When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I think it mostly revolved around government regulations and new requirements for on-highway diesel emissions. Even Ford knew it was a good engine as they had it in place for 10 yrs, but the government likes to ruin things.
Same story I heard, emissions requirements. The 7.3 was hard to clean up. Ford rushed the 6.0 into service, and as a consequence the early ones had issues. 10 scariest words in the english language per Reagan? "I'm from the federal government and I'm here to help."
Also I think Ford wanted their own diesel, and Navistars' further development on the 7.3 (38r turbo most notable element) was not enough enticement to keep Ford as a customer.
7.3 is a robust architecture and that has great value to me, but it is dated. Newer diesels make more power, burn cleaner, etc.
Also I think Ford wanted their own diesel, and Navistars' further development on the 7.3 (38r turbo most notable element) was not enough enticement to keep Ford as a customer.
.
The 6.0 was a Navistar engine as well. It seems that clean burning diesels and reliability don't go together, although I think some of the smaller clean diesels from companies like Daimler and VW are more reliable. Trying to make big HP and torque and still keep it clean must be a real challenge. Hopefully in the future there will be more advancements which will allow for simpler, more reliable ways to keep the emissions clean.
Each new motor that has come after the 7.3 has been in response to new emission requirements that had to be met. The 6.0, the 6.4 and now the 6.7. Each has more emission controls than the previous generation.
The 6.4's are better suited for a work truck. A DPF/EGR delete helps with economy, and offers a slight improvement with mileage. City driving kills the mileage. I was shocked how bad mileage is just driving short distances. Highway ain't too bad, but not as good as my 7.3's.
Same story I heard, emissions requirements. The 7.3 was hard to clean up. Ford rushed the 6.0 into service, and as a consequence the early ones had issues. 10 scariest words in the english language per Reagan? "I'm from the federal government and I'm here to help."
Also I think Ford wanted their own diesel, and Navistars' further development on the 7.3 (38r turbo most notable element) was not enough enticement to keep Ford as a customer.
7.3 is a robust architecture and that has great value to me, but it is dated. Newer diesels make more power, burn cleaner, etc.
Originally Posted by bigb56
The 6.0 was a Navistar engine as well. It seems that clean burning diesels and reliability don't go together, although I think some of the smaller clean diesels from companies like Daimler and VW are more reliable. Trying to make big HP and torque and still keep it clean must be a real challenge. Hopefully in the future there will be more advancements which will allow for simpler, more reliable ways to keep the emissions clean.
All the Ford diesels were Navistar until the 6.7L. First one developed in house.
