What if...
 

This will be silly to many, but I think it's still a worthy question (yet another facet to my weirdness):

Say they make a time machine (don't give up yet... this is on-topic), and you can buy your 7.3L Superduty brand new, with the factory warranty that is valid from today. Just for leveling the playing field, you would have a modern sound system, backup cam, and GPS.

The other option is a 6.7L with the same trim... but of course, the 6.7L is quieter and has more bells and whistles and better suspension.

There is no difference in price between the two trucks, because the time machine round-trip (with an 8000-pound truck) is pretty expensive.

What do you buy?

7.3 all the way

something about having to replace the entire fuel system at 10-12k out of my pocket if water or gas gets introduced to the system just doesnt sit right with me. Although the new ones are nice, I would do the 7.3 again with everything else being equal. The new 6.7s may eventually get there, but the 7.3 has been proven for durability time and again.

If it was between the 7.3 and the 6.7 I would go with a 7.3

If you left me in control of the time machine, after stopping my own wedding I would set the time machine for 2007, buy a 6.0 & bullet proof it.
I think the 6.0's are the best looking Superduty's and best sounding Powerstroke.

I just filled out the order forms for 5 new trucks last week. If the 7.3 was still offered, then I would have ordered all as F-550s with that engine. To this day, the 7.3 Power Stroke has been the most reliable and profitable engine that we have ever had in a fleet truck....by a fair margin too.

However, since the 7.3 is no longer an option, I went with 3 Kenworths (T170) and the other two trucks will be F-550 with the V10 engine. The 3 Kenworth trucks are going to replace International 4900 units and the F-550 V10 units are going to replace F-550 6.0 models.

Shake N Bake, for Ford's sake, they should read your post regarding the sales they just lost on F-650s or F-550s, both having the 6.7. If the front of my F-550 7.3L got wrecked beyond repair, I too, would replace it with a V10.

While I like my 7.3, the continued downfall of available parts is starting to push me towards selling my truck for a new one. Might just have to sell it while it is still in good shape before something breaks and I can no longer find parts. Leaning towards the 6.7 and I had a 99 with a v10 and I won't do that again.

If I had control of the time machine, the R&D $$$ spent on the 6.0 would have been spent on updating the 7.3.

If I went back in time I would get the 7.3 also. Too many damn sensors, DPF, DEF and a fuel sys that is garbage if water gets in it on the 6.7. Sounds just like this F35 aircraft I work on, todays technology that is always broke. A PITA POS.

What parts can you not get. There all over the place here

It took me months to find a simple alternator bracket as they are no longer made and many of the wiring harnesses are no longer available. I am sure I will find other stuff that is no longer out there when the time comes. Just thinking about getting out while the getting is good before something breaks or is damaged in an accident that I can't fix. I don't live in an area where I can have a half built truck sitting in the driveway for weeks or months at a time while I search the nation for parts and my garage is about 12 inches too short for me to get the door down. Might just pull off the winch and radios and let it go. Has less than 150k miles on it but after-market parts folks are not stepping in and producing what Ford has discontinued.

I would think the V10 in a F550 would get maybe 6mpg. I think at that rate I would try the 6.7L. But if the 7.3L was available I would go that route.

shakenbake, if the 7.3 was that much more reliable, why not drop some crate motors in w/ new trans, maybe change some suspension parts, brakes, seats, interior, etc, and get back going? One would think that could done cheaper than what a new truck would be. But im just guessing...... and i guess the TIME needed to do all of that is money lost if its your business, when you can go down to lot, pick it up and drive and start making money again......

MPG is not a factor when purchasing our trucks for fleet use. We average about 6 mpg across the board for any truck that has an aerial device which the majority of our fleet. In our branch, we have 12 little bucket trucks (29' to bottom of bucket) and they all are on F-450 chassis. I think 7 or 8 have the 7.3 and the rest are V10. Fuel cost per week is about the same for either type. Our F-550 trucks have the 6.0 liter diesel and a 42' articulating insulated bucket.....they use the same amount of fuel as the other two. The majority of the time those trucks are parked with a man working in the air. The engine has to be running for the bucket to operate.

