First Look: Ford's All-New 6.7-Liter V-8 Power Stroke Diesel Engine

First Look: Ford's All-New 6.7-Liter V-8 Power Stroke Diesel Engine
Photos Courtesy of Ford Motor Company

Ford is rewriting the rules of the company and industry with the introduction of its all-new advanced 6.7-liter Power Stroke V-8 diesel engine for the 2011 F-Series Super Duty pickups.

“The 6.7-liter diesel puts the motor back in Ford Motor Company,” said Adam Gryglak, the engine’s lead engineer. “This is the most advanced Power Stroke yet with the cleanest emissions,” lower noise, vibration and harshness “and substantially improved power and fuel economy.”

Codenamed “Scorpion,” the 6.7-liter PSD is Ford’s first-ever designed-in-house pickup truck diesel engine since the first oil burner (International’s 6.9-liter V-8) was offered under the hood of a Ford pickup in 1982.

“This was a global effort within Ford to create this engine,” Gryglak said. “We applied many of the lessons learned from Ford’s European operations.”

Ford’s road to the Scorpion has been long and winding. The 6.7-liter PSD is the third all-new heavy duty diesel engine in 7 years and the fourth since production of the 7.3-liter Power Stroke ended in 2002.

Its creation can be traced back to the 6.0-liter Power Stroke that Ford introduced for its 2003 Super Duty pickups. Ford and Navistar (International’s parent company) went to battle in court over warranty problems and cost issues related to that engine, which ultimately led to both companies ending their 30-year diesel manufacturing relationship in January. Ford kept the rights to the well-known Power Stroke name that has been associated with Ford diesels since 1994.

Ford 'Scorpion' 6.7-liter V-8 Turbocharged Diesel Engine
No more Navistar. The 6.7-liter Power Stroke V-8 is Ford's first diesel motor for its F-Series pickups to be developed entirely in-house after three decades partnering with the contract engine manufacturer. It will be built at Ford's plant in Mexico.

Ford introduced the 6.4-liter Power Stroke for its 2008 Super Duty pickups in order to meet tough emissions laws that required an immediate 90-percent reduction in soot, a natural byproduct of diesel combustion; General Motors and Chrysler did the same.

Clean-air regulations will be ratcheted up again on January 1, 2010. Diesel-powered pickups built after that date will have to have engines that reduce nitrogen oxide emissions by 90 percent from today’s standards and by 96 percent from 1994 standards.

NOx is a major air pollutant that contributes to smog, asthma, and respiratory and heart diseases. It's caused by diesel’s high combustion temperatures, which results from the high frictional heat created by compressing air in the cylinders to the point where it can ignite diesel fuel without using a spark.

But where GM and its engine development partner Isuzu have been able to reuse the basic architecture of the 6.6-liter LML Duramax V-8 diesel engine introduced in 2001, and Dodge is carrying over the 6.7-liter Cummins I6 that’s been in service since 2007, the Ford 6.7-liter V-8 is an almost total clean sheet redesign that uses many unconventional solutions to meet the needs of its drivers and the EPA.

Scorpion Turbo

Reverse Flow Design

The Scorpion’s architecture shares several key traits with GM's indefinitely postponed 4.5-liter Duramax V-8 diesel engine. Most notably, the intake and exhaust flow through the cylinder heads is reversed when compared to a conventional diesel engine, with the exhaust exiting directly into the engine’s turbo that sits in the engine's valley, mounted between V-style cylinder banks.

“When we looked at the at the design imperatives of the program we were looking to ensure that we delivered improved performance, fuel economy, NVH and heat management with the aftertreatment system,” Gryglak said. “The reverse flow and inboard exhaust configuration helps us achieve all of those objectives. It’s a smarter design.”

Scorpion Aluminum Head
New aluminum cylinder heads replace cast iron to save weight. They feature dual water jackets for cooling and a six-bolt attachment pattern for extra strength. Note the asymmetrical sizes and layouts of the intake (larger) and exhaust (smaller) ports.

Why? The arrangement dramatically shortens the distance between the exhaust and turbo, improving turbo response while protecting nearby powertrain components, like the fuel pump and alternator, from excessive heat. Higher turbo outlet temps also provide extra heat to downstream emissions devices to improve pollution-scrubbing performance sooner while emission catalysts (used to break down harmful pollutants) are warming up.

“Total exhaust volume and surface area of this configuration is about half that of the previous engine,” Gryglak said. “At the same time, we’ve been able to significantly improve the throttle feel of the truck.”

Single Sequential Turbo

Ford also reengineered the variable geometry turbo from the ground up with help from Honeywell’s Garrett Turbo Division (the same turbo supplier for the Duramax). As modern diesel mills like the 6.7-liter have become more powerful from generation to generation, emissions limits have gotten much tighter, and it’s become progressively difficult to match the turbo’s dual jobs of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) with acceptable levels of responsiveness.

Scorpion SST Turbocharger
Instead of using two separate sequential turbochargers like the current 6.4-liter PSD, the new Single Sequential Turbocharger places two compressors back-to-back (right side of picture in blue, representing cool intake fed air) to create a twin turbo setup in a single package. The VGT turbo still uses a variable vane setup around the turbine (left side of picture in red, representing hot exhaust) that continually change the velocity of the exhaust gas and wheel speed.

