Anyone know why the geniuses at Ford de-tuned the 6.2 in the super duties to 385hp and 405ftlb of torque when the 6.2 in the F150's are rated at 411hp and 434ftlb of torque. Why would they de-tune an engine in a heavier truck that will be pulling and hauling heavier loads?

 

Because it is towing and hauling heavier loads..and you will be pushing the motor harder more often then a F150 would.

 

Plus I believe the power curves on the 150 are higher up in the rpm band. The SD 6.2 makes like 80% of it's power at 1000 rpms, and 90% of it's power at 2000 rpms. That's real power that you can use.

I have one and love it, you should drive one. Nice combo of power, and trans gears and shift points.

 

I have one, I have a 12 F350 and it feels under powered! I guess it is what it is because we don't have another gas engine to choose from but my wife's F150 with the 5.0 will run circles around this truck. There is no reason to de-tune an engine because it is in a larger truck, it just forces you to run the engine harder rather than being able to back of a little bit because you have the extra power. Coming from a 6.0H NO it is nice not to have to put thousands of $ a year to keep it running!

 

Sounds about right. On average a half-ton weighs a good 500 to 1000lbs less than a similar configuration 1-ton. That typically gives it a better power to weight ratio, even with an engine that has significantly less hp (like the 5.0L's 360hp vs the 1-tons 385hp).

With that in mind, even with a lower power to weight ratio, the Heavy Duty truck will still tow and haul circles around the light duty truck when the load gets heavy. They're totally different animals designed with a totally different duty cycle in mind. Hence the 6.2L's being tuned differently in the light duty trucks vs. the heavy trucks.

 

The powerband of the 6.2 is higher in the rpm range also. I think you have the power percentages of the 6.2 confused with the 6.7 diesel.

 

I read the 6.2 in the super duty has a different camshaft than the 150 and is designed to reduce knock / detonation under heavy, sustained towing....hence the slightly lower power figures.

 

Also remember the hp rating of the 6.2 in the F150 is rated on 91 octane while the 6.2 in the SD is rated on 87. 87 in the F150 6.2 drops it to 401 while 91 in the SD 6.2 brings it up to probably close to 395...

You will see an increase in hp just running a higher octane on the 6.2. Jettix2 is correct, the SD and F150 do have different cams.

 

I see what your saying about running 91 octane but that gets kinda spendy for a daily driver that only gets 10mpg.

 

True, but my point was that the hp is so close between the 2 motors that it's almost negligible... I doubt most would feel the 16hp/~20ft lb's tq difference (difference between the two on 87 octane).

 

I'd like to add some observasions if I may. With winter here and fuel mielage down I'm at the bottom of the 13mpg range. For grins I did 92 octaine the last three tanks and am now mid to upper 13's. I usually fill at half and it's around 20 gallons. There is a 10 cent difference from 88 octaine midgrade and 92 so 2 bucks a fill up. Two bucks in this day is pennys.

Are you guy's sure the power goes up with better than 87 octaine? Mileage did so I'm wanting to believe this is true.

If this is true I garantee I'll be towing the camper this summer with premium. A trip out to Vedauwoo and back won't cost me a 12 pak difference.

 

It's definitely true, that came from the 6.2 chief engineer (Mike Harrison) who was here a couple years back when the 6.2 was introduced.

Here's the post:
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/9...ml#post8833938

You oughta see what the truck does on 93 with a tune on it.

 

some quality info man,thx for the link! just hit 10,000 miles the other day and Ive ran nothing but 93 through that boss motor

yea pretty sure WOT is 4200 RPMS on our trucks,gona be your 90% reeling 100 in at 5500-ish.

 

unyalli - maybe it makes sense man ,I read 13.5 on the dash on 93 not towing

do a MPG formula on a full tank 87 , then compare it to 93 man. I would I wont let that cheap ethanol trash around these parts touch my injectors tho.not running corn oil through alaskan pipeline bros . lol