Re: torque

Lem Evans July 1st 2010, 7:40 pm

whitefield wrote: I realize that all companies and engines have problems. I would like to know why ford couldn't build on the 7.3 plat form. John I realize that the 7.3 had some problems and some engine have been replaced but i bet the 6.0 has had more engine failures in one year as opposed to the 7.3 ever did . From my own experience from working in the ford dealer and working on them for the local farmers and nursery 's around my neck of the woods. They all want a 7.3 from 99 to 03. no 6.0 0r 6.4 . I service a 2008 6.4 for a local farmer and his reports are 13mpg unloaded and 8 to 10mpg hauling and the cleaning exhaust is always coming on. He had rather have his 7.3 back ! just my opinions!

Call the president or Barney Frank and ask them if Ford can build a 7.3 style engine .

Lem Evans July 1st 2010, 7:47 pm

schmitty wrote:
Lem Evans wrote:
richter69 wrote:But how about that torque?!?!?!?!....................

950 lbs ft with Q16.

Let's throw some more boost at it and run it on alky and see what we get. 40yrs ago, there were a lot of semi tractors out there that would have loved to have that much tq. I think the 250hp Cummins was around 900 and it was a 14L/855ci engine.

I was talking to Donald Bowles yesterday......he said his motorcoach's CAT engine with the new EPA regs used twice as much fuel and has less performance than his last one with the same/more hp rating Twisted Evil

I'd guess this is Fords fault too sunny

jbozzelle July 1st 2010, 8:55 pm

I keep telling everyone at work that in the next 5-10 years we'll have DPFs and DEF injection on our boats too.

Can you imagine the size of the DPF and the DEF tank for a 3,000HP 3516 Cat? If you can, double it.......... The add some more for the 3 other 950HP thruster engines and the 3 generators.........

Bullshyte if you ask me....

Lem Evans July 1st 2010, 9:00 pm

jbozzelle wrote:I keep telling everyone at work that in the next 5-10 years we'll have DPFs and DEF injection on our boats too.

Can you imagine the size of the DPF and the DEF tank for a 3,000HP 3516 Cat? If you can, double it.......... The add some more for the 3 other 950HP thruster engines and the 3 generators.........

Bullshyte if you ask me....

Oh dear.........just put 27 chipped-up 7.3s in the deal clown

bruno July 1st 2010, 9:21 pm

we have diesel performance packages on sale at CKR Twisted Evil

....... sold 3 today ....... the diesel techs should thank me Razz

...... btw Missy called me from ford today ....she's smokin !!!!

carry on gents

pipedobber July 1st 2010, 9:27 pm

Any info available as to whether this tune will be available to us that already have the 2011's and still maintain warranty? Thanks, Chris

richter69 July 1st 2010, 9:41 pm

its just the little things that set me off.................tranny work pays good..........no bs prior approval crap to deal with............

Nick, I hope those packages you sell replace the primary fuel filter setup and the quick connect tranny line fittings..................HOWS YOUR TRUCK RuNiN"?!?!?!@#$%^& Question

richter69 July 1st 2010, 9:43 pm

jbozzelle wrote:I keep telling everyone at work that in the next 5-10 years we'll have DPFs and DEF injection on our boats too.

Can you imagine the size of the DPF and the DEF tank for a 3,000HP 3516 Cat? If you can, double it.......... The add some more for the 3 other 950HP thruster engines and the 3 generators.........

Bullshyte if you ask me....

all that EPA crap.................to go boatin' in a sea of OIL................. affraid

bruno July 1st 2010, 9:45 pm

trucks running great , the wife ran down to florida and put 600+ miles on here and got an avg of 18.1 .....

richter69 July 1st 2010, 9:48 pm

bruno wrote:trucks running great , the wife ran down to florida and put 600+ miles on here and got an avg of 18.1 .....

Whens the last time you changed the fuel filter?....................or rather paid someone to do it?

You would think with the cab off it would be easier???? WRONG!!!!!!!! but that bitch got some motherf-ckin' ToRqUe............. tongue

Lem Evans July 1st 2010, 9:52 pm

bruno wrote:we have diesel performance packages on sale at CKR ....... sold 3 today ....... the diesel techs should thank me ...... btw Missy called me from ford today ....she's smokin !!!!

carry on gents

Cool deal.........if the thing chokes will 'smokin' Missy fix it or will Fabio ?

bruno July 1st 2010, 9:55 pm

Missy said she can fix anything .....she also said she's never heard of a Jon "A+" Richter......... Very Happy

richter69 July 1st 2010, 9:56 pm

Lem Evans wrote:
bruno wrote:we have diesel performance packages on sale at CKR ....... sold 3 today ....... the diesel techs should thank me ...... btw Missy called me from ford today ....she's smokin !!!!

carry on gents
Cool deal.........if the thing chokes will 'smokin' Missy fix it or will Fabio ?

