Nothing wrong with the 4 bolt design, the problem was first recognized when technicians found head bolts loose that could be removed by hand. IH had a Quality Control problem, the robots used in assembly were not torquing the heads properly. Torque to yield head bolts are fine in a stock application.

Why does Cummins have a problem with the head cracking on the number 5 cylinder? Poor design?

 

Oh no, you didn't just go there. Nothing worse in life then calling into question the design quality of a cummins(well maybe saying the 7.3 can't do something).

I would also put that in the heading of technician error as well. As techs, there is a certain degree of extra knowledge that people believe a technician to have and having that extra knowledge should have yielding better results with issues like this. I am by no means excusing the poor training given out by the higher ups.

The 6.0 is a highly sophisticated engine, much more so then the 7.3. Technicials and owners were not up to snuff. I actually put more blame on the owners, because when mention to people that they have to treat these engines differently then previous diesels(if they come from previous experience or even if they don't) and they look at me like why? Why should I have to do more then just turn the key and go? That wasn't in the manual, so I don't need to do it. When people exhibit that kind of mentality, that makes it hard not to go to owner related first and then work from there. That kind of logic just boggles my mind.

While technician error, I can lay blame more so on poor training by higher ups. Some technicians are just bad no matter what training they have, but I would like to think that it's a small percentage, but that may be my being ever hopeful of the natural goodness of people.

You know what the really ironic thing is about this? Is that treating this engine differently doesn't really involve an engineering degree, doesn't involve any strange alchemy, it mainly involes changing ones driving habits for bit and changing some preconceived notions about the diesel engine in general. Boy, that's really hard stuff to handle.

I hate to break it to everyone, but as all vehicles get more sophisticated(even gas cars), you'll have to handle all newer vehicles differently then what you are used to growing up. It's just the nature of "evolution". Some may require more effort then others, but it's not rocket science either.

 

Why does Cummins have a problem with the head cracking on the number 5 cylinder? Poor design?[/quote]

Who the heck mentioned anything about cummins in this thread? Why is it everyytime someone puts down a ford they always have a cummins comment? Hmmm could it be envy? You know what my 7.3 been kind of acting up lately think Im gonna go out and see if I can find a 6.0 to put in her lol. My wife would really think Ive lost it. Anyway as I have said before on other forums I really do believe Ford makes a good truck and I hope they learned admittedly there lesson with the mistakes IH made with the 6.0 and 6.4 only time will tell. To bad the paying customer has to be the guinea pigs!

 

I think you invited that comment with your 4 bolts design flaw comment. Reap what you sow.

 

How you figure?

 

Who the heck mentioned anything about cummins in this thread? Why is it everyytime someone puts down a ford they always have a cummins comment? Hmmm could it be envy?[/quote]

Now, I can't speak for everyone and I'm sure I'm by far the minority, but a cummins motor put me back into a Ford. Not only that, but my beloved 6.0.


Ford also made some faux paus when it came to their end. I rarely see innocents. Everyone is much to quick(and I'm the same way as well at times) to play the blame game.

You can only test so much. Even with some of the testing Ford did with the new truck, it still only goes so far. There are going to have to be some guinea pigs out there.

 

To answer your question why did I bring it up, you claim the 4 bolt design was flawed but no proof or reason as to why. The cracked heads on Cummins is a known flaw, does it make a poor design?

The 4 bolt per cylinder has not an issue, improper torque to yield bolt installation was the reason. The design is still not flawed as you suggested. I had more problems with my 7.3L and 4R100 in my 95 than I have with my 6.0L so your suggestion about re powering your old truck makes sense to me.

 

Hmmm thats kinda like saying 4million dollars is enough I dont need 6 million. If they had more head bolts I think the torque yieild would have been less of an issue. And again you keep bringing cummins into the conversation. where talkin 6.0 man

 

In defense of IH, Ford was building an engine at the time to replace the 7.3L but the program was scrapped, the VT 365 then was chosen to be the candidate that did meet emission standards. Ford increased the power over the IH platform and went to market.

 

I don't care if there were 20, if they weren't torqued in correctly, it wouldn't hold. It isn't so much the number, it's the torquing that was a problem.



Actually we are talking about design and design flaws. I don't recall you complaining to Troy about him bringing in GM engines in our discussion. What is the difference here?

 

To answer your question again. If your quality control is bad enough to send units out with loose head bolts that require "torque" to yield strength, 15 loose bolts per cylinder will not hold what 4 properly torqued bolts can.

 

Yes you are rite about that all Im saying is that more would BETTER!

Tex go drive your girly F150 and quit being so arguementitive!lol Way to serious!

 

Not really. That's like saying: "Well if a 4" exhaust is better for the 6.0, then a 5" will be even more so". Problem with that is if you go with a 5" exhaust on a stock or just tuned 6.0(which would probably account for about 80-90% of the 6.0s that are still out there), you actually lose low end grunt. Or you have to compensate with highly aggressive fueling. Or you get the the mods needed to safely accommodate that larger exhaust i.e. turbo(s), and injectors. So the bigger is better(or more is better) doesn't fit in all scenerios in of itself.

I fail to see were that fits in anywhere in this discussion.

Hey, I started a thread with remembering the old posters that "shaped" some of the still around older posters on this forum. Instead my thread got way off topic with "6.0: Flawed or not Flawed" discussion. Now I don't have a problem with that to an extent because I have taken a number of threads off topic in my day, so I see this as the "biter bite" type of scenerio. However, if you are going to "ambush" me in my own thread with something that was off topic to begin with, you get what you bargain for.

 

I think somewhere back at post 40 I mentioned this thread was going off topic.......now with that said, carry on like gentlemen.

 

Yes there was some good 5.7 diesels, but the majority of them just didn't make it very long. I had a summer job years ago and drove a company truck with the 5.7 diesel that had well over 100k miles and it was a dog to drive and it knocked and rattled something fierce, but it kept running for many years.