EGR recirculates some of the engine's exhaust back into the engine at a lower temperature. The cooled gases have a higher heat capacity and contain less oxygen than air, lowering combustion temperatures and reducing the formation of NOx.

Multi-turbo systems, like the previous Borg Warner two-turbo sequential setup that the 6.4-liter PSD used, can overcome these issues but they also face problems in packaging and heat that wouldn’t work with the Scorpion’s new architecture. 

“The turbo we’re using for the 6.7-liter engine is called a ‘Single Sequential Turbo,’” Gryglak said. “It’s a triple-wheel design with a single turbine and two compressors placed back-to-back. What we’ve done is take a twin-turbo configuration and package it into a single unit that gives us seamless transitions [as its adds boost throughout the RPM range and power band]. It also allows us to drive EGR at very low airflow rates to meet the new NOx regulations but also allows us to build the boost we need to overcome the pressure from the EGR.”

The Siamese compressor wheels are near-mirror images of each other. They have the same diameter and are optimized to reduce pressure differences that could cause noise or airflow issues. By packaging them as two smaller turbos, mass is also kept closer to the shaft which helps with balance and durability. The turbo is quicker to boost and better able to deliver horsepower and torque, especially at the low end where it’s needed most the help get heavy loads moving quickly.

External picture of the Power Stroke's new SST turbocharger.

The SST turbo continues to use variable vanes that surround the turbine wheel to dynamically adjust turbo speed using exhaust gases. During engine operation at low speeds and load, the vanes are closed to accelerate exhaust gases across the turbine wheel to help increase turbo wheel speed quickly. At high speeds the vanes are opened to help prevent the turbo overspeed. It's also been enhanced to introduce exhaust braking into the platform.

“You’ll get the feeling [when you’re driving in] tow/haul mode but it won’t explicitly be called exhaust braking. It’s built into the system,” Gryglak said.

The turbo also uses a brand new ball-bearing cartridge that surrounds the turbo shaft to help provide a double-digit increase in spool-up times.

Though some turbos are mounted to the engine off the turbine side – a solution that can cause balance issues requiring extra structural reinforcement and noises like whistles and whines – Ford balances the SST by mounting it at the turbo’s center using a 4-bolt pedestal housing. The compressor stage is bracketed back to the pedestal so it has an extremely stiff structure in front. Separate oil and water feeds flow through the pedestal to lubricate and cool the turbocharger and eliminate as many external connections as possible. The front of the pedestal houses the turbo’s oil filter.

The 6.7-liter SST provides up to around 30 psi boost compared to approximately 40 psi from the 6.4-liter dual-sequential unit and operates at up to 130,000 rpms.

Scorpion Rocker Arms
New 'single plane' rocker arms are individually attached to each of the 4 valves per cylinder (2 intake, 2 exhaust) instead of using a bridge to open or close the valves in tandem.

Two Cooling Systems

The Scorpion has two separate cooling systems, each with its own radiator and water pump.

The primary cooling loop cools the engine and operates at about 194 degrees. A secondary 122-degree loop controls the temperatures of the EGR, fuel and transmission coolers and a brand new air-to-water charge air cooler that replaces the previous air-to-air intercooler. The CAC sits between the turbo compressor outlet and the intake manifold to cool the air heated by passing through the twin turbos.

“Overall, the cooling pack is significant smaller” than the 6.4, said Ed Waszczenko, lead durability engineer for the Scorpion. Waszczenko was responsible for testing every component of the Power Stroke by pushing them to their breaking point to ensure durability. “The engine is more efficient. We need less cooling. A lot of the heat management of the engine has helped us reduce the cooling requirements.”


All of the engine’s EGR comes off only the right cylinder bank. Ford did extensive research that showed EGR could be pulled from a single bank instead of both sides of the engine to reduce the plumbing required. It also eliminates airflow balance issues that can occur when pulling EGR gases from two cylinder banks.

The 6.7-liter EGR system uses two EGR coolers, like the 6.4-liter setup, but it introduces a “hot-side valve” at the front of the first cooler that controls the volume of air let into the system instead of using a conventional “cool-side valve” behind the second cooler.

Exhaust Gas Recirculation Coolers
EGR is only pulled from a single engine. It's the first step in scrubbing NOx emissions to meet 2010 EPA rules. The second step is the application of Diesel Exhaust Fluid (aka urea) in the exhaust stream, which will require periodic refills.

Ford says the move to a hot-side valve was a lesson learned from its diesel experience in Europe, where other hot-side systems have been engineered to avoid the valve getting jammed from particulates.

“Cold-side applications have extensive warranty issues for valves stuck open due to soot deposits,” Waszczenko said. “The challenge for us is to get [the hot-side valve] enough cooling so the valve is durable for 250,000 miles. There’s an iron valve and aluminum valve, both water-cooled. They expand differently based on their construction. The F-550 and up will use the iron valve. Lower engines will use the aluminum valve.”

