So I have been following the introduction of the new motor with keen interest. But I have read some things that have given me concern that Ford really doesn't know what they are up against. In one factory press release, an executive brags that the new motor has been tested for 250,000 miles.

Really?

So is Ford proud of the fact that they have tested their new motor for fewer miles than the competitions' basic overhaul interval (300,000)?

And does Ford realize that 250,000 simulated miles on a dyno are a lot different than 250,000 miles in the field, overloaded on the road, idling in winter and then run flat out for hours on end. I hear a lot of reports about these trucks being spotted "undergoing testing" - but it never sounds like the truck is under much of a test.

One press release stated that the motor had been teted "for hours on end" - really? This suggests that they think the product is a commuter vehicle and that somehow subjecting it to a full workday is a "test."

Has Ford finally built the ultimate suburban poser truck - ready for a level-kit and fake bead locks?

I know, I know, some loyalist drunk on Kool-Aid is going to chime in here and say what a great job is Ford is doing and Ford can do no wrong. But think about it.

Ford has never manufactured a heavy duty diesel motor before and if the press statements are accurate, the 6.7 has not been sufficently tested-by the company. 250,000 mies? As a test threashold? Are they kidding?

Don't get me wrong- I wanted an excuse to stay loyal to Ford. But if you combine "ugly" with "untested" what do you get?

Personally, If I needed a new truck in the next model year, I get a huge incentive to migrate to the Cummins powertrain... Why take the risk? And while I really like my 2007 F350, it is not like the build quality is much to write home about... The truck has excellent load carrying capacity and it runs away with 25,000 gross. But... Next truck, do I want to do Ford's product testing for them?

The factory gooseneck hitch is a pretty sweet addition.

-mike

 

Just out of curiousity, what would you recommend for their testing? If they are road testing these trucks and not just running them on a dyno, is that not simulating real world conditions. They have spy photos all over the place of the 2011 trucks towing trailers.

And the looks aren't for everybody. I didn't like the grill when I saw it but it's starting to grow on me now. Yes there are some folks who put level kits and beadlocks on but I guess since they actually own the trucks, it's pretty much their choice.

I'm not drunk on Ford Kool-Aid. They can do wrong and have in the past. BUT, they are doing a hell of a lot better than GM and Chrysler. The 6.7 may turn out great or it may have issues but at least it won't be produced by one of the other two.

Sounds like you're down on FMC period. Maybe you do need to take advantage of the Dodge rebates.

 

ha ha, I wasn't impressed with the 250k mile test either. I mean come on, if trucks on the road are pulling 80k+ loads for over a million miles, you would think they could design a light duty truck to go at least half that. I am a little skeptical about ford taking it into their hands to build their own diesel, lets not forget International (navistar) is a diesel engine manufacturer. Of course the 6.0 and 6.4 seem to have their own issues and they are Navistar engines. However I really do hope that they nail it with this one.

Still not impressed with the 250k though. Sometimes I would like to know if the engineers have actually worked with a company that truly works their machines, or at least listens to what they the working man needs/wants.

sorry just a rant,

 

Where did they say they only tested it for 250,000 miles on a dyno?
Claiming the engine will easily go 250k would likely mean that they tested it for much farther/longer than that.


You've never heard of the 6.6 or 7.8 liter diesels?

 

it was in a question and answer interview the lead engineer gave. That is true ford did build those engines, but they were never good performers and not a sought after engine. I am sure they do have their following though.

 

let's not forget that ford has tons of diesel engine building experience in backhoes' bulldozers,frontend loaders and farm tractors.

 

The company I work for has two Dodge 1-ton flatbeds. One is an auto and the other is a six-speed. Both trucks are used to pull tandem (28&30 ft)and tri-axle (40 ft) gooseneck trailers. They are usually loaded to the max. The Cummins have been in the shop more than any of the other trucks that we have owned in the past. The check engine light won't stay off for more than two weeks straight. We also have an older Dodge with a 5.7L and it runs like a champ with 200,000 miles. That being said I don't know that I would be interested in a Cummins at this present time. I hope this Ford Diesel motor is a hit cause I plan on buying one in two years.

 

That's true, I didn't really think about that. Are the engines sourced from diesel manufacturers though. I know some manufacturers just built the machine, not the product. Like my Case backhoe has a cummins in it. I thought Ford sold off their tractor line, or at least changed its name to New Holland.

I really done have a clue how the engine is going to do, but i was disappointed in there 250k test. I was also disappointed in them taking over from Navistar. I just hope Ford can work with the new epa regulations better than Navistar did.

 

I wish that were the case- but it isn't. Ford New Holland has nothing- repeat, NOTHING to do with Ford Motor Company. New Holland- or Case New Holland (to be accurate) is owned by Fiat just like.... errrr... Dodge.

Don't get me wrong, I WANT reasons to stick with Ford- And to be realistic, it doesn't matter what any of us say or think- the truth about the new motor will be known in a couple of years.

I am only saying that the early signs are less than impressive. I see a lot of emphasis placed by Ford on branding- and I am skeptical-

When I see the company point to 250,000 miles as some kind of impressive test criteria... I am a bit embarassed for them.

