Problems w/6.0, 6.4 & 6.7 PowerStroke diesels video

[Reformed_Stockb]

I found this video that seems to give a good explanation of issues RVers might face with some Ford diesel pickups. The 7.3L was one of
the best engines ever put in a diesel pickup (according to Wiki). The
video explained the 7.3L had virtually no emissions equipment and was a simple design. Ever since emissions were placed on diesels, all kinds of problems came up. Later models were less reliable and more expensive to buy, repair and maintain. I have seen new Ford PUs with a sticker of $74K. That's just ridiculous.

New diesels also get reduced MPG, because fuel is used to clean emissions. Meaning more total fuel is burned. To me a couple living in a 5er, has a pretty energy efficient lifestyle. They have a small area to heat or cool and they tend to go were the temps are mild (i.e. summer up north, winter in FL). The additional cost has stopped my plans of buying a diesel & 5er. I'm sure it has done that to many others as well. So, I very much doubt the new emissions do anything for the environment. Here's the vid: http://tinyurl.com/pe6nxs5

[majorgator]

My current TV is a 2014 Ram with 6.7 Cummins and Aisin tranny. But my "other" TV, and still part-time daily driver is a '96 7.3 PSD F350 CCLB 4x4.

Comparing the 2 trucks are like comparing apples and oranges. No doubt that the Ram comes stock with all the power you need, is quieter, more comfortable, modern, etc. But there's great benefit in a mod'd 7.3. In stock form, they're not very impressive, but when you wake it up with chips, intake, exhaust, injectors, etc., it's an entirely different truck. With nearly 300k miles, I'd get it in today and drive it across country with 5'er in tow (right after I replace the ball joints).

[Bionic_Man]

I understand the romance of the "good old days", but they are rarely what you remember them to be.

I had a great experience with my 2nd and 3rd gen CTDs, but I have not desire to go back to them. I suspect the Fords are the same way.

[N-Trouble]

Yep "Total Cost of Ownership" on newer diesels can be through the roof once out of warranty. Take for example a CP4 failure which is upwards of $10k. I typically keep my vehicles well past warranty but almost makes more sense to trade in a newer diesel when warranty runs out.

[spoon059]

I miss the simplicity and durability of the older engines, that's for sure. We have a 20+ year old 3 cylinder Kubota that will never stop running. Change the oil ever now and again and keep adding diesel, that thing will outlive me. But its dirty and sooty as can be.

My new Ram is VERY clean, but it cost an arm and 2 legs and its very complicated. I hope nothing breaks outside of warranty, cause I'll never afford the repairs! it gets very good mileage and is super clean, so that is a plus.

I just wish we could have a compromise. Cleaner burning than the older diesels, but not so complicated that they are too expensive to keep on the road.

[Flashman]

donn0128 wrote:
RV living is definitely NOT cheaper than a s&b house. How do I know you ask? Easy, my 2400SqFt house cost me 80 dollars a month for gas and 90 for electricity. Winter 2013 living in my 300SqFt fiver in the same area cost me 125 a month for electricity and more than 150 a month for gas. Could I have done it cheaper by moving south? Probably, But like everyone always says, if momma aint happy no one is happy! And momma wanted a new house, so we spent 10 months looking.

Depends on how you RV - if you are a RV park rat - yeah it costs too much. If you dry camp and use a generator to charge the batteries then it can be real cheap.

[blofgren]

N-Trouble wrote:
Only reason 7.3 is STILL so highly regarded is because of the decade long failures with the 6.0/6.4. If those motors were half way reliable nobody would even be talking about the ancient 7.3 today... Weak 4-speed, noisy as hell, and not a lot of pulling power by todays standards.

No denying emissions have made modern diesels much less reliable.

I think you're 100% correct. I still like the old 7.3L though :B

[Iraqvet05]

Bedlam wrote:
As much as like the simplicity of the older engines, I'm glad we don't have the smog China is currently experiencing. (snip)

I was going to say the same thing. Yes, the tree huggers had their say but until you visit a country that doesn't care about emissions, you can't get a good idea of how bad the problem could be.

[IdaD]

Powerdude wrote:
What is the point of "saving the planet" by "cleaning up" the exhaust, when the emissions systems cause you to have 25% worse fuel mileage?

Kind of like cutting off your nose to spite your face....

You don't incur a 25% fuel economy penalty with the newer emission systems. Far from it. My truck is a lot bigger and heavier than my dad's '99 or '00 7.3 Powerstroke and I get better mileage, not to mention the power difference.

