Gas vs PSD
Posting Guru
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 2,498
Likes: 3
From: Windsor, Colorado
For the way I use my pickup I just haven't found where a gasser is better.
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 742
From: Isanti, MN
For YOU.
The real crux of the matter is that it's not the best choice for everyone.
With Ford losing the V10 in 2011 in the F250/350, and going backwards to an 8-cylinder 6.2L, they are making the choice for those who prefer the gasser.
Looks like I'm keeping my 2001 for the rest of my life
The real crux of the matter is that it's not the best choice for everyone.
With Ford losing the V10 in 2011 in the F250/350, and going backwards to an 8-cylinder 6.2L, they are making the choice for those who prefer the gasser.
Looks like I'm keeping my 2001 for the rest of my life
Just because it's a bit smaller and 2 cylinders down does NOT mean it'll be worse.
The 6.0L PSD gained 50 HP when it lost 1.3 liters. My 6.4 puts out nearly 100 HP more than the 7.3L engine. Technology is great!
Why don't we all wait and see before bashing?
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 42,561
Likes: 423
From: Long Island USA
I understand lots of folks are resistant to change. However why don't we wait to speculate on this engine until we actually see HP and TQ values, as well as power and torque curves.
Just because it's a bit smaller and 2 cylinders down does NOT mean it'll be worse.
The 6.0L PSD gained 50 HP when it lost 1.3 liters. My 6.4 puts out nearly 100 HP more than the 7.3L engine. Technology is great!
Why don't we all wait and see before bashing?
Just because it's a bit smaller and 2 cylinders down does NOT mean it'll be worse.
The 6.0L PSD gained 50 HP when it lost 1.3 liters. My 6.4 puts out nearly 100 HP more than the 7.3L engine. Technology is great!
Why don't we all wait and see before bashing?
It might not show in the numbers, but it's still there.
As for the diesels, yes, boost is a wonderful thing. On gassers, there is no replacement for displacement, especially when normally-aspirated.
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 742
From: Isanti, MN
True enough about N/A gas motors. Depending on other factors it may actually perform better though. The V10 needs to rev to make serious power, which I'm sure will be the same for the new 6.2.
But say it only has a minimal loss in torque. What if it has 425 instead of the current 457? I believe they are using a new VCT system in the new engine. What if they can get it to provide near peak torque all the way from 1,500 to 5,000 RPMs? The current V10 starts to lose steam after the torque peak at 3,250. What if this one didn't until much higher? You'd have a relatively minimal loss of power at lower RPMs, but the mid and high range would be MUCH better.
Couple that with the new 6R140, which I'm sure won't be bashful about letting the engine rev up and sing, and I think it'll be a monster. I believe in the videos on the Ford website they claim that it's more fuel efficient than the outgoing 5.4L engine. Think about an engine that may tow better than the V10 and get better MPGs than the 5.4!
This thing could be GREAT!
But say it only has a minimal loss in torque. What if it has 425 instead of the current 457? I believe they are using a new VCT system in the new engine. What if they can get it to provide near peak torque all the way from 1,500 to 5,000 RPMs? The current V10 starts to lose steam after the torque peak at 3,250. What if this one didn't until much higher? You'd have a relatively minimal loss of power at lower RPMs, but the mid and high range would be MUCH better.
Couple that with the new 6R140, which I'm sure won't be bashful about letting the engine rev up and sing, and I think it'll be a monster. I believe in the videos on the Ford website they claim that it's more fuel efficient than the outgoing 5.4L engine. Think about an engine that may tow better than the V10 and get better MPGs than the 5.4!
This thing could be GREAT!
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 42,561
Likes: 423
From: Long Island USA
The 2-valve V10 puts out 80% of it's peak torque at only 1000RPM. And it doesn't "lose steam" after 3250, it just peaks at 3250. The fall-off isn't as much as you make it sound like 
Hook it, I'll pull it.
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 15,037
Likes: 4
From: Grand Lake, La.
True enough about N/A gas motors. Depending on other factors it may actually perform better though. The V10 needs to rev to make serious power, which I'm sure will be the same for the new 6.2.
But say it only has a minimal loss in torque. What if it has 425 instead of the current 457? I believe they are using a new VCT system in the new engine. What if they can get it to provide near peak torque all the way from 1,500 to 5,000 RPMs? The current V10 starts to lose steam after the torque peak at 3,250. What if this one didn't until much higher? You'd have a relatively minimal loss of power at lower RPMs, but the mid and high range would be MUCH better.
Couple that with the new 6R140, which I'm sure won't be bashful about letting the engine rev up and sing, and I think it'll be a monster. I believe in the videos on the Ford website they claim that it's more fuel efficient than the outgoing 5.4L engine. Think about an engine that may tow better than the V10 and get better MPGs than the 5.4!
This thing could be GREAT!
But say it only has a minimal loss in torque. What if it has 425 instead of the current 457? I believe they are using a new VCT system in the new engine. What if they can get it to provide near peak torque all the way from 1,500 to 5,000 RPMs? The current V10 starts to lose steam after the torque peak at 3,250. What if this one didn't until much higher? You'd have a relatively minimal loss of power at lower RPMs, but the mid and high range would be MUCH better.
Couple that with the new 6R140, which I'm sure won't be bashful about letting the engine rev up and sing, and I think it'll be a monster. I believe in the videos on the Ford website they claim that it's more fuel efficient than the outgoing 5.4L engine. Think about an engine that may tow better than the V10 and get better MPGs than the 5.4!
This thing could be GREAT!
