Yep, and it was hillarious. Not a ding on her bumper cover, headlamps and grille shattered, hood rolled under and buckled up. The car was steaming and she was cussing and she was shaking her fist at me as she drove away. And of all times I did not have my camera. I waited on the parking lot for about ten minutes just to make sure that she did not call the law in an attempt for hit and run. But the Kroger camera caught it all.

Dumb *** broad, probably in the typical rush, combing hair, putting on makup, yaking on the phone and scratching her *** and wants to blame it on someone else.

I should have called the law and reported her for hit and run. Bet that would have made her day!

 

Yep, some start lower than others.

 

What fumes?

Am I missing something?

 

Ever heard of "fuel injection"? It's this not-so-new thing that keeps your gas engine running right at any altitude. Although n/a gas engines lose power at altitude, so do forced induction diesel engines. It doesn't matter that the PSD is forced induction. The air is just as thin for them as it is for a N/A engine at that altitude. Your forced induction engine loses power too at altitude, just not as much.

What you are making reference to is a carburetor, which needs manual adjustments to compensate for altitude.

Chevy gas trucks dont have aluminum heads with 3 threads holding the plug in. Yes, that would be a design flaw in every respect.



I boo this response. Head gaskets should never be a "problematic item" on an engine that was supposed to be designed to work. This engine was supposed to be able to handle being pushed to it's limits at all hours of every day and survive. The manufacturer has provided the gauges you need, others are not required. If that doesn't say design flaw, I don't know what does.

 

Actually, with a good turbo set up, a turbo charged engine will not loose any power even at high altitudes. Be it gas or diesel. The air will be thinner, so the turbo will spin faster to maintain the same boost.

Of course there will be a point where the turbo may be spinning so fast it either self-destructs or its efficiency drops way off.

 

I would have been laughing so hard. I am glad no damage to your own vehicle though. Great story.

 

Fuel injection, nope never heard of it. I guess my diesel doesn't use injectors. A little man squirts fuel into the turbo while I am driving.

Turbo's make power in high altitudes on gas and diesel. Ever heard of the PIKES PEAK race. Subaru seems to win that all the time with a TURBO CHARGED engine.

 

WTF? Are you drunk?

"Turbos" make power at ANY altitude, and if you read into the pikes peak race at all you'd know that the first cars used in that race were N/A. On top of that, Suzuki has OWNED that race since the mid-'90s.

 

If the turbo is sized to utilize all of its capacity within the useable rpm range of the engine, it will drop efficiency at altitude.

Most stock diesel turbos can be maxed out at sea level by just dropping the throttle from a dead stop. Altitude does affect them in the power dept just as it affects a N/A gas engine, just not as much. Try going to a drag strip that is near sea level and then going to Denver or somewhere where the alititude is much higher and see the difference yourself. The altitude affects all engines no matter what type of induction they have.

An "over-sized" turbo has positive effects at higher rpms and higher loads but the lower speeds are affected by presenting qualities of turbo lag, something else that makes your truck slower at altitude.

I'm not saying that a non-turbo engine is affected less by altitude. I'm just stating that altitude affects all engines in whatever form of induction is used.

 

Team Violence, in your previous post quoting 2001400EX, he was responding to a V-10 guy like yourself who was stating the V-10 does not have a design flaw. It is nice to see that you agree the V-10 does indeed have a design flaw in the cylinder heads.

As to your response to me: Nope just trying to figure out where you are coming from. All diesel's are fuel injected, DUH!

 

i think both are better

 

So again, if Bill had a turbo, he would do a lot better at 9,000 feet than the other mods he was talking about.

 

Absolutely.

And just to let everyone know. I have a V10 truck. It's more of a love-hate relationship. It has left me stranded twice. Once on top of a f-ing mountain with a spit plug and my 10200 lb TT behind it, and once with a chucked cam pulley. Both of course, were covered under warranty. I am currently battling a steering issue that seems that most SD trucks have but don't blame the engine for it.

It is severely underpowered at low RPM and gets horrible, I repeat, horrible mileage while towing (170 miles to a tank). I have installed headers, a tuner, 4.88 gears, removed the problematic (in my case) EGR, and ported the intake to make it be able to tow my TT better than 50mph without screaming.

I can tell you when this engine lets go, it's cummins time. The trucks in impeccable shape for being so old and has no rust whatsoever. Its only downfall is the damn V10. In contrast to that statement about the downfall of owning a V10, I had also owned a 6.0 F250 that I absolutely loathed. Not only was this truck impeccably maintained by the dealer during it's short life, it was never modified nor pushed beyond what I call it's "safe limit". It had; failed head gasket/bent rod from hyro lock due to a fuel system malfunction not explained to me by Ford. They replaced the engine free of charge that time. I also had endless EGR cooler and VVTurbo issues that I ended up leaving to Ford to remedy after the buyback. The truck had ridden on a flat-bed more than 6 times in its 7 months of my ownership. It had caused two, I repeat, two spoiled vacations more than 1700 miles from home, a emergency situation on a busy interstate when it hydro locked and missed work hours due to it's many failures.

So if there was ever a type of truck that I hated, it would be a Ford diesel truck.

 

Team Violence, as I have stated many times in this thread, Ford made a terrible mistake with the 6.0 Diesel. None of the problems you had are found in the 7.3. The new 6.4 is having problems and poor milage. The 6.7 doesn't look much better.

I also wish Ford would have stuffed the 5.9 cummins in the 350's. I would have purchased one of those for sure. As far as the chassis goes, just like you stated, the trucks are all the same regardless of engine package.

 

Sorry, I didn't lay on the sarcasm thick enough. LOL

And read up a little, Ford does not provide an egt gauge and the rest of the gauges suck.