Power Stroke VS. Small Block - Ford 7.3 Diesel - Diesel Power Magazine


discuss....

to me the 5.8 is not that healthy.

 

Something doesnt add up here..they claim the PSD is making only 281 ft-lbs tq??? They say its a 97, so last I recall a PSD 94+ makes oh what 500+?

 

To me, it's a stupid test. They're comparing apples and bananas.

 

I agree. That seems pointless to me.

 

no its not a fair test.but i like the end.

DOLLAR-PER HORSEPOWER
Diesel - $22.93/hp
Gas - $164.47/hp

something was wrong with the 7.3l PSD too.heck the pre-PSD 7.3l (mine) with the turbo's have better dyno runs at the rear wheel.
so stock,nope.sorry lol.it's not a close base like they claim there. which of course messes up their hp per dolor (as in pure gain,as if you started with an engine with fresh stock injectors.)
its likely the stock injectors were shot to start with is my guess.but of course,they had to make the story sound good somehow.

 

Those $/hp numbers are totally bogus. They may be true for the gains on the mods, but why don't they add in the cost for the original engines? Considering the 5.8L was standard in F250s and F350s and the PSD was a $4000 option (so figure about $3000 and $7000 for the engines), that would change those $/hp significantly. Spend another $4k on that 5.8L, and I bet it blows the the PSD out of the water.

Jason

 

It's a rigged test from the start. Anyone considering a 7.3 is not going to even consider a 351. It'll be a question of 460 or 7.3. So to be a reasonable or useful comparison they would have to compare engines that are in a similar class and a decision a normal person might have to make.

They also didn't do anything notable on that 351. No port work on the heads, just a crappy intake and some roller rockers? Of course there will be no power increases. The thing needs a proper cam and some long tubes, preferably some port work on the exhaust side. Edelbrock would also be nowhere on my list of cams to consider, but their Edelbrock comment shows this is a biased article, all they care about is stroking their sponsors.

They choose to ignore proven methods of making power and instead do some flashy bolt ons to a tired old small block, compare it to a big diesel and proclaim diesels are great gassers suck. I pity anyone foolish enough to spend any money on this magazine. They have no credibility whatsoever. It's all about catching those who don't know any better so they can sell their sponsor's junk and get more sponsor money.

 

Rigged.. that test is a complete joke. They spent $2700 on the 5.8 and got 16hp and 10 ft/lbs of TQ? You get more than that by simply cutting the stock exhaust off... which they didn't touch.

But even if they had done an honest upgrade on the motor with longtubes and an appropriate cam, the biggest numbers you will see from a narurally aspirated 5.8 at the rear wheels is about 350tq and 300hp.. which still falls well short of the TQ output of the powerstroke, and that's what really matters in a work truck.