In fact- when you do the math- it is pathetic.

If you average 50 MPH - (an assumption based upon by dividing my odometer by my hour meter) you will put 5,000 hours on the motor on the way to 250,000.

5,000 hours- Hell- we get that out of combine engines- and that is pretty must the worst life an engine could have. Typically, we can close in on 10,000 hours before a major on most diesels- sometimes longer, sometimes random things happen before 10,000- like a dropped valve on a Cat this summer. Obvously gen sets and pump motors have a significantly longer life- for equally obvious reasons.

So Ford's special testing benchmark for their new motor is a little more than half the lifespan we get from motors in much worse environments and it is 50,000 less than the basic life expectancy for the Cummins B-Series motors. Why would I buy the Ford motor? It is not even built here...

If I were going to sell a product - and I expected it to have a life expectancy of 300,000- wouldn't I test it for more than that?

Does this mean that Ford is admitting they intend to sell a product with a SHORTER lifespan than Dodge?

A local utility was running F-550s with buckets and service bodies. The hour meters on the trucks they cycle out of service are all hovering around 10,000. And the 7.3 and 6.0 trucks I have looked at are sound as new. (Can't say that for the auto transmissions though.)

If Ford intends to replace the International motors with a product "tested" to only 5,000 hours- they are at risk of losing the business of customers who rely upon their products for work rather than a social statement.

Of course there is a chance that Ford's first heavy duty diesel will provide a longer service life than it was tested under- there is that chance. But it seems like an important market for Ford to leave to chance.

-mike

 

Respectfully, I don't think being critical means that you need to buy something else.

But you raise a good question: testing, what would I do?

Well- obviously there are financial and time constraints facing FoMoCo. But ideally, I would place a lot more than 4 trucks in the hands of end users to test. 4? Thats it? I would identify fleet customers who rountinely place very high miles on their units. And I would look for environments as diverse as possible- from the hell of 100 plus degree harvests with heavy dust conditions, to repeated duty cycles in extreem climates. I think I would also place the motor in a few commercial medium duty over the road applications- just to rack up abuse and endless miles.

The reason I would default to so much real world testing is because International is no novice engine builder- and yet there were significant wiring issues with the early 6.0 trucks- an issue I tend to believe would have been discovered with more testing. And the architecture of the 6.0 was changed Jan 1 06 - again, something that testing should have revealed the need to do.

To be fair, emissions rules often push products to market- maybe early. I don't know. But it seems to me that to rely upon computer modeling may not uncover every issue.

It comes down to the fact that Ford has sited a testing goal that is shorter than the proven life expectancy of their competors engines.

That makes me concerned.

-mike

 

The 6.7 was not just tested on a rolling dyno. It was tested on a dyno that could simulate load and put the truck under extreme pressure. I am more than certain that Ford has and will continue to put this engine through the paces as they will not want to repeat the mistakes they made with the Navistar engine. I give Ford a lot of credit for manufacturing there own engine as they are the only American auto manufacturer that does. Hell, If it doesnt work out they can get the Cummins in a couple of years, cause at Chrapslers rate of declining sales they will be out of business soon and no amount of government bailout is gonna save them this time. Fiat got out of the American market years ago because they couldnt make it here and I have no clue why they bought into Chrysler. If Daimler couldnt make that company profitable I doubt Fiat has a chance. They will give it a chance though and then liquidate it when it fails, cause nobody else will touch it.

 

oops double post

 

Yeah I think real world testing is the best situation as well. I have no clue how many real world test trucks they put out there, but I get the feeling it wasn't enough.
Just my pet peave. Take the 99- f 450 and f 550s. Something that always bugged the crap out of me was that they only had a PTO port on one side of the tranny, and in a 4x4 model, guess what side of the tranny it was on? Thats right the transfer case side. So anybody who wanted a shaft drive PTO had to go else where. Or do a funky drive line that passed underneath the transfer case. That always drove me nuts, its like come on guys, did you guys actually think about that one. Give me a break these 450 and 550 tucks are WORK trucks.

Just a rant,

 

The below must be what you are refering to;

Note;

Tested to 250,000 miles should not be taken to mean they ran them on the dyno for 250,000 miles then shut them down and called it good enough.

It could mean they abused multiple engines during testing and every one of them made it to at least 250,000 miles without a failure.

Ford has given this tested to 250,000 miles for durability claim on previous versions of the Powerstroke.

The rated B50 life of a B-series Cummins is about 350,000 miles, B50 life means they claim 50% of the engines will do 350,000 without needing a major repair.

 

From what I understand they took a real world tested engine, pulling max GCVW truck and trailer, up in steep grades ect ect ect, basically working the hell out of the engine and then they tore the engine down at that point and concluded all the mechanical and all the gaskets where in good condition with no sign of failure in the near future and predicts these engines to have an an easy life with 250,000miles and expect to exceed that milage for some time.

I dont think it was a mere "K, we just rolled 250k miles and nothing happened", they tore the engine down and scrutinised it to great detail to make sure nothing was in pending failure.