Three other key design EGR features include:

  • A floating core design, instead of clamshell, that allows the EGR coolers to independently move within their housings as they thermally expand and shrink.
  • An EGR bypass valve directs exhaust gases straight into the induction system when the engine is cold during startup to get EGR working as soon as possible to lower NOX levels.
  • And a repurposed throttle body that’s used like an EGR valve to drive the correct amount of EGR that the system requires at the right pressure.

Waszczenko says all the changes have made the EGR system more durable. “We have not failed a single EGR cooler during testing,” he said.

But EGR alone isn’t enough to reduce NOx to meet clean air standards. The 6.7-liter PSD also introduces selective catalytic reduction to Ford’s pickups.

SCR uses diesel exhaust fluid, a urea-based solution (32.5 percent industrial urea and 67.5 percent deionized water), that’s injected as a fine mist into the engine’s hot exhaust gases. The heat turns the urea into ammonia that – when combined with a special catalytic converter – breaks the NOx down into nitrogen gas and water vapor. It's similar to the approach used by Chrysler for its 2010 Dodge Ram 3500/4500/5500 cab chassis trucks.

Diesel exhaust fluid refill intervals will vary depending on duty cycle. Some customers will only have to refill during routing maintenance, such as when the oil is changed, while others will have to top off the tank sooner.

“We think we’ve found the right balance between what the engine EGR can deliver and what the DEF system can do,” said Chris Oberski, emissions engineer for the 6.7-liter Power Stroke diesel engine.


Airflow Cutaway
Airflow cutaway showing the throttle body (which is used primarily to assist with the exhaust aftertreatment) and intake manifold that's made from composite material instead of aluminum.

Air comes into the engine through the airbox and is directed passively through upper and lower chambers into the compressor portion of the turbo. At the same time, hot combusted gases from the engine are cooled using EGR. Both the cold compressed air and hot EGR are mixed together in the EGR throttle body and then directed into special chambers on either side of the intake manifold. The manifold uses tuned resonators to cancel out any pressure waves that are created within the intake system that could be heard as transient airflow noise, such as a drone or moaning sound.

The intake manifold is made from a composite material. Gryglak said that using aluminum would have created a heat sink that would have robbed power from the motor.

Special flow-mapped rocker covers that seal the valvetrain and provide structural rigidity also have feed chambers that direct air to the intake valves and then into the cylinders for combustion.

Combustion Components and Capability

Every moving part of the Scorpion’s cam-in-block design is new, from the crank to the pushrod valvetrain.

“It takes a fundamentally different combustion system to achieve lower feedback noise levels from the engine and maintain, or in our case, reduce emissions,” Gryglak said. “We’re also promising significantly improved fuel economy.”

The forged connecting rods are attached to the steel crankshaft using a 45-degree slant opening in the rod, instead of 90 degrees, for easier assembly. New cast pistons are gallery-cooled to control temperatures, with one entry and one exit for oil to flow through in the bottom of the piston. When the piston descends during the combustion cycle, a cooling jet of oil is fired into the entry. Special oil drillings add extra lubrication to the joint where the rod and piston are joined.

Injectors, Pistons, Rods
The pistons (top) have a unique bowl shape design that helps reduce noise and emissions during combustion. The connecting rods (middle) are attached to the crank using a 45-degree opening. 3rd generation piezo electric fuel injectors (bottom) have 8 holes and can squirt fuel up to 5 times per stroke.

Ford officials said they spent close to two years to find the optimal balance between in-cylinder noise and emissions during combustion.

The top of the cast-aluminum piston is very unique. Its bowl-like shape plays a key role by helping control the chaotic swirl of the fuel-air charge during combustion. Ford and piston supplier Federal Mogul cycled through dozens of CAD iterations and twelve physical designs to create just the right concavity for the piston top, according to Oberski.

The Bosch common-rail fuel system operates at up to 30,000 psi to send fuel to the engine’s 8 piezo injectors -- one per cylinder. Each injector nozzle has 8 holes and can deliver up to 5 injections per combustion cycle. Two pilot injections control noise levels, and a main injection is used for the power-generating combustion event. Two variable post injections are used to produce extra torque and for heating up emissions catalysts that scrub NOx and eliminate soot downstream from the engine. While cruising, only 3 or 4 injections will be needed.

“We’re using the third-generation of this technology,” Gryglak said. “It’s key to meeting our fuel economy and emissions objectives. It allows us to better atomize the fuel to mix it with the incoming air for improved combustion efficiency.”

The compression ratio drops a bit, to 16.2 from 16.7.

Special acoustic covers sit over the injectors on each cylinder bank to quiet impulsive noises from the fuel system as well as to lower overall NVH from the engine.

Bosch 3rd Gen Fuel System
The high pressure common rail fuel system operates at up to 30,000 psi

The asymmetrical layout of the intake and exhaust valves is the last approach needed to manage noise and emissions. It’s a four-valve setup, like the 6.4-liter engine, where the two intake ports are larger than the two exhaust ports.

