6.7 without a doubt. ill take 400hp out of the box, yes please. great engine paired with an excellent trans

 

shake, i was strictly talking about the trucks with the 7.3 and i was assuming that you were/had replaced the 7.3s already, but as i now see they are still chuggin on down the road......

 

This is an interesting thread. I'm a very small business, and run only 3 trucks- the 3 in my signature. I bought the v-10 last. Mostly because I liked the CC lariat for personal useage and doubled its usefulness as a backup work truck. I figured I'd try the v-10 out as a possible option for 7.3 replacement when the time came. As far as towing my 7k trailer, it just doesn't feel right compared to the 7.3. Does it do it? Yes. Does it seem happy all day long on back roads? Not compared to the diesels. They go all day, and when you park them, seem a little disappointed that there's nothing else for that day. Not sure what I'll do when the time comes. Ride in a friends 6.7 the other night that was towing my JD 310 backhoe. It seemed happy to do it. Don't think my v10 could have.

 

Rob I take it you would rather be back working on the F16's since they are like our 7.3 PSD in the fact that they have stood the test of time and proved to be a good work horse or in the case of the F16 it is a good proven fighter jet.

Now if I could go back in time........ I would still pick a 7.3PSD over any of the lastest greatest diesel Ford has out!! There is no way I would ever own a Ford 6.7 !! But I was checking out yesterday a newer Dodge 3500 Mega Cab Cummins 6.7 DRW that had some modds done to it and
"That I would own." But can't afford to own it.
Mind you I dislike Dodge but I hate Ford for their 6.7 and I do NOT care for the look of the new Ford front end. Oh yea the newer Ford DRW has the ugliest rear dually fenders EVER !!

 

shake n bake... which are lower cost to maintain, your 7.3L or your V10's? Your post said your company has 7 or 8 of each.

If I had to guess, I would have thought the V10's to be cheaper to maintain. One third the oil, twice the interval.

 

Not to mention the teacup sized filter

 

Ed, you absolutely right on that. F16's and 7.3L are like the same when the F35 and 6.7 are like the same. On F16's we didn't have to hook a computer up to the jet just to do troubleshooting or operational checks as in the F35 you have to hook a computer up to do everything. And when operational checks don't go right then we reboot the computer and try again. And when I mean everything has a sensor on it , I mean it. And there is so much more room in each compartment, not like the F35 and the 6.7. I'm trying so hard to get back on F16's here at Tyndall AFB but the old F4 guys just don't want to retire.

 

Tell me the 6.7 has verticle take off.

 

No it sure don't and neither does the Air Force or the Navy version of the F35. But the working components of it is so sophisticated its really a HIGH maintenance aircraft. Now if they can get everything on that jet to work the way it should at the same time then it will be an awesome jet but that will never happen in its life time.

 

Is the 6.7 a PSD or Cummins? Heck we're talking time machines and ****e so we might as well throw the Cummins in the mix.

My buddy with the 6.7PSD enjoys the engine when it isn't costing him repair bills in the shop......3 DEF heaters, 1 radiator and some fuel components replaced......and he has only 85K on it and bought it with 65K on it.....color me not impressed....

The ride of the new rigs is outstanding compared to our chasis, as it should be with suspension updates etc. But the costs are just silly.

Also, for what many of us tow (6000-10000lbs) the 6.2L gasser might be a viable option as well. I was able to ride in a newer 350 Lariat with the 6.2 and a gooseneck horse trailer with about 3000lbs of horses in there and it was a the quietest thing I've been in......and it had zero issues with towing that load.

 

Great feedback!

Here are my thoughts when I posed the question:

When Stinky was at his worst behavior, I pondered getting a 6.0L and bullet-proofing it. I want a diesel - that's it - so the V10 is out of the question. I had a 460, and I won't go that route again. The Cummins is an awesome engine... but I hate the wrapper, and I'm not in a position to put one in a Superduty.

Posing the question also made me wonder about the possibility of some of us saying "hell yeah, 7.3L" in order to feel good about the choice we already made. Shake-N-Bake's assertion has a great deal of credibility, because his situation is not a singular scenario. The 7.3L (in stock form) is simply an enviable platform for anybody that works their truck hard. The fact that they are stretching the vehicle life to a specified limit (20 years) speaks volumes in an era where capitol equipment investments are sometimes amortized out (and replaced) in five years.

I have opted to blast away at my Superduty to return it to like-new condition and some have chastised me for my choice, others have looked at my situation with envy. I'm not saying there are those who want the misadventures I've endured (I'm a cautionary tale) - but there are those who wish they could muscle through their own woes as I have, and end up with a vehicle as capable as Stinky will ultimately become. I don't say this with hubris, just relaying the feedback I've received.

If I knew then what I know now - before the trail of Buck$Zooka craters - I think the bulletproof 2007 6.0 is best for my situation. Saying that... this would have taken me down a path I currently know nothing about, and I could be writing about wishing I would have gone with a 2000 7.3L and upgrading it.

Excluding the tools, accessories, and technology purchases (stuff useful on things other than the 7.3L or can be easily resold), I believe I've passed another milestone: I think I just passed the $30K mark on Stinky (including the purchase price). With that... Stinky has had all his rolling hardware restored to new condition, all sensors/controls are new, I have backup modules, plenty of life left on the engine (as per the compression test), upgraded power and transmission to the level of a brand new 6.7L, and modern electronics. Stinky cost half that of a new base 6.7L Superduty, and if I replaced the motor - I'd still be sitting on a pile of unused Buck$Zooka ammo by comparison.

If I were to take all the money and time I have into Stinky, plus add all the money and time I suspect I need to keep Stinky happy for the next ten years - then compare that with the cost of buying a 2015 6.7L and keeping it happy until 2025: I am quite literally betting the cost of ownership for Stinky from 2010 to 2025 will be less than going new today.

 

Thats okay rich, it pales in comparison to the amount of $ that goes thru these things in fuel costs. Since ive had mine (2005), i figured ive put over $50k into the ole girl just in fuel, throw in the purchase price (25k), a few sets of tires, several sets of front bearings, radiator, alternators(3x), water pump, a/c, and now trans, etc etc etc, hell ive easily got 100g's in the ole girl when you account for everything under the sun. But thanks to this website and all you boys it could be 150k if i had to pay someone else to work on her.... but funny thing is, im still spending money on her (i guess that what you do for the gals you love) , waiting on my turbo rebuild kit to come in the mail and a ww2. Then next year i plan on putting some new injectors in..... and it never seems to stop..... lol

 

What a silly thread.






















Everybody knows you need a DeLorean to go back in time, not a Ford pickup.

 

I can install a Mr. Fusion, a flux capacitor, and some stainless steel hubcaps.

 

What a testament to this engine!

Thanks, Greg, for your unbiased analysis as it relates to a larger fleet of non-OTR trucks.

My needs are not speed, but reliability. Given that, I would not move away from this engine even if given an enticing opportunity.

I was fortunate to stumble across this powerplant in my last truck purchase, and I doubt my luck could hold out SO well again.

Pop