Same gearing? I think the one time I saw this comparison the V10 was still using the 5R110.

I'd practically bet my new ordered truck that if you could specify a brand new 6.2L C/C and a brand new 6.8L C/C both with the same rear end gearing towing the same trailer the V10 would win.

 

I updated my post with more detail. Yes, same rear gearing and very close mileage. Trans can't be the same as the 6 speed didn't come out until 2011. Maybe the new trans gave the edge to the 6.2? Since an apples to apples test with 100% identical trucks can't be performed (they don't exist), we'll never know. You'd think with the way folks talk that the V10 was heads and shoulders above the motor that replaced it which just isn't so.

 

To get back to the OP's idea of adding a bed to a CC, it's doable (been done a lot actually) but difficult. The frames are completely different so much fabrication is required. If you do it, we want pics!

 

Just turned 210k on my 2011 6.2. This thing is great. I'd tow my camper across the country in heartbeat. Hopefully they improve the numbers!

 

I didn't mean that it can compete with the diesel I meant how may of us do t need a diesel however need more than what the current 6.2 can do so u believe the v10 would fill that void.

 

Because V10's are awesome?

 

This I agree with...

 

Here are the links mentioned by Rodney.

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...ng-videos.html

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...-hd-video.html

https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/1...nd-videos.html

 

6.2 with the "new" transmission runs awesome. I haven't driven it with a trailer yet, but the current setup pulls pretty well. You just have to be fearless of RPMs

 

Its funny, I was talking to a buddy who drives a 2012 F-150 EcoBoost and pulls a tandem-axle enclosed trailer probably topping out around 5-6k lbs loaded. He's currently got a loaner 2015 F-250 gas crew cab while his 150 gets some accident repair done. He "hates" the 250 - says the engine is gutless, pulls far worse up hills, is always shifting, etc. Now personally, I've had two gas 6.2L Super Dutys, both with 3.73 gears, and pulled a little heavier than him. I found the power to be pretty decent - hardly diesel like, but once the transmission downshifted, the engine had more than enough power up steep hills. It sounded great doing it - the large diameter exhaust Ford puts on the 6.2L trucks gives it kind of a deep tone. Certainly the transmission downshifts quite a bit in response to throttle input, but no surprise there. Maybe the turbos spoiled him. I always got the feeling the transmission would hold up forever, and the engine being de-rated would also hold up for a long time. The RPMs never bothered me. Tow/Haul made the gears a little more intelligent. I did feel the 6.2L was a little gutless off the line, but that was due to Ford's intentional delay of WOT until a certain RPM was reached, as well as the 3.73 gears. I think 4.30 gears, the power bump, and the slightly lighter truck will make these 2017 gas trucks very good. I realize the lighter-duty transmission will be more responsive (more like the F-150 trans) but I'd still prefer the 6R140. Very heavy duty trans.

 

My guess is that the low-end torque and flat torque curve of the EcoBoost spoiled him. Not to mention the F150 weighs quite a bit less, and has more torque. I still feel an EcoBoost F250 would be a great alternative to diesel for those of us who don't need to drag 15k lbs around all the time and don't want the expense, hassles, emissions issues, or unknowns of the diesel. I'd like to see a 4-4.5L V8 EcoBoost in the Super Duty.

 

That's the one thing I'm worried about when my lease is up. Like the new superduty but just don't want the diesel. Afraid gas may be to weak . Maybe I will just go with another Eco

 

I think, now that we have a 2.7L EcoBoost F-150 in the family, that the GDI twin turbo gas engine can perform every bit as well as a full-fledged diesel. I think a 4.5L V8 EcoBoost would be a monster producing an easy 500HP and 700lb-ft.

The two areas where the diesel would still always win out are actual fuel economy and longevity. Fuel economy is simply a result of required boost, and the diesels don't need as much boost as often as the gas turbos. When they do, however, they suck down the fuel just as well. The diesel engines also tend to have engine components designed to run for a longer lifespan. There won't be a timing chain stretch or guide issue on an HD diesel. No DI fuel pump wearing down a cam lobe. Tougher cranks and generally tougher blocks, although the 27L is a partial CGI as well. However, I think a lot of people could be well served by an EcoBoost engine in the Super Duty. Honestly, the high-output Raptor V6 would be a pretty interesting Super Duty engine.

 

I'm surprised the gas EcoBoost engines do not use a liquid CAC such as the Powerstroke. The advantages are a more consistent cooled air temp, and no condensation possibility, as well as more compact packaging and shorter plumbing runs. I guess that would probably require a second radiator, though, which might be too costly.

 

The 3.5 is rated at 365/420. Going to a F250 gas just doesn't seem logical for my use. IF I were to go F250 it would have to be diesel to warrant the F250 IMO.

I pulled a 12k trailer full of rough sawn heart pine beams and the truck did fine. It wasn't a real long trip, probably 200 miles. Not sure what the new engines will do but hopefully the gas will go up with power.