The overhead valvetrain also uses a new rocker-arm configuration to open and close the two intake and two exhaust valves. It’s designed to improve the engine’s wear characteristics. Four pushrods per cylinder (two per hydraulic lifter) each have a single-plane rocker arm that’s individually connected to one of the four valves instead of using a conventional bridged valvetrain setup that runs multiple valves in tandem. It’s the first time Ford has created such a solution.

Instant start glow-plugs provide gas-like starts at very cold temperatures.

New aluminum cylinder heads reduce engine weight and incorporate dual upper and lower water jackets to provide cooling to the valvetrain.

The engine crankcase has shifted from conventional gray iron construction to state-of-the-art compacted graphite iron. It saves weight while boosting strength.

“What you’ll notice in the shape of the [engine] block is the structure that’s been added,” Gryglak said. “It has very thin wall sections. We’ve added structure to where it’s needed, but still saved overall weight. From a weight to displacement ratio, this will be the lightest block in the segment. The overall engine platform is about 160 pounds lighter than 6.4-liter diesel.”

The engine uses a two-piece oil pan to help store its 13 quart capacity. The bottom piece is composite to help quiet the engine.

Compacted Graphite Iron Engine Block
The engine block is the first use of compacted graphite iron instead of conventional gray iron that saves weight while gaining strength. Note the prominent ribbed structures where additional reinforcement has been added.

After all the radical changes to the engine, the overall packaging is the same as the last engine. The 2011 Super Duty won’t require any frame modifications.

Ford hasn’t provided power figures yet but promises they’ll be significantly greater than the outgoing motor. Expect peak horsepower at 2,800 rpm and peak torque at 1,600 rpm, Ford officials say.

We witnessed the engines being tested in an acoustic dyno chamber and can report back that noise levels are noticeably lower on the 6.7-liter engine than the 6.4-liter PSD.


Ford is quiet for now about the Scorpion’s transmission, though we expect the Super Duty's new gearbox will be the new 6R140 heavy-duty six-speed automatic with power takeoff capability.

Ford officially says the standard manual transmission is gone as of the 2011 model year. The take rate was too low to justify continuing production of the ZF-source 6-speed handshaker. The rear cover of the new engine follows an SAE 12 bolt standard that allows Ford to mate almost any HD automatic transmission to the back of the mill.

Biodiesel Compatibility

The Scorpion diesel is certified for compatibility with B20 biodiesel (80 percent standard diesel, 20 percent biodiesel blend), like the 2010/2011 Cummins and Duramax diesels.

“We’ve protected the customer if they want to use B20,” said Gryglak “Biodiesel blends can sometimes vary in quality, so on our low-pressure feed lines into the high-pressure fuel pump there’s a pressure switch. If there’s a bad batch of fuel, sensors will immediately notify the customer they have an issue [through] the trip computer.”

Ford recommends that customers running biodiesel in the 6.7-liter engine not to let the fuel sit for longer than a month. Otherwise, things can start to grow.

Testing the Engine

Scorpion on Engine Dyno
Scorpion engine in a dyno test cell.

Ford says it has put the 6.7-liter engine through a vigorous testing scheme to identify any potential weaknesses or quality concerns before the first units wind up in the hands of customers.

A 250,000 mile durability test looks for structural fatigue points. It simulates the driving habits of 95th percentile Super Duty customers who pull the heaviest loads. The engines are placed in a dyno cell where they spend nearly 6 hours running continuously at peak torque and then 3.5 hours at peak grade power to prove out connecting rod and rotating mass strength. The cycle repeats for 1,200 hours, or 50 days of running.

A thermal fatigue test is used to prove out the engine assembly process by stressing the head gasket, joints, radiator connections and other seals. For this test cycle, the engine is idled and then throttled up to peak power for about 14 minutes. That’s enough time for the engine to get red hot. It’s then shut off and 16-degrees below zero coolant is pumped in and allowed to soak for a few moments before the engine is fired back up to rated power. The shock loop is 150 hours long, or 75 cycles.

A structural test is run to make sure the engine’s build tolerances and parts acceptance criteria are set properly, so there are no surprises during production. Engines are built using actual parts with purposely incorporated defects that simulate the worst quality issues Ford has seen in production, such as low head bolt torque or inclusions in the piston casting bowl. It’s a new test that the Scorpion team determined was necessary if the engine was going to be built in-house.

Finally, there’s a real-world wear test that, like the durability test, simulates the operating conditions and applications of Ford’s 95th percentile customer. Fully assembled Super Duty engineering test mules are run over 250,000 miles of the most grueling roads in the U.S. with the toughest grades in temperatures that vary from -40 to 130 degrees. It’s the equivalent of 10 years of services in six months. Two-hundred test points are measured at peak rated power and torque over every speed range to make sure the engine’s entire real world operating spectrum is tested.

At the end of each of these tests, the engines are broken down and the team examines every component, looking for problem areas. When problems are found, they’re fixed and then the test cycles start over again.

2011 Ford Super Duty

Putting Their Money Where Their Mouths Are

Ford won’t say how much money it invested in the 6.7-liter Power Stroke diesel, but we think it may be the most expensive single engine program in the company’s history. Perhaps we’ll see more Scorpion derivatives to spread the investment among a larger group of vehicles.