A crate motor does us no good....none of our 7.3 liter trucks need replacement engines except for Lindey (1998 International 4700 26,000 lbs GVW). That engine actually runs fine but leaks so much it doesn't pass DOT inspection. The shop pulled the engine and found the block cracked at the oil pan mounting holes. Apparently someone removed the pan sometime in the past and they used an impact gun to re-install the bolts. IH says the sealant got in the threaded bolt holes and hydraulic pressure busted out the bosses. So, we have a new engine on it's way for that truck.

We purchased 18 Power Stroke Fords with the 7.3 liter engine. All 18 are still running. Those trucks go out every day. It's pretty rare to see those trucks having problems. They aren't perfect, but compared to our other vehicles, the 7.3 Power Strokes are very solid

If you are suggesting that we replace the 6.0 liter engines with a 7.3 then that is not possible. The truck would never pass emissions or DOT inspection and we would have to place it out of service. The emissions testing regulations in our area require that all original systems remain on the truck as it left the factory. So, if it left the factory with a 6.0 liter engine, then it must always have a 6.0 liter engine complete with the EGR, Cat etc. It has a 6.4 liter....then it must always have a 6.4 liter along with the DPF etc.

From a strictly financial perspective....if the 7.3 was available today, then almost every fleet manager in the country would purchase them for their fleet because the cost to operate is much lower than anything else out there. Some of our 7.3 Power Stroke trucks are 15 years old now and we aren't even considering replacing those trucks. Rule of thumb for our fleet is that we replace the chassis after 10 years and the body after 20 years. We are making plans to purchase some more F-450s with the V10 engine and move the bucket bodies over but we have decided to hang on to the 7.3 liter trucks until the bucket is 20 years old and then we'll sell them as a complete unit. It looks like the 7.3 liter Power Strokes are going to last the full 20 years which is twice as long as we planned for when they were first purchased. No other truck/engine combo in our fleet has accomplished that feat. We first started purchasing a fleet in 1963.

I'd say the hell with both and just ride your avitar:) but I'm just cruising the threads,lol

6.7 without a doubt. ill take 400hp out of the box, yes please. great engine paired with an excellent trans

shake, i was strictly talking about the trucks with the 7.3 and i was assuming that you were/had replaced the 7.3s already, but as i now see they are still chuggin on down the road......:-jammin

This is an interesting thread. I'm a very small business, and run only 3 trucks- the 3 in my signature. I bought the v-10 last. Mostly because I liked the CC lariat for personal useage and doubled its usefulness as a backup work truck. I figured I'd try the v-10 out as a possible option for 7.3 replacement when the time came. As far as towing my 7k trailer, it just doesn't feel right compared to the 7.3. Does it do it? Yes. Does it seem happy all day long on back roads? Not compared to the diesels. They go all day, and when you park them, seem a little disappointed that there's nothing else for that day. Not sure what I'll do when the time comes. Ride in a friends 6.7 the other night that was towing my JD 310 backhoe. It seemed happy to do it. Don't think my v10 could have.

Rob I take it you would rather be back working on the F16's since they are like our 7.3 PSD in the fact that they have stood the test of time and proved to be a good work horse or in the case of the F16 it is a good proven fighter jet.

Now if I could go back in time........:-X04 I would still pick a 7.3PSD over any of the lastest greatest diesel Ford has out!! There is no way I would ever own a Ford 6.7 !! But I was checking out yesterday a newer Dodge 3500 Mega Cab Cummins 6.7 DRW that had some modds done to it and
"That I would own.:-X06" But can't afford to own it.
Mind you I dislike Dodge but I hate Ford for their 6.7 and I do NOT care for the look of the new Ford front end. Oh yea the newer Ford DRW has the ugliest rear dually fenders EVER !!

shake n bake... which are lower cost to maintain, your 7.3L or your V10's? Your post said your company has 7 or 8 of each.

