New Superduty gas engine for 2023.

valhalla360 wrote:

3 tons wrote:
Ford gassers are fine, but in typical turbo fashion, turbos are destined to be a money maker for the Ford garage…For ‘Real power’ the entire world will continue to require a diesel power-plant rather than the illusion of a turbo as a band-aid substitute- JMO

3 tons

Odd it's almost impossible to find a non-turbo diesel in the modern world. Apparently, the garages are very happy with this?

I think you are stuck in the world of 30-50yrs ago when people would bolt a turbo onto a gas engine never designed for a turbo and bad things would happen.

No, it's pretty straight forward to turbo charge an engine reliably if it was built for turbo from the ground up. The issue here is marketing. A $2k upcharge for a gas engine that put out the same power as the $10k upcharge for the diesel engine doesn't make a lot of sense.

But this assumes that adding a turbo (per your claim…) to a gasser will put out the same power as a diesel (huh? - seriously!!), and that gasser turbos are every bit as robust as are turbos on diesels (or maybe even as reliable as naturally aspirated gassers?)…Maybe this is true (I donno?), but if so, suggest that Detroit has overcome their shoddy ‘beta offerings’ rich past? This would be a welcome change indeed, but most definitely wasn’t the case on my last new truck purchase in 2016…

3 tons

Oregun wrote:

valhalla360 wrote:


why would anyone pay the upcharge for the 7.3l that Ford just spent big money to develop?

I see your point but I ask myself the same question about why would so many pay so much more for the 6.7 Diesel. I think it comes down to choosing wants vs needs.

Will have to wait and see how this plays out.

Going from the 7.3 NA gas to the turbo diesel, I would agree. There's an ego factor that comes into play.

But if they turbocharge a big block gas engine (and it's designed to handle it), the gas engine will at a minimum hang with the diesel under tough conditions (such as towing a heavy load up a steep grade) and in many situations (such as running around town not towing) out perform the diesel.

I'm far more skeptical of the ego being a big factor in a 6.8 NA vs 7.3 NA gas engines where the HP & torque will presumably be darn near identical based on the difference between the 6.2 & 7.3 being not far apart.

I really don't see the need to have two gas engines in the SD? I wonder if it is designed to be more "hybrid compatible"?

valhalla360 wrote:


why would anyone pay the upcharge for the 7.3l that Ford just spent big money to develop?

I see your point but I ask myself the same question about why would so many pay so much more for the 6.7 Diesel. I think it comes down to choosing wants vs needs.

Will have to wait and see how this plays out.

3 tons wrote:
Ford gassers are fine, but in typical turbo fashion, turbos are destined to be a money maker for the Ford garage…For ‘Real power’ the entire world will continue to require a diesel power-plant rather than the illusion of a turbo as a band-aid substitute- JMO

3 tons

Odd it's almost impossible to find a non-turbo diesel in the modern world. Apparently, the garages are very happy with this?

I think you are stuck in the world of 30-50yrs ago when people would bolt a turbo onto a gas engine never designed for a turbo and bad things would happen.

No, it's pretty straight forward to turbo charge an engine reliably if it was built for turbo from the ground up. The issue here is marketing. A $2k upcharge for a gas engine that put out the same power as the $10k upcharge for the diesel engine doesn't make a lot of sense.

Oregun wrote:

valhalla360 wrote:

As to the new engine, I'm confused with 6.8l...seems really close to the 7.3 gas, so why?

Maybe they want to obsolete the 6.2L and the 6.8L will be more competitive with Ram & Chev.

Problem is the 6.2l is only 40hp & 45ft-lb from the 7.3l. I would assume a 6.8l would be gaining HP and torque...to as you say compete with dodge and chevy.

So if the new engine is within say 10HP and 10ft-lb of the 7.3l, why would anyone pay the upcharge for the 7.3l that Ford just spent big money to develop?

valhalla360 wrote:

As to the new engine, I'm confused with 6.8l...seems really close to the 7.3 gas, so why?

Maybe they want to obsolete the 6.2L and the 6.8L will be more competitive with Ram & Chev.

It doesnt make sense unless it’s replacing both engines.
No other mfg has 2 HD pickup gasser engines and no way there’s enough fuel mileage difference unless maybe they’re getting fancy again, unlike the 7.3.

Ford gassers are fine, but in typical turbo fashion, turbos are destined to be a money maker for the Ford garage…For ‘Real power’ the entire world will continue to require a diesel power-plant rather than the illusion of a turbo as a band-aid substitute- JMO

3 tons

SoonDockin wrote:
If it was a turbo 6.8 it might be of interest. Personally I would not go gas without some boost since I cross the mountains a lot and am spoiled by my turbo charged vehicles now and before.

I doubt you will see a turbo gas engine in this size range. The capabilities would be too close and undercut diesel sales.