Ford also isn’t talking about the prices when the engines go on sale in the 2011 Super Duty next year. We think it will run more than the current engine. But Ford does repeat over and over like a mantra: the 6.7-liter PSD will be the most powerful, most fuel-efficient and the most-refined Power Stroke diesel engine yet. And the team that created it says it will be around a long time.


You will never be able to replace the 7.3L powerstore.

Cooter: Damn, that's a long sentence...

Ken: GM also had plans for that config for its 4.4 litre diesel which never materialized due to financial issues.

And I wonder why this config isn't used for all turbo diesels - it only makes sense.

Great looking engine but what about fuel economy, I own a 6.4 L and I can't afford to drive it. It has lots of power but 8 miles to the gallon pulling trailers (which is always) is too expensive.
I hope this one is better because I am a die hard ford fan but am considering switching trucks.

YOU DODGE GUYS ARE TWO CYLINDERS SHORT OF A FULL BLOCK!!! The sheer number of Ford and GM diesels sold should tell you something... that many people cannot be wrong. Diesel buyers are not sheep. If the Dodge/Cummins combination were the best why aren't sales numbers verifying it?

As far as the 7.3, yeah it was a great.... DIRTY motor.

As far as the 6.0, Ford sold have used head studs and some sort of lubrication for the turbos vains.

The 6.4 was an end of a contract.. period.

This new 6.7 better get the MPG's the 6.0 got!!!!

nuf said!

it's a good lookin pickup don't get me wrong. But in my book they still can't hang with the inline 6 thts rite the 5.9 CUMMINS thts the only way I'll b going I have a 98 dodge with over 400.000 and only changed the tranny and the injection pump and have tons of mods on it like a 150 horse chip exhaust manifold cold air 100 horse injectors and water methanol. SO dodge is the way I'll go but maybe FOrd can turn it around for me ? i DOUBT it

Sounds like its gonna be a beastly motor, which makes sence because ford is a beastly truck.

Actually, GM & Dodge are out of the picture for me.... it is a political thing... so I reeeeeally hope this is a sick engine.

KenRay... "7.3 (derivitave of International T-444E) pretty good... "??!!!???!!!??!!???!!??????

Only 2 million on the road today (ending production in 2002) More than GM & Dodge combined. Whose drinking Kool-aide?

Never owned a pickup, had an expedition. Wife bought a 34 foot travel trailer, so now comes a truck to pull. Expedition had no balls E150 almost dropped its transmission. Im only talking about 8000 lbs of tow. I bought a 2008 f250 6.4. It has been 16 months 28,000 miles no issues. Every day vehicle. I get 15 mpg no highway. 19 to 20 on higway and a solid 12 when under tow. Tailpipe is as clean as the day I bought the truck. I can run my finger inside and absolutely no black. The only thing I do is I use diesel kleen in the gray bottle every tank. As for noise, I do not know how they can make it any more quiet..

I'm about to embark on purchasing a new diesel to replace my '03 F-350 Power Stroke but I'm so bitter over the continual failure of the injectors. Can someone explain why this is and is it only generic to the 6.0 L? I just drive and have them serviced and no nothing of the innards. Should I go with the Duramax?

I drove a 7.3L in a 95' F-350 in the late 90s before I could even get my license, "learned" how to drive on a 7.3L in the 2000 Excursion and currently drive a 6.0L in an F-250. I am thinking about finding a 7.3L because that engine was practically bullet proof. I have a few good friends that stated that they would never get rid of their 7.3Ls until for came out with a similar engine if not the same one. EPA can stuff it, people don't get diesels to worry about the environment, they get them for the power and reliability. Putting all these EPA regulations ain't helping the engine at all. Take them off and go back to the basics of the 7.3L CAT motor. Why? Here is your answer, it worked and was one of the best, why change it?

i would just like to say to all of you powerstroke owners that i have high hopes for the new powerstroke engine.i own two f 350 powerstrokes that i bought new,one is a 99 the other a 2000 the 99 has 768000 miles on it and the 2000 has 813000 on it.both of these trucks pull a 4-car trailor.

I have seen the cut away, looks interesting would like to see it being built in the US rather the Mexico, do we need to send a STIMULESS CHECK to Mexico so they can build it there? Come on Ford, keep it in the US, it's bad enough having ANYTHING built out of the US.

