Well if Ford would put an engine with down-to-earth power ratings in, maybe they would put a manual behind it again. A whole lot of 7.3s moved a lot of miles with 235 HP and 500 ft-lbs of torque, but somewhere along the line 400HP became a requirement. Too many hot-rodder ricer-diesels wanting a sports car that looks like a pickup truck, running around peeling out and "rolling coal" lmfao. The 7.3 might have taken til next Tuesday to get started, but they didn't have $19,000 HPFP failures either.

"But....ut...ut.... I can't tow my 28000# toy hauler at 90 MPH up I-70 without all that power!"

 

Interesting. The common-rail fuel system debuted in the 2008 Super Duty, and many think that happened as it's the simplest way to meet the requirement to regenerate the DPF. I only know of a few engines that don't use common-rail technology and have a DPF.

Another interesting point is that the 6.4L engine only has 25 more horsepower than the 6.0L engine. Which, BTW, is only a 0.5 HP increase in specific power. Meaning the common-rail technology wasn't responsible for the horsepower increase; the displacement was. Furthermore the EPA killed the 7.3L, not hot-rodders.

 

I'm not arguing that the 7.3 could meet emissions, I'm saying that if instead of squeezing more and more power of the engines, Ford could run a more reasonable power rating and maybe get back some of the "ruggedness" that used to be associated with diesels.

The 6.4L as the MaxxForce 7 only puts out 200-230HP and 580-620 ft-lbs and works perfectly fine, why did Ford need them to push it up to 350HP and put dual turbos on it? Because some F250s needed to really haul ***** to the grocery store? The chassis of a SD can only tow so much weight, why do we need an engine that's 200HP shy of a C16 Cat highway enginge to tow 1/4 of the weight? Less power + more gears, but I'd wager the "average pickup driver" is more worried about it driving like a car than towing like a truck.

 

The EPA may have killed the 7.3, but the HP wars can't be blamed on them.

Years ago I was hoping the 4.4 would be offered in a Super Duty after it's roll out as a half ton diesel. A 4.4 in the neighborhood of 300hp with a stick shift transmission would have been the ideal truck for me.

 

Because nobody will buy a turd like that.

 

I love all of the preachy guys here about how trucks make too much power and how they are too much for people and blah blah blah.

Who flippin' cares?

 

i dont know my dads 2000 7.3 runs and tows everthing we throw at it, i nor my dad could ever see spending 50 to 60k on a new diesel when the "old schooled champ" does the same work plus more!

 

sh$t even my baby 5.4 tows everything i hook her too, she might not be able to do 90mph towing 15k but is that what you really want? A 22k coffin on wheels?

 

apparently everyone whos been posting

 

It's the same thing as people complaining there's no manual. It's a tool, and instead of a sledge hammer maybe we want a tack driver. But Ford killed the Ranger so we're stuck in over-built 7-lug half ton wonderland with the F150, or hot-rodded diesel ricer-world with the Super Duties.

 

And I get to wait behind people like you who are towing using a truck that is way underpowered. Yay.


Only the heavy F-150 is a 7 lug...

If you don't want a powerful motor why not get the gasser?

 

Apparently you didn't see the Ohio truck meet results...

 

Underpowerd, no. slower than the diesle when towing, i will agree. Thing is, even the weak lil 5.4 is more powerful then the previous gen pushrod engines and even has more hp than the big old 460.

But back to the original topic, I would love to see a manual trans back in these trucks and a more conventional looking front end. Not so fond of the droopy eye look going on currently, nor the enormous air dam. Fantasy land here, but I'd love to see a recreation of the old 73-79 body style, love those trucks.

 

If we're talking fantasy land, how about building a truck where half the motor isn't tucked up under the cowl and crammed up against the firewall. If the stick shift is gone, there's no reason to keep the tranny tucked under the hump anymore. Get rid of those huge plastic fan shrouds and slide the motor forward so you can actually see the darn thing.

 

First of all the Maxxforce 7 is rated between 230-300 HP. Secondly, many people don't buy Super Duty trucks because they need them, they buy them because they want them. Heck, anyone that needs to tow less than ~9-10,000 lbs can get by with the F150, but many like to be not maxed out. And before you say it, I've hauled 46,000 lbs for a GCW of 79,000+ over some of the highest grades in the nation with 435 HP. If my company owned an 800 HP engine I would want it, it's no fun to go 25 MPH up a hill!

Say what you want about the "average pickup driver" but they are the ones plunking down $40K+ to buy the vehicle. If Ford offered your 230 HP diesel in their super duty pickup there would be very few sales, as people would flock to the nicer driving GM and Dodge trucks. I liked the GM and the Dodge pickups, but what sold me on the 2011 Ford was the engine. Not just the power, but the refinement, transmission, and fuel efficiency.

I can't afford two car payments. So when I needed a truck I did not buy an F350 and a Taurus, because I can't afford that. I bought the F350 and expected it to haul the kids, groceries, and my butt to and from work every day. Many folks demand much more than just a tool, and if your ideal truck was available they wouldn't be driving a Ford. Myself inclusive.

I'm pretty sure the manual tranny had nothing to do with it. Has more to do with handling(engine centerline behind axle) and safety(crumple zones before the engine!) than anything else. Would be great from a service perspective, but I don't think possible without a LONG hood!