Pumped! Getting 2017 experience early 😉
Hotshot
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 10,120
Likes: 652
From: NH
I'm not sure how true that is - there probably is a little more, but it seems the 6.7L has a couple of limiting factors for additional power development now, including the somewhat weak connecting rods and the CP4.2 fuel pump. I think both of these things need to be upgraded to reach the 500/1000 benchmark everyone is talking about.
Thread Starter
|
Lead Driver
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,665
Likes: 164
From: Cartersville, Ga
I'm not sure how true that is - there probably is a little more, but it seems the 6.7L has a couple of limiting factors for additional power development now, including the somewhat weak connecting rods and the CP4.2 fuel pump. I think both of these things need to be upgraded to reach the 500/1000 benchmark everyone is talking about.
As to the internals, they will live at the 500hp mark. Proper tuning will take them into the low 700s as has been proven by a few guys on PSA.
Lead Driver
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,940
Likes: 2,652
From: The Great State of Texas
That was classic....
Thread Starter
|
Lead Driver
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,665
Likes: 164
From: Cartersville, Ga
With the possible introduction of the L5P Duramax for 2017, I'm sure the opportunity will present itself for Ford to play that trick again. I figured they might increase the displacement of the current 6.6 Duramax, but it sounds like it will remain there. Maybe GM has a few tricks up their sleeves. We shall see. Rumored to be ditching the Garrett chargers for something else along with moving away from Bosch hardware and ECM. It will be fun to watch the race to 1000! Someone's gonna do it and I doubt it will be Ram being they don't have an auto slush box capable of doing it at the moment.
Hotshot
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 10,120
Likes: 652
From: NH
It was, but somehow GMs 397 horses and 765 foot pounds were strong ones, because the Duramax always seemed to do very well against Fords "upgraded" numbers. Indeed, TFL Truck just ran a current Duramax Dually up the IKE and it was quicker than the 900lb-ft RAM towing 21k.
Prolocutor
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 13,618
Likes: 1,245
From: Western MA
It was, but somehow GMs 397 horses and 765 foot pounds were strong ones, because the Duramax always seemed to do very well against Fords "upgraded" numbers. Indeed, TFL Truck just ran a current Duramax Dually up the IKE and it was quicker than the 900lb-ft RAM towing 21k.
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Most Expensive Ford Trucks Ever Sold on Bring a Trailer
Joe Kucinski
2027 Ford Super Duty Buyer's Guide (Every Model, Engine, & Package)
Brett Foote
Top 10 Ford Truck Tragedies
Joe Kucinski
AEV FXL Super Duty - the Super Duty Raptor Ford Doesn't Make
Brett Foote
Lobo Vs Lobo: Proof the F-150 Lobo Should Be Even Lower!
Michael S. Palmer
Ford's 2001 Explorer Sportsman Concept Looks For a New Home
Verdad Gallardo
10 Best Ford Truck Engines We Miss the Most!
Joe Kucinski
Prolocutor
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 13,618
Likes: 1,245
From: Western MA
GM is not looking for that kind of bump. Take a gander at the Duramax forums. They are painfully optimistic for much lower numbers than that...
Lead Driver
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 6,676
Likes: 913
From: Milford, MI
With the possible introduction of the L5P Duramax for 2017, I'm sure the opportunity will present itself for Ford to play that trick again. I figured they might increase the displacement of the current 6.6 Duramax, but it sounds like it will remain there. Maybe GM has a few tricks up their sleeves. We shall see. Rumored to be ditching the Garrett chargers for something else along with moving away from Bosch hardware and ECM. It will be fun to watch the race to 1000! Someone's gonna do it and I doubt it will be Ram being they don't have an auto slush box capable of doing it at the moment.
) 
Thread Starter
|
Lead Driver
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,665
Likes: 164
From: Cartersville, Ga
Just wanted to update this. Since the project is moving a little faster, I started a new thread in the 2017 Super Duty section with a new video! Go check it out and feel free to ask questions (I'll answer what I can 
).
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...xperience.html
).https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...xperience.html
Hotshot
Joined: Apr 2013
Posts: 10,120
Likes: 652
From: NH
Hmmm...returnless fuel lines had advantages in gasoline engines: less plumbing, and less evap emissions by keeping the fuel cooler. On a diesel engine, aside from less plumbing, what would the advantage be? Diesel does not have the evap problems that gasoline does, and the return circuit actually has the cooler / heater function built in. Perhaps the thought it that the cooler would not be needed on returnless, and the heater could be electric or removed, and thus save some coolant routing as well. Maybe its not a bad idea.
Fleet Mechanic
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,865
Likes: 34
From: Annandale, VA
Returnless fuel injection system would mean no more metal shavings being shoved back to the fuel tank and through the entire fuel system when the HPFP fails.
I doubt we'll see a 9th injector. GM is the only company using it. I'd prefer it, but cost and complexity are working against us there.....
I doubt we'll see a 9th injector. GM is the only company using it. I'd prefer it, but cost and complexity are working against us there.....