OK there are alot of good comments above. I have had cow trucks for 12 years. Mostly all inline 6s they are proven great engines with less moving parts. But I ahve been driving quite alot longer and I remember well the 8 cylinder engines and the 3408 cat and the silver 92s and lets face it the 92 was another powerhouse for sure but like all Detroits until the DS 60 it was a driveway oiler. LEAKERS! but pur in oil and they run for eternity. I bought my first Harvester in 83 and they are bullet proof. I owned 4 only replaced 2 sets of glowplugs on them total. The least miles of any of them was 295K one I sold had 383K and it was sold to some boys Rodeoing for another 1/ 1/2 and then went to a ranch. IT is still working that was 9 years ago. My current 7.3 is a 99 it is a great truck. I tried a 98 Cummins in a 3500 Dodge. It was my only deviation from the Ford. The front brakes are so small they suck. every 20K you have to replace them. Yes I use my pickups, ranch work stock trailers and ect... It ran well but it did not have the power of my PS Ford 350 It ahs 238K and it has factory compression still. That is right I had it tested to see if it had some life left when the 6.0 came out and again last year while considering the 6.4 not happy from reports on either of those. So I will be keeping my 7.3 it's exhausted and chipped and cold air flow. And it eats the Duramax and Dodge at Ropings all the time. With stock trailer attaqched. And they are running new 6.7s and I just wanna say cmon Ford do me proud. The last two sucked and I'll need another truck some day. C& cat would have been great. But I think you may have something here. But a WORD TO THE WISE manual transmission ! SOmething bullet proof. LIke a 9speed ect... PS. Thank YOu for not taking the STIMULUS MONEY like the other two suck ups. AND then filing bankruptcy on us. I know many people who have said they will only buy Fords now and they were dyed in the wool Chevy guys or Dodge Guys because of your decision. THanks..

I am not to thrilled about this new motor. I have been a die hard ford pickup man all my life, Im still running the old 7.3 trucks. I have one with over 700 thousand untuched. I had a 6.0 for about 3 months wat a peice, I farm and run a trucking company, ford trucks are the only to keep up with me and my guys fast pace, guys like me just need a good drive tran. Why go away from the man 6 speed sum of us good ole boys still want to feel what we got. I am still waiting one Kenworth to built a pickup. The guys out there that need a good truck dont care about how loud the engine is we just want a good strong truck we can depend on.



What are the real numbers for fuel economy and what are the gears that the engineers will pair with this diesel?

I have an 02 F350 Crew Cab Dually with a 6 speed. With .410 gears I could never get above 15 mpg and would get 9-10 towing on the interstae. I switched the gears to .355 and easily get 18.6 empty and 12 towing heavy.

If the claim is a 25% mileage increase over the current 6.4, that's nothing to brag about. I look at payback on the additonal cost to purchase a diesel. At 10 -12 mpg, which most of the latest psd's get, there is no payback.

I'd invest in a new diesel if the payback was realistic. If I have to drive the truck 350,000 miles to break even why would anyone invest in this motor?

Well folks,
Sounds great, but it also sounds to me like this engine is already well and truly obsolete. Have a look at the two URLs included below, found on a defense industry blog. Basically, if the claims made in these two posts, which appear to have been made roughly 18 months apart, are accurate, the developed power should be at least equivalent to a gas turbine power plant of equivalent weight and physical size. Also, apparently, should use not more than 1/3rd the fuel to do the same work. Interestingly nobody seems to refute the actual claims in this blog. Something is seriously out of whack here. Either American manufacturers are way behind in technology development or the Russian tank in the article doesn't exist? Seems to me, what is being claimed here, would mean the 6.7 litre Ford engine should be somewhere about 1,000hp to be competitive and then it has to somehow get the fuel consumption down by better than 60%.
Somebody should ask Ford for the figures for their new engine and then ask how it stacks up against what is reported in this blog. Interestingly, the engine in this blog is apparently the first instance of a diesel engine being able to replace a gas turbine and simultaneously increase the available horsepower. What gives here, are we really that far behind in military technology development and if so why?

A four part emission system,two seperate water pumps,a Honeywell Turbo(always have problems with first design), an extra tank to fill(urea), an EGR cooler the size af a small rad(most likely to fail from heat fatigue). Way to much to go wrong with this new Engine of Fords. Not to mention the connecting rods look very weak for an engine of this magnitude. I would wait for a couple of years for all the issues this engine will have to be rectified before ever paying that kind of money on an ALL NEW ENGINE. UREA FLUID price is already climbing like a rocket. Freeze point of urea not good here in Canada (do you have to leave Urea heater plugged in all the time?). I don"t usually change Vehicle brands but i will this time . The New Ram Heavy Duty looks just to Awesome and proven Engine with 3 year old Emission compliant engine without UREA. I'm switching to the big RAM HD

CUMMINS I6 engine is the torque king. With the new RAM design and better than the rest Laramie Interior it will soon be NO.1 in Heavy Haulers sold.

New Engine design and materials used in new ford diesel MY ASS, Isuzu has been sitting on their 4.5L V8 engine wich is the same reversed flow engine as fords diesel. some materials for block as well. I guess ford had to copy someone to build a good design diesel....too bad they have to use ford sensors and crap to mess up a good thing

I REALLY hope this works out for them... cuz every engine since the 98 7.3 has been a nightmare, and I'm sick of my friends who are ford techs complaining about how much they hate having to wrench on them.

Ford NEEDS a better diesel, hopefully this is it.

Why inline 6 over v8? An inline 6 can be perfectly balanced and a v8 can not. They both function fine, but if you are perfectly balanced, there will be less wear in the long run. V8's can be balanced, just not perfectly balanced. This is why BMW and Mercedes prefers to use inline gas engines.

Made in house is mexico? Ha, welcome to Amereica.

