New Superduty gas engine for 2023.

[Oregun]

New Superduty gas engine for 2023.

[NamMedevac_70]

Powerful gas all the way good buddies.

[noteven]

V10 EcoBoost 600HP!

[JoeChiOhki]

I mean if we're playing displacement one-upmanship, they could always go back to their original 7.5L of the old Ford 460 😉 😛

[joeshmoe]

Its interesting that all the offerings are push-rod motors. Superduty customers have been wanting more than one option for years now.
From '99 all the way to 2020, the only push-rod motor option was the Powerstroke.

[Buzzcut1]

the diesel engine is not about horsepower its about torque for pulling

7.3 liter Godzilla 7.3
Horsepower 430hp @ 5,500rpm
Torque 475lb-ft. @ 4,000rpm
Transmission 10-speed automatic

6.7L Power Stroke® turbo-diesel
450 HP
935 lb.-ft. torque TorqShift® heavy-duty 6-speed SelectShift™ automatic transmission 4x2 or 4x4 drive system 35,000 lbs. max towing 7,640 lbs. max payload

[Oregun]

Looks like they are killing the 6.2L gas and I saw something about enhancing the exhaust on the 7.3L Godzilla.

Here are the specs


Four engines are offered with a 10-speed automatic transmission, including a new 6.8-liter gasoline V-8 that replaces the current 6.2-liter V-8 and a high-output version of the 6.7-liter turbocharged Power Stroke diesel V-8, along with the standard Power Stroke and 7.3-liter "Godzilla" gasoline V-8.

[Oregun]

Grit dog wrote:

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.

I know you want this to be a great discovery, but realize that it doesn't make sense unless we're all missing something or they're turfing the 7.3 already.

Your guess is as good as mine at this point.

[valhalla360]

3 tons wrote:

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

Since we are talking Ford: Current motors...
- Diesel = 475 hp
- Gas 7.3 = 430 hp

Adding a turbo will typically boost the HP, so yeah, it should be able to match HP.

Using the 3.5 ecoboost, as an example, peak torque drops back to a much more sedate (almost diesel like) 2500-3000rpm range.

So yeah, the performance should be very comparable if not better than the diesel in some respects.

Yes, they can certainly be just as robust. The little 3.5 is putting out 385hp and seems to be fairly reliable. More than double the displacement to 7.3 while only bumping up the output by 100hp shouldn't be straining properly designed motor.

But of course as I previously stated, I would be surprised to see them do it for marketing/profitability reasons. Not because it's technologically difficult.

[Grit_dog]

3 tons wrote:

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

You both are a bit out to lunch on this, just at different restaurants...

[Grit_dog]

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.

I know you want this to be a great discovery, but realize that it doesn't make sense unless we're all missing something or they're turfing the 7.3 already.

[3_tons]

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

[valhalla360]

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.

[Bionic_Man]

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"?

[Oregun]

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.