If I had to guess, I would have thought the V10's to be cheaper to maintain. One third the oil, twice the interval.

Not to mention the teacup sized filter :)

Ed, you absolutely right on that. F16's and 7.3L are like the same when the F35 and 6.7 are like the same. On F16's we didn't have to hook a computer up to the jet just to do troubleshooting or operational checks as in the F35 you have to hook a computer up to do everything. And when operational checks don't go right then we reboot the computer and try again. And when I mean everything has a sensor on it , I mean it. And there is so much more room in each compartment, not like the F35 and the 6.7. I'm trying so hard to get back on F16's here at Tyndall AFB but the old F4 guys just don't want to retire.

Tell me the 6.7 has verticle take off.

No it sure don't and neither does the Air Force or the Navy version of the F35. But the working components of it is so sophisticated its really a HIGH maintenance aircraft. Now if they can get everything on that jet to work the way it should at the same time then it will be an awesome jet but that will never happen in its life time.

Is the 6.7 a PSD or Cummins? Heck we're talking time machines and ****e so we might as well throw the Cummins in the mix.

My buddy with the 6.7PSD enjoys the engine when it isn't costing him repair bills in the shop......3 DEF heaters, 1 radiator and some fuel components replaced......and he has only 85K on it and bought it with 65K on it.....color me not impressed....

The ride of the new rigs is outstanding compared to our chasis, as it should be with suspension updates etc. But the costs are just silly.

Also, for what many of us tow (6000-10000lbs) the 6.2L gasser might be a viable option as well. I was able to ride in a newer 350 Lariat with the 6.2 and a gooseneck horse trailer with about 3000lbs of horses in there and it was a the quietest thing I've been in......and it had zero issues with towing that load.

Great feedback!

Here are my thoughts when I posed the question:

When Stinky was at his worst behavior, I pondered getting a 6.0L and bullet-proofing it. I want a diesel - that's it - so the V10 is out of the question. I had a 460, and I won't go that route again. The Cummins is an awesome engine... but I hate the wrapper, and I'm not in a position to put one in a Superduty.

Posing the question also made me wonder about the possibility of some of us saying "hell yeah, 7.3L" in order to feel good about the choice we already made. Shake-N-Bake's assertion has a great deal of credibility, because his situation is not a singular scenario. The 7.3L (in stock form) is simply an enviable platform for anybody that works their truck hard. The fact that they are stretching the vehicle life to a specified limit (20 years) speaks volumes in an era where capitol equipment investments are sometimes amortized out (and replaced) in five years.

I have opted to blast away at my Superduty to return it to like-new condition and some have chastised me for my choice, others have looked at my situation with envy. I'm not saying there are those who want the misadventures I've endured (I'm a cautionary tale) - but there are those who wish they could muscle through their own woes as I have, and end up with a vehicle as capable as Stinky will ultimately become. I don't say this with hubris, just relaying the feedback I've received.

If I knew then what I know now - before the trail of Buck$Zooka craters - I think the bulletproof 2007 6.0 is best for my situation. Saying that... this would have taken me down a path I currently know nothing about, and I could be writing about wishing I would have gone with a 2000 7.3L and upgrading it.

Excluding the tools, accessories, and technology purchases (stuff useful on things other than the 7.3L or can be easily resold), I believe I've passed another milestone: I think I just passed the $30K mark on Stinky (including the purchase price). With that... Stinky has had all his rolling hardware restored to new condition, all sensors/controls are new, I have backup modules, plenty of life left on the engine (as per the compression test), upgraded power and transmission to the level of a brand new 6.7L, and modern electronics. Stinky cost half that of a new base 6.7L Superduty, and if I replaced the motor - I'd still be sitting on a pile of unused Buck$Zooka ammo by comparison.