As far as the aluminum heads. Look at the DMAX, cast block, aluminum heads, steel head bolts. Ever hot rodders no no list. Yet Mine will take any ford or dodge out there. No that wasn't a chalenge just saying that the combo works.

Ford hasn't made a decent diesel yet. What makes anyone think this one will be any better?

I also see one problem right away. They're building it in MEXICO! But as long as they have tons of American supervisors to make sure the workers are gauging and checking the parts it won't be as bad. As far as the Cummins goes, only problem with buying one is that you have to buy a Dodge along with it. I'm a mechanic at a Ford dealership so I've seen the problems with the 6.0L's and the 6.4L's. My 2005 6.0L hasn't had any problems yet, but I've only got 50k on it. When the head gasket goes I'll put the ARP stud kit on it and an EGR delete kit too.

In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with something if it can be fixed.

Ford is the only truck that will last under a service body. I have owned GM and Doge, they all had frame and running gear issues. My F-550 has had no issues, and I am running the 7.3 PSD. My 550 is carrying an 11 ft Auto-Crane body with an Auto-Crane 5k capacity crane, an air compressor. welder, tools, parts and harware to do my job repairing earth moving equipment. The truck weighs in at 16,200 lbs.
I will always buy Ford, kept my 7.3 because they are bullet proof and the 6.0 and 6.4 had to many issues. I hope Ford has built a motor to finally replace the 7.3, I need to replace my truck. Would love to test one set up like mine to see if it will last.

For all you talking crap about ford. Think about it ford ain't deep in debt like a pos dodge and chevy most of you don't know what your talking about diesel engines. I seen so many dodges on the side of the road and there transmissions need help I can't wait till dodge goes completely broke I don't mind Chevy to much there not to bad.

we will see how good this engine really is when it gets run in the local truck pulls, goes through muddy logging roads, idling on the side of a railroad for 10hrs in -30deg temps, pulls a max load for over 1000miles in 80deg temps.

thats REAL world WORKING trucks , and no engine proved it could do all the above better than a 7.3(in a ford anyways)

Why did they not develop an inline 6? Looks like I'll just keep the old Cummins till they do....

well the 7.3 was a great engine , 6.0 wasn't as bad as everyone says i have customers with well over 100 k with no problems, most of the problems are lack of maintenance, people putting programmers on there truck when they don't need them and K&N air filter that suck dirt. oh and no one wants to change their oil on time, i hear a lot of people wine about these truck and its probably because they no nothing about the trucks and its just what they have heard or they where too stupid and probably shouldn't own one , i work on these trucks and most of the problems lie between the steering wheel and the seat. and yes the 6.4 have bad gas mpg but other then that there not that bad.

To all the people stating that these things should be assembled in america: GET WITH THE TIMES. GM built everything in america and look what happened to them. American workers are simply too exspensive these days for a company to remain competitive.

Its time for manufacturing to be done elsewhere. American made does'nt mean a whole lot anyway these days. The quality of a product is determined by the people SUPERVISING the assembly men/women, not the common factory worker. Some of the best products produced these days come from places a lot worse than mexico as far as standard of living is concerned.

I look at with much interest from to the emissie of this 6.7 engine. 6.4 the diesel does not satisfy to euro 5 in spite of California emissie. The trucks in Europe are possible sell must them satisfy to the emissiewaarde euro 5 can someone me tell what these emissiewaarde, s to be.? For example NOX, HC, Partical and all other exhaust gases??

Greetings From Holland

i have a question i have a f350 fitted with the triton v8 it keep getting oil in the water system i checkthe oil cooler and i just dismantle the engine looking to see where or how the oil could be mixing any one out there that had this problem any advice will be accepted. thanking you.

If you have coolant in the oil that's usually a sign the block is cracked somewhere, I don't know I've ever heard of it happening the other way... I guess there could be a crack in one of the oil passages and its getting into the coolant that way. I'd say drain the oil pan and make sure there isn't any water in it.

I have a 7.3 with 381K. Very plesed, no problems. Would like to buy a new truck, 2010 6.4 or 2011 6.7 ????
I drive about 250 miles per day with a trailer

i would just like to say i love ford diesels i work on them every day and they have their issues but what motor out there doesnt the new 6.7 will be a contender and id like to see dodge or chevy "who is government owned" make one as good as ford has. ford for life

I have owned an 01 ford 250 with the 7.3 and an 06 dodge 5.9, and have worked on or around a farms for years. I bought a ford because the 7.3 is and was bulletproof never had a problem with it. The tranny was a different story replaced it at 65000 on my dime and then 99000 on their dime as i was ready to get a lawyer. The truck rode like a cadi compared to my dodge. Now the dodge. I bought it for the cummins and feel as though i want my ford back and throw this engine in it. Anyone that has worked on a farm knows the I6 is the way to go for reliability and pulling power, if this wasn't the case you would see alot more farm equipment looking for something better and you dont see any of them running back to the v8 diesels of the past. I really hope this engine is all its cut out to be as i will be in the market for a daily driver in a few years when the dodge goes under the knife for major reconstructive surgery. I like the new look and who doesn't like the king ranch interior. It should make a really fun fast trade in every two year truck just like the rest of the fords that have come out since 2003.5. I wouldn't get one to pull a grain buggy down the highway though no matter how much torque they claim to have.