FaBiO WiLl bE To BuSy TrYiNg To GeT ThE MoThErF-CkIn' FUEL FILTER OfF ThE C-CkSuCkEr.................BrInG ThE SmOkE BaBy.>.>.>.>.>.>.>.>.>.>. bounce

richter69 July 1st 2010, 9:57 pm

bruno wrote:Missy said she can fix anything .....she also said she's never heard of a Jon "A+" Richter.........

TeLl HeR Im FiLEd UnDeR HeRo................

schmitty July 1st 2010, 11:20 pm

Lem Evans wrote:
schmitty wrote:
Lem Evans wrote:
richter69 wrote:But how about that torque?!?!?!?!....................

950 lbs ft with Q16.

Let's throw some more boost at it and run it on alky and see what we get. 40yrs ago, there were a lot of semi tractors out there that would have loved to have that much tq. I think the 250hp Cummins was around 900 and it was a 14L/855ci engine.

I was talking to Donald Bowles yesterday......he said his motorcoach's CAT engine with the new EPA regs used twice as much fuel and has less performance than his last one with the same/more hp rating
I'd guess this is Fords fault too

The new stuff EPA reg diesel stuff is crap. That's why I'm still running the old 96 Pete with 1.26M miles on it. I don't want to deal with the headaches that these new HD diesels are having. If he's only using twice as much fuel he should be happy, I've heard of plenty that are worse than that. I can pull 85,000# all day long and get over 6mpg, most of the new stuff is in the low 4's. At $2.85/gal $.7125/mile@4mpg $.475/mile @ 6mpg difference of $.2375/mile. In an average 100k year that is $23750. Embarassed

richter69 July 2nd 2010, 9:23 am

......yep, spent 30 minutes struggling with a poor design, funny thing is they went backwards as they used to be as such you used a wrench to get it off................get it together fast and get the money..................who gives a shit as long as we make money on trucks.....................snap together trucks.

TORQUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

342g July 2nd 2010, 10:40 am

David Willingham wrote:A friend of mine is coming to the house Monday with his new 2011 F350 SRW 4x4. I'm going to drive it and see how it does. He isn't happy with the mileage at all. He is getting 12.1 pulling a 14ft enclosed trailer and the trans shift timing sucks. He said when you get on it unloaded, it waits too long to shift. He did say the power was very good, as good as the 2010 Duramax he traded in on it. He said he got better mileage with his 2001 7.3 F250 pulling the same trailer.

I would be tickled pink, getting 12.1 pulling my trailer, I get about 10, sometimes, less. Embarassed

bbf-falcon July 2nd 2010, 11:28 am

I will just keep my ole Powerstroke 7.3 as long as the wheels will turn Smile

D's557BBF July 2nd 2010, 12:02 pm

blown86hallet wrote:1600 rpm ~ 847 ft lbs
2800 rpm ~ 412 hp.

New calibration, factory trim, meets EPA!

Adam those are not the numbers you showed me in the beginning! Why did the tq numbers get so low? Them early dyno #'s where off the freaking chart! 4 digit plus

One of the charts you showed me was 1300 ft lbs!! what happened man?? Shocked

dfree383 July 2nd 2010, 12:15 pm

Its amazing how alot of the new Diesels burn 50% more fuel to do the same job........ I wonder how the real math works out.... 50% more fuel burned and how much less emissions......... Hummmmmm........

Seems to me you burn 50% more you have....... MORE EMISSIONS ???? Am I crazy?

D. Sea July 2nd 2010, 12:17 pm

dfree383 wrote:Its amazing how alot of the new Diesels burn 50% more fuel to do the same job........ I wonder how the real math works out.... 50% more fuel burned and how much less emissions......... Hummmmmm........

Seems to me you burn 50% more you have....... MORE EMISSIONS ???? Am I crazy?

Your math is flawed, just ask Man Bear Pig Laughing

gdog July 2nd 2010, 12:21 pm

Dave,
You could be crazy....all the polls haven't closed. But that doesn't make you wrong.
thanks,
Gordon

dfree383 July 2nd 2010, 12:24 pm

gdog wrote:Dave,
You could be crazy....all the polls haven't closed. But that doesn't make you wrong.
thanks,
Gordon

OK Let me clarify....... Hows my Logic in this situation flawed????? Burn more = More Emissions ???? Right????

schmitty July 2nd 2010, 2:06 pm

dfree383 wrote: ???? Am I crazy?

Yep, but that's the quality we like best about you. Razz

BigBlockRanger July 2nd 2010, 2:16 pm

dfree383 wrote:
gdog wrote:Dave,
You could be crazy....all the polls haven't closed. But that doesn't make you wrong.
thanks,
Gordon

OK Let me clarify....... Hows my Logic in this situation flawed????? Burn more = More Emissions ???? Right????

Don't try to make anything the govt mandates, make sense, you *will* go crazy if you're not already for just trying....

Sponsored content