly addressed. We're past that. We're on to the real-life application of the power. First things first, no truck with any diesel engine, from the first 6.9 to the latest 6.7, could be called "unsafe" or "not versatile." The only thing "safer" about more power is the ability to get up to speed quicker while loaded, as when joining traffic on a highway, or maintaining speed in traffic while loaded, as when climbing a grade. When every new diesel engine is released, people are in awe over the truck's ability to do those two things better than the previous model. But that doesn't mean that the previous model did them poorly.

As for the "versatility" aspect, let's go ahead and address that. The 2007 6.0 Powerstroke was rated at 325HP/570TQ. In a one-ton, private use application, can you name ONE thing that you cannot do with that truck and those numbers, that you CAN do with the newest 6.7L Powerstroke at 440HP/925TQ? I doubt it.

After you've answered that question, I'd like to once again direct you to the two previously asked questions that you still haven't answered. Here they are again:

"Yes, some people tuned the crap out of the 7.3, for the exact same reason that manufacturers are in this arms race with power numbers. The consumers want the biggest, baddest truck on the road, even if it's not necessary for what they're trying to do. They sure as Hell weren't tuning and modding the crap out of them because the 7.3L in stock form wasn't enough truck. Like you just said, your K2500 with the small block could tow your fifth wheel just fine, even if you'd rather have a bigger truck.

Once again, the (two-part) question is this: Because truck manufacturers have effectively surpassed the needs of their target market, as well as the capabilities of the light duty truck class, both of which have been conceded multiple times in this thread alone, with their diesel engine development, what is the impetus at this point to pursue still higher power numbers, other than being able to say you have the most powerful diesel engine?

And, when will they instead turn their focus to developing higher MPG numbers and lower maintenance costs (higher reliability) instead of higher HP/TQ numbers, when 99.99% of their target market, meaning those who own and operate light duty trucks, will never notice ANOTHER increase in HP/TQ but they WILL notice an increase in MPG, and a decrease in repair bills?"

 

Christ. First you ignore how I pointed out its not just for fun, since that had been addressed already, and you flip from I when said safER to acting like I said anything else was UNsafe, then you ask if there's anything that CAN'T be done by and older truck that can now. If you're talking about purely checking a box, then the naturally aspirated diesel out of an '80s Mercedes 300D "can" be put to use in a truck to do whatever. Or a Cummins 4BT for that matter. I've driven some diesel cars and trucks in Africa and Europe that were not what I'd choose for myself. And manufacturers focus on whatever sells vehicles, based on consumer choices like mine.

Your capabilities or lack thereof on working on trucks is relevant only to your own choices. A 6.2L is cheaper, lighter, simpler, and easier to work on even by people with little skill in their driveway. If enough others make different choices, then that's what manufacturers are going to focus on.

In the meantime, de-tuned 6.7L trucks are already available. Get the computer out of one of those or have a tuner give you a custom de-tune and relax into your less powerful truck if it makes you feel better.

 

You really must be looking for an argument at this point. No, I didn't ignore anything. I addressed everything you said. Look for the sentences that begin with "the only thing 'safer' about more power..." and "As for the versatility aspect..." where I address your claims of more power being safer and more versatile.

Agreed. Nowhere have I said that the manufacturers should base their decisions on my preferences. As you say, it's my choice, so trying to tell me that I'd be happier with a 6.2 gas job really doesn't make any sense.

You are STILL entirely missing the point of this thread. It has absolutely nothing to do with what makes one person or another person "feel better". It's about why manufacturers continually choose to focus on improving HP/TQ numbers in light duty trucks given that they're well along the path of diminishing returns, instead of focusing their R&D dollars on more tangible benefits for the consumer, like cheaper purchase cost, cheaper maintenance costs, and higher fuel economy.

The fact that you continually go off on tangents instead of responding to the questions being posed to you shows that you're not interested in an intellectually honest discussion.

 

Interesting to hear the different view points though I wasn't expecting it to reach quite the extent it has. I was mostly just curious if there was anyone else thinking like me. Really like my current diesel and dread the thought of replacing it with a new one considering the total cost (purchase, maintenance, repair cost, etc). Add to that all the discussions from people glad they traded their diesel for a 6.2. I found myself asking what would it take to get me interested in a brand new diesel. To me, the 6.7 has simply out grown the light duty segment. It's just the ticket for medium duty but it's being shoe horned into the light duty. It' d be really cool to see what it'd do if 2 cylinders were shaved off. Yeah, you'd have to change the firing order, crank, etc, etc.

Once that's done, add on a factory tuner with economy mode, tow mode, county fair truck pull mode, etc.

 

Ugh wrong thread sorry