Ford, Dodge, Chevy!.... Power Stroke, Cummins, Duramax!!.... Mines better! No, mines better!! STOP THE WORLD I WANT TO GET OFF!!!

Oh, by the way.... I have a 2008 6.4l diesel F-250. I'm happy with mine. I'm getting 12.5 MPG pulling a 7X14 enclosed motorcycle trailer with three atv's inside. 18 without the trailer. Keep your foot out of the throttle, use your cruise, do the speed limit, drive like you got some sense, take care of your investment, don't abuse your equipment and see what happens....

I also have a 98 F-150 with a 5.4l gas untouched with 250k plus.... Anything can break down with abuse. Take care of your investment and perform regular services and inspections.

READ YOUR OWNERS MANUAL! Don't leave your diesel idling beside a railroad track for 10 hours without idling up the engine. Your owners manual explains why....

LOL! all these ford fans excited to get ahold of their "made in Mexico" diesel! Who proclaimed those guys expert diesel engineers/developers/assemblers?.
What a bunch of hypocrites , the same (ford camp) bunch that nicknamed duramax a derogatory name because they were from Japan (but made now in ohio)are all bowing down and kissing the ground waiting for their new king to cross the border from Mexico! HA!
When was the last time a Mexico product of importance came into the USA that couldn't be eaten or soaked in salsa?

I am in the construction industry. I hope this engine can hold up to the 7.3L's reputation. I agree that that not having 7.3L was a blow to Ford's diesel market. I have driven all the "big three" and seen a lot of guys that beat there trucks for their business. Overall, Fords are the most popular and mosted liked. Chevy/GMC second, Dodge a distant third (nothing against the "engines"). Fords take the beating and hold up. That is until they got away from the 7.3L Diesel. Great truck, but the latest diesels were sub-par. I hope that the new 6.7L works out for Ford. I really do.

One more thing. While it seems to be a good engine, let's not forget the "GM" Duramax is actually an Isuzu. To bad that the Cummings couldn't be on a better platform.

bigger engine,more power,lower emissions,more power means stronger drive lines and rear-ends,has that been addressed? lower emissions means turbo issues and oil issues as well as EGR issues, 250,000 mile testing really doesn't seem like a lot of miles compared to what should be expected of diesel motors,at least a half million miles should be the bottom line of testing, considering class 8 motors are nearly all garenteed a million miles. the cummins 600 was pulled from market for awhile till the torque issues were ironed out and the only true control is with manual transmission and not auto. a computer will have to be on automatic and with that means more can go wrong. just my .02

Everyone keeps knocking fords on here it seems like. I live in the thumb of michigan and we have our share of the "Big Three." Seems kind of funny though there are a small group of about 12 of us that have well over 400k on our 99' - 02' 7.3L.. Seems we are always the ones having to run and pick up all the new chevy and dodge guys. Not saying our trucks don't have problems (mostly balls joints) but they've never left us 1800 miles from home. Think ford should look back at the 7.3L and go from there. Ya the economy isn't the best but they are proven. You want a reliable truck, GET YOURSELF A 7.3L !!

From my experience with the 05 6.0, one had better have a full extended warranty for life on the new extremely complex engine and tranny. What a myth that they talk about engines going for one, two or three hundred thousand miles with no trouble!

Should have kept the 7.3. Best engine ever made. Had a chance to talk with an engineer for the 7.3 and he stated it was designed to run 300.000 w/o having to pull the heads. I wouldn't believe him if i didn't own one. Know people that have (6.0)sicko's and the 6.4's and nothing compares to the reliability of the 7.3. I'm not an engineer just an old Mississippi redneck that has grown up around all kinds of equipment. So I really do not know what I am talking about. Just what works and what does not. Guess we will see if the Fords 6.7 works.
If not I know some other people that offer a 6.7 that should be bulletproof if its anything like the 5.9 that came before it.

Dodge fan boys won't be around for long, chrysler is all but done. Losing market share and money. Fiat will dissolve this money losing brand in a few years. Fiat bought into chrysler to build an infastructure in the US, not to save a garbage brand. Ford F-series sales for march 2010 were over 103,000 units. Ram, just over 38,000. That should be the clue that few people trust their money with chrysler products

the best diesel

On six picture i see a Turbocharger that a having problem. If you notes the blue on the exhaust side that's not paint. that's what happen when metal get real real hot just about to melt. Heat is not good for any engine. Heat can kill anything even diesel more. Also if ford what's us pay $7,000 diesel option it should be made in the "U.S.A" at lease when international made there engine it was made in the "U.S.A". But now that the Ford trucks are not getting the international option and there closing that plant down for lack of sales. But then I am glade that there making this poor design somewhere else. The last thing USA needs to make more junk. BTW any hotter on the Turbocharger will blowup. Some company's just don't learn. Remember Pinto?

The comments to this entry are closed.