[Turtle_n_Peeps]

A lot of your post is flat out incorrect. Lets try to straighten this out.

I found this video that seems to give a good explanation of issues RVers might face with some Ford diesel pickups. The 7.3L was one of
the best engines ever put in a diesel pickup (according to Wiki). The
video explained the 7.3L had virtually no emissions equipment and was a simple design.
Yes the 7.3 is a good engine. It was a very simple design and this made is reliable.

Ever since emissions were placed on diesels, all kinds of problems came up. Later models were less reliable and more expensive to buy, repair and maintain. I have seen new Ford PUs with a sticker of $74K. That's just ridiculous.
Not really. The 6.0 and its big brother the 6.4 was a questionable design from the get go. The 6.0 was the same years as the LB7, LLY and LBZ Duramax. Try to find any emission complaints about those engines. Not going to happen. [COLOR]

New diesels also get reduced MPG, because fuel is used to clean emissions.
No they don't. Check out the MPG the 7.3 got and then compare it to a new diesels. And guess what; the new diesels have more than twice the HP or that old diesel. Yes, double the HP and the same or real close to the same MPG. Check out some numbers on Fuelly. [COLOR]

Meaning more total fuel is burned. To me a couple living in a 5er, has a pretty energy efficient lifestyle. They have a small area to heat or cool and they tend to go were the temps are mild (i.e. summer up north, winter in FL). The additional cost has stopped my plans of buying a diesel & 5er. I'm sure it has done that to many others as well. So, I very much doubt the new emissions do anything for the environment. Here's the vid: http://tinyurl.com/pe6nxs5
Yes, it takes energy to clean the air. For a modern diesel truck that comes in the form of diesel.
You're so, so, so wrong about not doing anything for emissions. Stick your nose up to the 7.3 and I will floor it. See what happened there? :B And those are visible emissions. NOX are sky high on the 7.3 and almost non existent on modern diesel thanks to SCR.
If you don't like the additional cost, it's simple, don't pay it. Buy a used diesel or a new or used gas engine truck. The 6.4 hemi has almost as much power as a modern diesel and way more power than the old 7.3 diesel.
There are many cakes out there so you can have your cake and eat it too.[COLOR]

[lawnspecialties]

Powerdude wrote:
What is the point of "saving the planet" by "cleaning up" the exhaust, when the emissions systems cause you to have 25% worse fuel mileage?

Kind of like cutting off your nose to spite your face....

Excellent point. Put "ethanol" in that same category.

[Bedlam]

As much as like the simplicity of the older engines, I'm glad we don't have the smog China is currently experiencing. I do have an old-air cooled VW, but it gets driven on occasion instead of being a daily or primary driver...

[Powerdude]

Interesting video.

If you dig around deeper on the various Powerstroke and Ford forums, you will realize what he is talking about the 2011+ 6.7 L diesel.

Not brand bashing by any means, but they all have their problems. And they pretty much all start with emissions.

What is the point of "saving the planet" by "cleaning up" the exhaust, when the emissions systems cause you to have 25% worse fuel mileage?

Kind of like cutting off your nose to spite your face....

[IdaD]

My dad has a 99 or 00 7.3 and it is loud to the point it can be impossible to carry on a conversation at times. It rides like a tractor, bogs down at times and and has a terrible turning radius too. No issues beyond normal maintenance stuff in 15+ years is hard to argue with, though.

The amazing thing is the current Super Duty utilizes the same basic chassis today (and it shows).

[lawnspecialties]

N-Trouble wrote:
Only reason 7.3 is STILL so highly regarded is because of the decade long failures with the 6.0/6.4. If those motors were half way reliable nobody would even be talking about the ancient 7.3 today... Weak 4-speed, noisy as hell, and not a lot of pulling power by todays standards.

No denying emissions have made modern diesels much less reliable.

Amen!

I've had them all.
2001 7.3
2005 6.0
2009 6.4
2011 6.7
2015 6.7

Every year, they got better and better. Even my 6.0L gave me four years and 51,000 miles of trouble free camper pulling power all over the southeast coast.

By far the least dependable truck I had was the 7.3. Cam sensors left me stranded on the side of the road twice. The second time was the moment I decided it was time to sell and get a new truck.

The 7.3 had its place but if I had to go back to it, I'd just as soon get one of today's gas engines.