I have heard that Ford did not start putting powerstrokes in their F350s until '94, and that in the years before that they put in a diesel called the IDI. Can anybody tell me what the IDI stands for and what differences there are between it and the powerstroke? I am looking at buying a 92-97 F350, does anybody have any recommendation as far as which diesel is better?

Thanks

 

IDI is In-direct injection. They had a mechanical fuel pump, and pre-combustion chambers. The PowerStroke is DI or Direct Injection right into the combustion chamber. They use HEUI(Hydraulic energized Unit Injector) I think thats the acronym. I may be a little off. But anyway the injectors are actuated by very high oil pressure from, you guessed it, a high-pressure oil pump just for the injectors. Much higher injection pressure is achieved this way. It's more efficient.
Try a search for this topic and sit back with some popcorn. This has been cussed and discussed to death here. IMO, get a POWERSTROKE. It's more fun to say than 7.3L IDI! Hope that answered your question, and may you enjoy your DIESEL exhaust as much as I do!

 

I agree with BigDeezel58. If you can afford it, get the Power Stroke.

 

I have a '91 IDI that I've been extremely happy with. The IDIs are durable, economical to operate (with a reduced fuel setting), and very easy to work on for somebody with average mechanical skills. More serviceable components are exposed and accessible on an IDI than a Powerstroke, and IDIs are all mechanical (no computers or engine electronics). The aftermarket is also flooded with them; you can blow up an IDI, and buy a dyno-tested, fully built drop-in replacement for $5100.

Having said all that, Powerstrokes are the cutting edge of diesel technology. They have more power, more torque, run cleaner, last as long or longer, are quieter, and the trucks they are installed in will be newer, more refined, and loaded with features that IDIs never had... Buy the Powerstroke.

 

I have a 1986 F-350, the 6.9L blew #7 and I replaced it with a Turbo Charged 7.3L IDI. I've only drove it for a day or two and it's better than the old motor. I would have loved to put a POWERSTROKE, but too much money, time hooking up and with no electronic crap alot more reliable. I have nothing bad to say about any Ford diesel, they both run great, ya you get more power with a PSD but diesel were never designed for HP.

 

You are certainly entitled to your opinion but this "electronic crap" is going to be around a lot longer than your IDI engine so you'd better get used to it. The twenty first century is here, people! Come on out of the cave!

 

Nobody is denying the benefits of technology. Living in freedom means having choices, like not being force-fed "technology" when something simpler also gets the job done. For those of us who live in the relative middle of nowhere, simplicity will get you a lot farther than diagnostic test equipment on a frozen mountain pass in January. I won't deny the IDI is getting left behind, but it won't be going away any time soon. Thousands are being rebuilt and sent back to work every year, and those of us who appreciate its serviceability and simplicity will be here to buy them.

 

Do you remember when we used to have to take all the vacuum tubes from our TV sets to the durg store every weekend to check them and replace the bad ones just to watch TV? When was the last time your TV quit working (assuming you didn't buy a cheap made in Malaysia special)? Admittedly, the first electronic fuel injection systems were a pain in the **** (mainly because we didn't know how to work on them). When is the last time you had a fuel system (or ignition) failure on your car (assuming you are not driving something from the thirties)? I swear this is true: Accel makes an aftermarket conversion kit to convert an electronic ignition trigger on Harley Davidson's Evo Big Twin back to a points type ignition. WHO, besides a Neandrathal or someone confined to a mental institution would want to do that?! Apparently there is enough of a market for it, for Accel to produce! The technology is changing for the better. Engines are cleaner, smoother, more powerful, lighter in weight and have cleaner exhaust -- all at the same time. I am pleased to know that there are still IDI powered trucks out there giving good service and I'm not suggesting you get rid of yours to buy the latest technology unless you want to, which you obviously don't. But the question was raised as to which is the better way to go. If all your going to do is drag your *** back and forth to work, get which ever you want. But if you have a heavy load to pull, you'll be infinately happier with the power to get the job done. (Just my opinion.)

 

I don't have a problem with moving into the 21st century, but like curmudgeon says, as long as it gets the job done by change. I've had my share of "electronic" vehicles and they're nothing but a headache, if you don't have a scanner or other specialty tools you have to take it to somebody that does, which means MONEY OUT OF YOUR POCKET. Look, I'm not trying to win a p---ing contest, all I'm saying is theres nothing wrong with any Ford diesel, PSD has its advatages and so does the IDI.

 

Joe: I am no Luddite when it comes to diesel technology. You'll notice in #3 above that I recommended the Powerstroke over the IDI. Despite my feelings about the IDI, I know which is clearly the better vehicle. I would like to see U.S. diesel sales approach that of Europe someday (somewhere near 60% of all new vehicles). Someday we will solve the corrosivity and gelling problems of vegetable fuel, we'll be filling our 2010 6 liter Power Strokes with coconut or palm oil, and OPEC will be just a minor annoyance - only technology will get us there.

 

What you have proposed would certainly be a step in the right direction.
People at our level on the totem pole may think OPEC is some kind of annoyance but I am convinced the "system" is working precisely the way it was designed to work. And as far as becoming energy independent, the CEO of British Petroleum says we (the US) use 45% of the world's oil production. I haven't done a count lately but it seems to me that that is a hell of a lot of palm trees and soy beans. And I'm sure the petroleum industry would have something to say about what kind of fuel is burned in our engines (just as General Motors had something to say about replacing our mass transit systems in our cities with GM made busses in the 1940's). None of those #####s in Washington are your friend, the drug trade in this country and elsewhere is operating precisely the way the US government wants it to (dispite what they would have us believe) and let me know if you haven't heard about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.

 

I don't disagree with the intent of your thought process. All I'm saying is if you do some math it will become painfully apparent, in short order, that the only way to be weened from OPEC is to reduce our dependence by about 90%. And alternative fuels will probably only come to the forefront if they become less expensive than petroleum products.

 

 

The system is indeed working exactly as it was designed - people reaping rewards for putting their money and ideas at risk. I don't hold much stock in consipracies; I've been around long enough to see 95% of them discredited. You are correct about Big Oil. They will fight for survival at all costs, as their shareholders expect. I can guarantee you they are already looking at potential alternatives to crude oil, and will probably attempt to corner the market on those alternatives just as Archer Daniels Midland did with ethanol after the last "crisis". Millions of R&D dollars are already being spent on blended vegetable fuels as we speak. The system is working just fine thank you.

 

Running diesels on coconut oil! WOW! Just think, exhaust that smells like a Pina Colada! How bad could that be? MMMMMM!