Just wondering....Ford spent a lot of time and money testing the new 08 Super Duty in Alaska, towing a couple of 18000# trailers cross country, and generally trying to prove the 6.4 was ready for production.

What did all that testing show? What were the problems that came up? What was changed on production trucks as a result of all that testing?

Love my 08, just curious.

 

I'm sure what Ford didn't test was the everyday commuting many of these trucks do and the affects on regen that this duty cycle causes. Shame on them for this oversight.

 

Yea but I am confident I can hook my trailer behind it and goto Las Vegas with confidence unlike my 6.0,.........

 

All that testing in Alaska should ensure my truck will start everyday and be safe to drive during the Vermont winter no matter how cold and how much snow and ice.

 

I dunno.... I sorta put all my blame on international, not ford so much, It seems ford is always trying to fix internationals problems, then ford gets the bad rap.. Ill be glad when international is gone and ford is building there own diesel. Hopefully ford will redeam themselves in 2010. The 6.0 had a bad reputation, and the 6.4 isnt much better.

 

Easy there. I won't argue about the 6.0, but having driven and owned both engines, I think the 6.4 is WAY better. I don't mean to derail my own thread, but this is not about bashing the 6.4. I was just wondering what all the testing Ford did showed them.

 

Adam, I hate to bust your bubble, Ford has a long row to hoe, designing and building its own diesel. If they started 2 years ago it might be good, but withthe money crunch they are in, that is highly doubtful. If you want to see a surefire flop, buy the first one with their motor in it. The VT365 was hot rodded by Ford, from its highest output offering (there were several output levels) of 230HP and 620TQ as a VT365 to 325HP and 560TQ, then they threw a Powerstroke badge on it and hoped for the best. Now this is not to make excuses for IH, they knew the terms and conditions of the contract they signed with Ford. So in reality both parties are wrong. I think if IH had got involved (ligitagion against Ford) much sooner, things would have gotten better. I chalk it up to a missed opportunity for Ford engineers to learn something from IH engineers. I promise you this much though, Ford will be the loser in this deal. IH will find another light truck mfg. to supply engines to, thats a gaurentee.

 

I agree, i dont think i could have said it better myself. Ford is way behind in the light duty diesel engine race. It will end up a last minute problematic engine pushed out before its ready. IH will be a bad loss. IMO

 

Yes, but will it regen at 20F while you're on your way to work? I have my doubts, which are based on my own experience.

 

VT365 - 620 ft.lbs. @ 1400 rpms
6.0 - 560 ft.lbs. @ 2000 rpms

Thats some serious hot rodding.

 

Not bursting my bubble at all, I dont know all the facts, thats just kinda the way Ive felt about the international/ford relationship. I guess international and the 6.4 sorta let me down, and Im hoping for a miracle in 2010.. Not to bash, maybe my hopes were just to high.

 

Ah, looking at only one end of the spectrum, they had to turn it much faster to make it go from 230hp to 325hp. Torque is what was sacrificed to do this. I really wonder how much difference the "seat of pants" would be if we were able to run the IH calibration in our trucks. Also if IH stock files from the 230/620 would be much better as a reference point to tune from?

 

Yea, the Ford 6.0 was set to turn 3300 rpm to make that power compared to 2600-2800 on the VT365. Of course the same sort "light truck adjustments" were also made to the power curves on the 7.3, 6.4 and for that matter the B-series Cummins in their applications.
I keep seeing these claims that Ford cranked up the power and thats part/all of the reason for the issues with the 6.0. But what evidence exists that International didn't design the engine to do what Ford wanted and International "detuned" it for use in medium trucks?
Some might argue that Ford had more problems with the 6.0 than International did with the VT365, that maybe true, however I can tell you International has had plenty of VT365 issues and their customers typically are'nt tampering/modifying or being **** about oil leaks either.

 

Well one reason we have not heard mass ammounts of griping on the VT365 mediums is the fact that IH techs went to school long before the Ford dealership techs did. I spoke with a VT certified (365 and 275) when I had some issues with my 03. Their proceedures for warranty and failure analysis were night and day different from what Ford was doing at the time. Not tht this eludes to the original question, however, If you ask around the medium shops, they typically don't have repeat offenders for the same issues over and over again. It may all boil down to the same ammount of issues on either side of the coin, but if a guy with an F250 has to go back 7 times for the same thing and the Medium goes back once, who do you think is going to be happier? Even if the fleet owner has his whole fleet go in for the same thing as the first truck, but if they all come back fixed right the first time, it leaves much less of a sour taste in the owners mouth.

The only way to really know if the 6.0 was vastly different in tuning strategies than the VT counterpart would be to look at the programming of both. Then compair them to the different offerings of the 7.3 and 6.4 respectively. (just guessing, really don't know, but think that due to the displacement difference between the 7.3 and 6.0 the 6.0 was relying far more on its fuel system than it was displacement, given the major changes in pressure from one Heui system to the next, and trying to utilize a better flowing 4v head to compensate, the less cubes was probably strictly to try to meet emissions, which didn't work all that well, hence the larger 6.4 as well as the B moving up to 6.7 giving them a little wiggle room in tuning strategies) It would be nice to know for sure though.

 

Uhhh, WHAT???<O</O

no offence, but after reading that statement, I call into question the validity of your entire argument, which seems 'off-topic' anyways.<O</O