hope this isnt a repost but i found this interesting http://www.dieselpowermag.com/features/ford/0707dp_2008_ford_super_duty_gas_vs_diesel/index.html

 

This was posted several weeks ago.

Take the review with a grain of salt.

 

Sure, we're biased toward the diesel engine because we write for Diesel Power magazine,

This statement sums up the whole article. The diesel boys well aways try to come up with way of justifying the extra cost of there toys.

Denny

 

they have a good point about resale value,in my area v10's are a hard sell,where as powerstrokes sell themselves. i dont think their mileage claims are that far off either.they are very consistant with my experiance with a 2000 f250 v10 and a 2004 f350 6.0 powerstroke.pulling 15k dump trailer with v10 5-6mpg's, 10-12 with the 6 liter.empty 10-12 v10,17-18 6 liter.the v10 is much cheaper to maintain though.if you want a diesel to save money you probably wont,but as far as power goes,no question about it.in stock form there is no comparison,chip the diesel and add a free flow exhaust and hold on.

 

When you talk about chipping the diesel you start to change the way that it was designed to run. Sure a programmer adds a lot of power but i have heard that some programmers can make the egt's on diesels go near or above 1800. So you can add a lot of power but at what cost?

 

Nobody I know gets 18mpg (22-23 mpg imperial) with a 6.0.
And 12 mpg with 15k?
Not where I live. Which apparently is in the real world.

 

My dads '05 6.0l got 18 mpg when we picked my torino in W.V. with a 18' heavy equipment trailer in tow. I don't recall the return trips mileage. Now thats what the computer said. Flat running to Carlise, Pa the computer said 20 mpg. My '00 V-10 get 15 mpg empty and pulling a 16' bass boat I got 11 mpg. That was with pen and paper. Sock for stock I beat up on his truck from stop lights. But give that truck some space and it will rip. Once that turbo spools up look out. I raced him on I-294 and was beat up on. My truck has no rev or speed limiter so these were not an issue ... I just couldn't keep up. Now his old '99 7.3L .. Ahhh those were the days of me being top dog.

 

Both the 04 and 05 that I have used and ridden in got less than 13 empty city/highway.
We hooked another 05 up to my 18 flat deck with a BJ60 on top and got 11mpg at 100 kmh.
But we did get 13 once on the way back from Winnipeg.
They pull nice when they aren't down with some kind of problem, but the fuel economy, ok for a 7500 rig, but not outstanding.

 

The PSD folks need to stop with the "my 6.0L" or "my 7.3L" got this mpg. This article is talking about the '08 6.4L PSD. According to early reports...this engine is not getting what the older PSD's would get...and not even close.

On another hand...glad to read the article. Always appreciate comparisons...and like seeing the head2head!


biz

 

Friend of mine bought a 2005 6.0 and I bought the same truck (basically) with the V10. He gets 15 when I get 12. It's definitely a difference, but not as much as he thought. I thought I'd get 10 - 12, he thought he'd get 17 - 20. I'm happier with my mileage than he is, although he still gets better mileage.

 

that is the purpose of adding the biggest free flow exhaust you can

 

believe what you want but i am not the only one posting these numbers.it has always been a fact that diesel engines are more efficient than gassers,there is just no way to get around the btu output of the two fuels.the v10 is a great engine cheap and reliable,but the diesel is great in its own respects too.power vs. power there is no comparison(not to mention the ability to add power).the WVO thing is great too.diesel technology is definately the way of the future,but after all that is just my opinion!

 

Here is the problem I have with buying another V10. In 1996 I bought an F250 with the 460. Gas was "high" at $1.20 but I thought what the heck I need power. 10 mpg average would just be the price I paid for towing. Then in 2004 my son bought the V10 and we always compared the two. He got about 13 not towing and I continue to get 10. His V10 is undoubtably a smoother engine but requires more RPM to develop torque. So in towing applications I get slightly better mpg. Our boats weigh in about the same.....5000 lbs. In towing I still get around 10 on trips of 250 miles and his V10 gets about 9. So his engine is penalized more from towing because it needs more rpm to get torque where as the 460 gets 400 lbs of torque at 2200 rpm.

So now as I move through the decisison process of the next truck I must look at how long I keep tow vehicles and what in the world will fuel cost in 5 to 10 years. If the same trend continues and it goes up by 3X then I could be paying $8 or $9 per gallon in just a short time. This whole thing is getting crazy. I think I'm holding out for a more reliable smaller diesel with somewhat less torque but more mpg!! Come on Ford, give us what we want. This torque race is stupid.

I cannot even find a V10 to test drive!! I called Ricart in Columbus Ohio which is supposed to be the largest dealer east of the Milky Way Galaxy and they acted insulted that I would even consider the V10. They don't stock them.

 

The mags numbers for the 6.4l are pure BS. Go down to the 6.4l section and see what those guys are getting mpg wise with there 6.4l in a "Real World" situation. You will soon see there arn't getting even close to the mpg numbers the mag posts.

A 6.8l V10 with a 4:30 costs $6200 less, has less torque has better reliability and still gives the 6.4l a hell of a fight. That alone speaks well for our 6.8l.

 

I agree, the 6.4 forum drivers are not happy with their milage.

The other thing the article doesn't really talk about is the up keep. They say at 12k miles a year, you break even after about 4 years in gas savings. Now add up the extra maint cost and the overcome that with milage it will be be a lot longer than 4 years.

I'd have no problem buying a PSD if I needed the extra TQ. 200 more ft lbs would be nice but I don't need it for my enclosed car hauler. 9-10K tops.