Ford 7.3L V8 Power Numbers & They Are Lower Than We Thought!

[timmac]

Looks like the new 7.3 V-8 is not such a powerhouse after all, just a tad more than the V10..

And with all the issues the 1st and 2nd years of anything new who wants to be the 1st to try it in a new motorhome that to will have its issues..

I will keep my old school 2008 V-10 5 speed, Bounder with the Banks Power Pack system, 5 Star Tuning and pass the new 7.3 V-8 motorhomes on the hills..

https://youtu.be/pg7m5GDNeac

[wildmanbaker]

I agree on that. I believe that is a vastly under estimated power plant.

[JRscooby]

wildmanbaker wrote:
JR, you would have been better off putting a 390 in it instead of the 360. The 360 really had a bad rep in the ford pickups as being gutless and a gas eater. Quite a few people put a car 390 in place of the 360 and were very happy with the increase power and mileage.

For what I did with that truck a 300 inch I6 would of been the best, but I was working with what I had.

[wildmanbaker]

JR, you would have been better off putting a 390 in it instead of the 360. The 360 really had a bad rep in the ford pickups as being gutless and a gas eater. Quite a few people put a car 390 in place of the 360 and were very happy with the increase power and mileage.

[JRscooby]

crawford wrote:
I was comparing when the V10 came out the 460 went away how you come out with chevy and compress gas is way off subject.

Let me see, re-writing history with statement "ford 460 truck engine it was the biggest gas gushier ford made", I saw no limit comparison to the 10.
I brought up the GMC, as a comparison, to show that for most it might be history, but I was there. I owned, operated, and made money with gas engines in class 8 trucks.

And up the thread somebody was comparing the cost of operation the new gasoline engine to a diesel. Fact is it is not real hard to convert a gasoline engine to run on propane or natural gas. That conversion could cut fuel cost enough to get by with less power.

wildmanbaker wrote:

The 460 was a gas eater because of the way Ford had to set it up to pass emissions. With the correct timing chain set, so the cam is straight up, and some other corrections, it was a powerhouse and didn't do bad on MPGs either. Unless you are talking about the poly head 427, GMs real powerhouse was the 454 hands down, and wasn't a nightmare to work on.

I had a few 460s. I pulled one out of a early '80s F350 to transplant into my '76 F500. After about a month of feeding it, and trying to put it on a diet, I rebuilt the 360 and put it back in.
I never saw a 454 in a class 8. I do know the 427 used in the 70 series twin screws where not the same as light trucks.

[crawford]

My 460 got 6 mpg while it could pull a house and engine was strong mine never could hold exhaust header broke all the time. By the way how did GM get into a Ford topic. Guessing didn't read I guess.

[wildmanbaker]

JRscooby wrote:

crawford wrote:
if you all remember the big ford 460 truck engine it was the biggest gas gushier ford made and don't think that will change in the new engine.

False. Back when "Super Duty" on the side of the hood ment there was a 850 in the VIN, (F850) Ford had a 477, and 534 CID. I had one of each. Either would pull Jesus off the cross, but a GMC 427 could pull right with them, and burn less gas.
One place the new engine might box a diesels ears is if it can run on compressed natural gas, might get the same work done at much lower cost.

The 460 was a gas eater because of the way Ford had to set it up to pass emissions. With the correct timing chain set, so the cam is straight up, and some other corrections, it was a powerhouse and didn't do bad on MPGs either. Unless you are talking about the poly head 427, GMs real powerhouse was the 454 hands down, and wasn't a nightmare to work on.

[crawford]

I was comparing when the V10 came out the 460 went away how you come out with chevy and compress gas is way off subject.

[camperdave]

Most all new engine designs are due to a combination of manufacturing cost and emissions requirements. I'm sure this one is too.

I have no doubt that history will look kindly upon the 6.8 V10. Great engine that did its job very well and had a long run. Long live the V10!

[JRscooby]

crawford wrote:
if you all remember the big ford 460 truck engine it was the biggest gas gushier ford made and don't think that will change in the new engine.

False. Back when "Super Duty" on the side of the hood ment there was a 850 in the VIN, (F850) Ford had a 477, and 534 CID. I had one of each. Either would pull Jesus off the cross, but a GMC 427 could pull right with them, and burn less gas.
One place the new engine might box a diesels ears is if it can run on compressed natural gas, might get the same work done at much lower cost.

[crawford]

if you all remember the big ford 460 truck engine it was the biggest gas gushier ford made and don't think that will change in the new engine.

[wildmanbaker]

Well, if you think a larger displacement engine, producing more power, is going to get better mileage, good for you. You can run them really lean, and get a large amount of power, until all of the aluminum is burned up. That usually does not turn out good. A larger engine that runs easer, but uses more fuel, yes, but don't kid yourselves. Ford developed a large V8 in the late 60s, 537 CID, but they did not turn out well. Machine shops seem to like them though. Not saying their new engine will turn out the same, but this is not any new for ford.

[JaxDad]

301TBS wrote:
Made for towing, not racing. Flat torque curve, 400ft lbs at 1500rpm

Yup, a gas powered diesel. LOL.

[Chum_lee]

timmac wrote:

theoldwizard1 wrote:

timmac wrote:
Jeez what's the point Ford less HP and almost the same torque as the 3 valve V-10 in the F-53...

Likely better fuel economy and lower cost to build.

Yes Ford even admitted it will have a lower cost to build but no one knows the true mpg yet, Ford has not said a word about it..

I suspect it will only be a tad better than the V-10 at best...

Unfortunately, Ford never intended their new (and hopefully improved) V-8 engine to propel their heavy duty F53 chassis at light speed. The reason for the increase in the cubic inch displacement is so that they can run the engine in closed loop more often without needing to use high power fuel enrichment. (as much) They are hoping for a slight increase in fuel mileage at higher power settings while still using 87 octane fuel. It's kind of like being able to run a jet engine (at speed) without an afterburner.

A "tad" better fuel mileage IN CLOSED LOOP means improved emission control. It's a BIG thing for Ford to demonstrate their commitment towards emission control to the powers to be, especially in their gas guzzlers.

Chum lee

[timmac]

theoldwizard1 wrote:

timmac wrote:
Jeez what's the point Ford less HP and almost the same torque as the 3 valve V-10 in the F-53...

Likely better fuel economy and lower cost to build.

Yes Ford even admitted it will have a lower cost to build but no one knows the true mpg yet, Ford has not said a word about it..

I suspect it will only be a tad better than the V-10 at best...