If I were to take all the money and time I have into Stinky, plus add all the money and time I suspect I need to keep Stinky happy for the next ten years - then compare that with the cost of buying a 2015 6.7L and keeping it happy until 2025: I am quite literally betting the cost of ownership for Stinky from 2010 to 2025 will be less than going new today.

Thats okay rich, it pales in comparison to the amount of $ that goes thru these things in fuel costs. Since ive had mine (2005), i figured ive put over $50k into the ole girl just in fuel, throw in the purchase price (25k), a few sets of tires, several sets of front bearings, radiator, alternators(3x), water pump, a/c, and now trans, etc etc etc, hell ive easily got 100g's in the ole girl when you account for everything under the sun. But thanks to this website and all you boys it could be 150k if i had to pay someone else to work on her.... but funny thing is, im still spending money on her (i guess that what you do for the gals you love) , waiting on my turbo rebuild kit to come in the mail and a ww2. Then next year i plan on putting some new injectors in..... and it never seems to stop..... lol

What a silly thread.






















Everybody knows you need a DeLorean to go back in time, not a Ford pickup.:-X15

I can install a Mr. Fusion, a flux capacitor, and some stainless steel hubcaps.

What a testament to this engine!

Thanks, Greg, for your unbiased analysis as it relates to a larger fleet of non-OTR trucks.

My needs are not speed, but reliability. Given that, I would not move away from this engine even if given an enticing opportunity.

I was fortunate to stumble across this powerplant in my last truck purchase, and I doubt my luck could hold out SO well again.

Pop

Tugly, I had a 460 also. And a Ford 400, a 351M, a couple of 302s, a 289, and I forgot what engine was in my Mercury Montego wagon. Anyway, lots of experience with Ford gas engines, and my last truck prior to going with the 7.3L diesel was the carbureted 460. With eerily similar experience, I totally get why you went diesel, coming from the 460.

However, that being said, the V10 is not even a distance cousin twice removed from a 460. It is an entirely different animal. I have a V10 also, an older 2 valve version. it is a dream to drive compared to any Ford gasoline motor I've ever owned. Snappy, quiet, powerful... it just works. The V10 I have is in a van chassis cab, where quietness around the doghouse is better appreciated.

Going back in time, knowing then what I know now, I wouldn't dismiss the V10 out of hand in a heavy pulling truck like I did back then. Back then, my experience was colored by the 460 and 400. Now, 15 years later, I recognize what a leap forward the modular block family was for reliability in Ford gas engines.

Think about it. More than 75% of the front engined Class A motorhomes, and an equally high estimation of Class C motorhomes, as well as the hundreds of thousands of gas engined airporter transport busses, school busses, passenger vans, cargo vans... and the literally millions of taxi cabs and police cars... all heavy service vehicles with constant uptime in applications where reliability is key... all running on those modular block motors. These aren't our father's Ford engines.

I know this is a 7.3L forum, but I'm still curious to hear from Shake N Bake if the V10's in his fleet have cost less per year to operate than the equivalent chassis 450's with 7.3's.

Great post, good points.

For me, when I needed a vehicle to tow the horse(s) I wanted something reliable, powerful enough that I wouldn't be struggling on hills etc. and something that would last a while with some dilligence on my part.

I already had a 2001 tundra that I didn't want to tow live animals with, not that it couldn't I jsut wanted something more sturdy......and in the price range I was looking a 250 7.3L fit the bill perfectly. If I bought something new at the time it may have been a gasser who knows, but I wasn't buying a new 6.4 at the time I knew that.

I think we all know the 7.3L is reliable drivetrain with proper love along the way and can give many years of service, the thing we all begin to struggle with a little (I think IMHO) is the platforms with the 7.3 are really starting to show their age in both wear and ride quality compared to the newer rigs.

Thjat being said......for half the price of a new 6.7 we can have a very well built up and reliable 7.3 capable of doing all of what a 6.7 can.

I've been looking at the economy numbers on the V10, and they translate directly to my experience with the 460. The old joke "It'll pass anything but a gas station" comes to mind. If I ate like that, I'd need Dodge tow mirrors on my motorcycle - to see around myself.

