I have never seen a non-stock 7.3. Every last 7.3 I've seen around here has been bone stock.

 

what the article meant was that by 06 the 6.0 had the lowest number of warranty claims for 06 vehicles. it didnt mean every vehicle combined throughout history. for 2 years the 6.0 had some pretty bad problems, but then things got ironed out and it ran fine. how many years did it take ford to fix the spark plug shooters on the v10? 6 years? every new engine is going to have problems and it's not something that only happens to diesels.

 

I never said gauges, they do not affect performance, mostly tell you when to stop pushing. So, the exhaust is around $250 and the programmer can ber around $200 but usually more depending on what you get.

I guess I don't live where ya'll do, or maybe just have different friends. All the 7.3s I have seen at least have exhaust/programmer. Now i am sure there are some farm trucks and that without those things, but I never have really looked.

Point is, we are talking PSD vs V10. And every person I know and I would guess a good portion of the population that tows, at least does the exhaust/programmer on the PSD. So, there are a few bone stock ones in the crowd, line them up with a V10 and prove me wrong.

 

The "shooters" were far and few between, and were mostly non-existant in '97 and '98 when they were first put into the E-series vans. For the '99 Superduty, through 2002, it was a higher rate, and mostly it was a lack of maintenance that caused it, not a design flaw. They did, however, do something about it in less than 6 years, and they did do various things over the years to lessen the problem. Many of us V10'ers have never had an issue with the plugs, because we maintain them. Myself, I have the short-thread heads, and no issues. I know a few '99'ers who never had a problem neither. And of course, you can look through the V10 forum and find those that puked a plug or two, but you know how it is with Internet sites - they collect the problem people

December 1996 - 4.6L 4V alignment feature added
February 1997 - 4.6L 2V head alignment feature added
September 2000 - WEP (Windsor Engine Plant) 2V head alignment feature modified (4.6/5.4/6.8)
November 2002 - WEP introduced long thread heads on 2V (all)
May 2003 - REP (Romeo Engine Plant) introduced long-thread heads on 4V 4.6 and 5.4
November 2003 - REP introduced long-thread heads on 2V and modified alignment feature

In 1999, and 2001, an interim fix was done for a cross-threading issue.
Original process:

Step 1 - Zero torque spark plug (air tool)
Step 2 - Torque to 16-20Nm final torque (DC Run down), monitor at 6-12Nm, and final torque must be reached within 0-360 degrees.

New process (addressed the possibility of applying installation torque for more than 25 degrees of rotation)
Step 1 - Zero torque spark plug (air tool)
Step 2 - Torque to 16-20Nm final torque (DC Run down) start monitor at 6-12Nm, and final torque must be reached within 3-25 degrees.

Another action to address cross-threading was the addition of an alignment feature to lead the plug into the hole.

 

Its the same with the 6.0, most of the problems are caused bt lack of maintenance. And I havent lifted a head yet either, so we can safely say that both of these motors have no major problems then.

 

I just think its funny that v10 guys bash the 6.0 like it's a piece of garbage because it had changes made to it over time to fix problems, but they justify that same process with the v10 as being something other than the engines fault. If ford had one design for the spark plug threads for 90 years and never had a problem with plugs shooting out, came up with a new design that was very prone to shooting plugs, and then switched back to the original design, that screams design flaw to me. I have never owned a vehicle that I had to "maintain" the spark plugs to keep them in the head. If I can't put them in and forget about them until it's time to change them, then it's a design flaw. If I had to check and tighten my glow plugs every 20k miles because they could pop out then I would consider that a design flaw too.

Take your last sentence and apply it to the 6.0 forum as well.

 

There never was a plug design change until the new 3V cylinder heads.
The same old spark plug type that's been used forever is used in the 2V.
There is not a design flaw in the 2V cylinder head,nor is there in the spark plugs themselves. The "flaw" is in drivers that will not pull out of the throttle when they encounter spark knock(beats the plugs loose from detonation), and in those that improperly maintain their engines. Leaving ANY spark plug in place for more than 50K miles is ignorant and is asking for a problem.
JL

 

I have run my 3 Chevy gas trucks ragged, drove them like I stole them, and for some reason, I have never shot a plug. However, if I had own a V10, I probably would have. That is a design flaw.

The same can be said for the 6.0. The head gasket issue is due to people driving too hard and not backing off when pushing it too hard, they SHOULD have bought gauges prior to driving it hard. So it is the customers fault, NOT a design flaw, right? hehe

Sorry guys, just stoking the fire.

 

Yes, the spark plug is the same. No one is saying the plug is the problem. I said the THREAD design in the problem. As in the lack of threads in the head. Ford went from having many threads in the head down to almost none and then back to many. If there is no problem in having only 4 threads then why did ford put more threads in the 3v heads? I own 12 vehicles at this moment, and countless others in the past, and there is only ONE that requires constant monitoring of the plugs, exact specifications for installation, etc. But noooo, there's no design flaw there at all.

 

Then there is a failure with Ford's programming and sensor equipment if the computer can't correctly detect knocking/detonation and retard timing to compensate. If there was no "flaw" in the 2 valve heads, then why did Ford double the thread depth with the new heads?

It's ignorant saying leaving sparkplugs in place for more then 50,000 miles is ignorant, considering modern plugs will last 80,000-100,000

 

Definatley a design flaw in the early v-10 heads and while they say you can run plugs for 100 k miles I wouldn't do it. Even if it doesn't miss it doesn't mean the gas mileage isn't suffering.

 

I'm one of the V10 owners who would LOVE to have a diesel and I've tried to stay out of this thread until now, but seriously, even suggesting that the problems of the early 6.0L PSD are even remotely comparable to the 99-02 V10's plug issue is just insane.

If you *honestly* believe that;s the case I suggest you spend some after school time reading the V10 and 6.0L PSD forums. It is acutely obvious that one WILL cost hundreds (EGR Valve) if not thousands to repair (Headstuds, HPOP) and the other can be solved by an insert and absolute worst case scenario a head removal.

Diesels are awesome, I'd love to say I owned a PSD but I can't and I'll be the first to admit my diesel envy. As a PSD owner you have to be honest with yourself and those around you and admit that the cost to repair one (motor vs motor), and particularly the 6.0L PSD is far higher than that of a gas motor.

Edit: I feel dirty now that I've replied to this thread. Ugh.

 

post the results up

 

If this "thread design" was such an issue,then EVERY SINGLE MODULAR BUILT would have a problem with "blowing plugs out".
I personally have put well over a half million miles of driving modulars of every type and have never had the first hiccup of any kind related to this "thread design". Our fleet of trucks at work are all 2V modulars, and of those 30 trucks,we have never had a single plug issue. There's a combined 1-2 million miles drive on those trucks in the last 2-3 years. IT IS NOT A DESIGN FLAW.
JL

 

By using your logic above,then the 6.0L should never blow a headgasket-the PCM should know when the cylinder pressure is high,and prevent it,right?
As for the 100K mile tuneup-you win the "falls for marketing hype" award.
JL