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
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
2026 Shelby F-150 Off-Road: Better Than a Raptor R?
Brett Foote
2027 Super Duty Carhartt Package First Look: 12 Things You NEED to Know!
Michael S. Palmer
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 742
From: Isanti, MN
Funny post, Miller Feed.
I believe you, my 5.4 was a real workhorse and I believe had a very similar torque curve to the V10.
But still,
http://www.5startuning.com/dynoscans/page%2014.jpg
This dyno of a 2005 3V V10 dyno chart shows a definite decline of torque once it peaks. If you could minimize that through clever cam timing, you could make some BIG power. Much like the rumored 400 HP of the 6.2.
Originally Posted by Krewat
The 2-valve V10 puts out 80% of it's peak torque at only 1000RPM. And it doesn't "lose steam" after 3250, it just peaks at 3250. The fall-off isn't as much as you make it sound like
But still,
http://www.5startuning.com/dynoscans/page%2014.jpg
This dyno of a 2005 3V V10 dyno chart shows a definite decline of torque once it peaks. If you could minimize that through clever cam timing, you could make some BIG power. Much like the rumored 400 HP of the 6.2.
FTE Leadership Emeritus
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 42,561
Likes: 423
From: Long Island USA
Totally stock, the curve on that dyno shows a "decline" of 35 ft/lbs at 5100 rpms (190ftl/bs), versus the peak of 225ftl/bs at around 4000.
That's 18% less than the peak. That's not a whole bunch.
It's worse on the 2-valve, unless you start doing things like I did - open the intake and exhaust and tune it. My 2-valver really pulls way up to 5000RPMs.
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 742
From: Isanti, MN
I believe it! I remember driving Monster-4's truck with a 5-star tune, and it really pulled all the way to redline. This is why I love the modular truck engines so much! This is also why I invited a friend who loves his Hemi ram to our little gathering next Sunday. Others may make engines that pull hard at high RPMs, but I've never driven a gasser that pulls like a Mod V8(or V10!) at low RPMs and can carry that all the way through redline.
Even so, to say something's perfect and can't improve normally means you're not trying hard enough. I know Ford has been trying awfully hard, and their sales numbers lately really demonstrate that.
The 3V V10 gained a lot when they went with the 3V heads with VCT. I expect a similar improvement with the "little" 6.2L V8 and their new VCT system. I have high hopes...
Even so, to say something's perfect and can't improve normally means you're not trying hard enough. I know Ford has been trying awfully hard, and their sales numbers lately really demonstrate that.
The 3V V10 gained a lot when they went with the 3V heads with VCT. I expect a similar improvement with the "little" 6.2L V8 and their new VCT system. I have high hopes...
Senior User
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 432
Likes: 0
Ah, that depends on the competition!
Realize for a minute that KelVarnson and I both own diesels. When I went up to Millersburg and met up with Monster-4 and i eat hybrids, we got to try them out. Wasn't a fair comparison to Monster-4's V10, as he had the older model with less power than the 3V V10 of the same generation as the '07 F150 and my '08 PSD we lined it up against. Still, it did a great job with that kind of load, and I really have lots of respect for the engine. I would have been really interested to see how a stock 7.3 would have done.
From what I've seen out of my 6.4, as well as the stats on paper, there's no doubt that the 7.3 will seem to have an easier time with a load. After all, it has the definite torque advantage, which translates to a horsepower advantage all through it's rev range. At the same revs, the V10 can not match the horsepower output of the turbodiesel. Therefore, the only time you'd realize a benefit to the V10 is when you crank it up over 3,500 RPMs and let it sing. Perfectly capable of doing it, and I think it'd do it all day long for many years without a problem. The fact still remains that the 7.3 will likely be a more pleasant engine to tow with.
Which doesn't mean the V10 can't do it, though!
Realize for a minute that KelVarnson and I both own diesels. When I went up to Millersburg and met up with Monster-4 and i eat hybrids, we got to try them out. Wasn't a fair comparison to Monster-4's V10, as he had the older model with less power than the 3V V10 of the same generation as the '07 F150 and my '08 PSD we lined it up against. Still, it did a great job with that kind of load, and I really have lots of respect for the engine. I would have been really interested to see how a stock 7.3 would have done.
From what I've seen out of my 6.4, as well as the stats on paper, there's no doubt that the 7.3 will seem to have an easier time with a load. After all, it has the definite torque advantage, which translates to a horsepower advantage all through it's rev range. At the same revs, the V10 can not match the horsepower output of the turbodiesel. Therefore, the only time you'd realize a benefit to the V10 is when you crank it up over 3,500 RPMs and let it sing. Perfectly capable of doing it, and I think it'd do it all day long for many years without a problem. The fact still remains that the 7.3 will likely be a more pleasant engine to tow with.
Which doesn't mean the V10 can't do it, though!
what sounds really disgusting is full throttle shifts at 3K, just doesn't do it for me, give me a reving gasser any day
i will say this though, i will likely down grade to a diesel when i get into my mid to late 50s, not a bash, just a plan i have
diesel=great engine for people who luv em
gasser=great engine for poeple who luv em
diesel will pull with less RPM and better fuel economy (not including the 6.4), diesels are great and i do not have a problem saying so, but, to me, my V10 is perfect, short trips to the store with kids, hunting, towing and off roading, idles quietly in my driveway without dumping fumes into my house or around my children
DIESELS CAN AND WILL PULL BETTER THAN MY V10, and to that i say, so freakin what, i luv my V10, smooth, quiet, powerful, high reving and thirsty!
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 742
From: Isanti, MN
I've gotten 17 MPG on the highway, and I have less than 4,500 on mine. Normally will get 12-13 city. How does your V10 do empty?
Post Fiend
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 7,841
Likes: 0
From: Vacaville, Ca