I am a 7.3 fan all the way. Love that I bought one and never want to get rid of it. But I agree as stated above also. My dad has a 2000 2 valve v-10 with over 300,000 one it. It's been a great truck and gets a consistent 10 mpg. While that isn't great it is a worthy motor and has been very reliable.

Let me answer a question with another question; How reliable is a stock 7.3 assembly around 400 hp, towing?
I bet a 7.3 juiced to 400 hp would cost you more money to run than a 6.7.
Because the MPG would probably actually go down a touch, and stuff would melt faster. Especially towing.

The only thing better on a 7.3, IMHO, is the more reliable HEUI injectors, and lack of emissions stuff.

But to match a 6.7 all you need is about 330-350hp at the wheels give or take, and that can be a very reliable, cool running target with the 7.3L.

My buddy is lucky to see 16mpg empty with his 6.7 with a ladder rack on it, 14-15.5 towing a light contractor trailer....about 4000lbs

For what most people tow (based on gut feel without any scientific surveys) which is <10K or so.......that 7.3L would do just fine properly set up compared to the 6.7L. I'm not saying it would absolutely hang with a 6.7 on a mountain pass etc. but it wouldn't embarrass itself either, plus, the 7.3L is heavier with the extra $30K in small unmarked bills left over in the bed of the 7.3L.....:p

You must have had a good 460. My 460 got 6 mpg. Six. Ford trucks and vans of that era had dual fuel tanks. And in '79, the year of my previous truck and van, cheap gas was an astronomical 89 cents a gallon. Just 6 years earlier, it was 25 cents. The old joke used to be "i'll give you five bucks to fill up your tank", only, it wasn't a joke... it was a generosity, as there would usually be money left over to buy a pack of smokes, also at 25 cents. (Since we are traveling back in time.)

Anyway, I'll take the 10 mpg of the V10 in exchange for it's much better reliability, cooler running, and lower operating cost over the gas motors that preceded it, AND over the all the six point x powerstroke motors that followed it.

That's part of the privilege of shopping in hindsight through a time machine, as opposed to having to guess at the unproven.

One google search of "Ford 6.7 exhaust valves" will yield enough images and videos of cracked and splintered exhaust valves of bone stock Ford 6.7 diesels with not more than 100,000 miles on them... typically less... to give anyone some serious pause. Then add "dropped valve" to the search terms, to get images of genaded cylinders from untimely collisions with the piston. Then add "high pressure fuel pump" and "water" to the search terms. There isn't enough hours left in life to read the litany of lamentations on the 6.7.

Out of over 2 million 7.3L Powerstrokes produced, who here has had to pay $16,000 for a new fuel system because of water in the fuel? In 14 years of fueling the 7.3L, I've never once seen a Water in Fuel light even blink. I've drawn sample after sample from the fuel bowl, looking for water. None found. So is it really the "poor fuel quality in the USA" that is taking the 6.7 out of service?

If I had the money for a time machine... I would probably not be too concerned about expenditures on a vehicle.

But to put it bluntly...
If someone were to GIVE me a brand new 6.7...

I'D sell it in a half a heartbeat and buy the nicest 7.3 for sale in the country... and still have plenty left over for a down payment on a shop to build the 7.3 up real nice.

Skrew a skerpion.

I've considered the "total carbon footprint" of the pollution created in the manufacture of a new truck, and in the case of an unreliable new truck, the cost to manufacture another new truck every five years, just for me. Estimating the pollution created and energy and fuel consumed to manufacture, transport, and produce all the parts necessary to build, sell, deliver, maintain, and dispose of four trucks, where I can easily get the same 20 years out of just one truck, makes the old 7.3L less harmful to the environment in net terms.

I have thought the same thing; Nice interior, good ride, but I don't want to fix it, and it needs more fixin' than people think. And that damn DEF is annoying as well.