Ford Super Duty Reclaims Diesel Power Title: 400 HP, 800 Pounds-Feet of Torque

2011 Ford F-250 with 6.7-liter Power Stroke Diesel V-8

Need more torque? There's an app for that -- at least if you own a 2011 Ford F-250, F-350 or F-450 Super Duty pickup truck with an all-new 6.7-liter V-8 Power Stroke diesel.

Ford has announced that it's raising power levels in its all-new compression ignition engine to an astonishing 400 horsepower and 800 pounds-feet of torque through an update to the engine's software. That’s an increase of 65 pounds-feet and 10 hp over the initial 390-hp, 735 pounds-feet version of the engine that was announced in February. It's also an increase in bragging rights, after Ford saw GM claim segment-leading power ratings for the 397-hp, 765 pounds-feet 6.6-liter Duramax V-8 diesel in March.

“This [power upgrade] is part of our continuous improvement program,” said Adam Gryglak, chief engineer for Ford’s 6.7-liter diesel program. “Now is the right time to release it.”

Production of the updated engines with the new power ratings starts this week, but early adopters of the new 2011 F-Series Super Duty aren't being left behind because there are no changes to the engine or transmission.

“There are no physical hardware changes required,” Gryglak said. “The fueling schedule has changed along with transmission [shifting schedule] calibrations to make sure we have a smooth and continuous torque curve.”

Additional fuel injected during combustion is all that's needed to get the power bump.

Ford 6.7-liter Power Stroke V-8 Diesel

Starting Aug. 31 and continuing for the next 12 months, 6.7 Power Stroke owners can have their engine control unit software updated for free at their local Ford dealer. The upgrade process is similar to a firmware update in a smart phone or PC and is expected to take about 30 minutes.

“Drivers are going to see most of the benefit in highway gears, fourth, fifth and sixth, in the amount of reserve torque that’s available,” said Chris Brewer, Ford F-Series Super Duty chief engineer. “If you're driving in hilly terrain towing a trailer, instead of a downshift happening sooner, it will happen later. You can stay in a given gear longer.”

Along with more power, 6.7 v2.0 owners should see improved fuel economy because the engine can shift gears faster and hold them longer. Ford says the engine will be 2 percent more efficient than 6.7 v1.0, making the 2011 F-Series Super Duty 6.7-liter Power Stroke diesel 20 percent more fuel efficient than the old 2010 6.4-liter Power Stroke V-8 model.

“One of the nice things about staying in a [higher] gear longer is that you get improved fuel economy,” Brewer said. “The torque converter is also locking up earlier and, in some cases, staying locked up longer.

Unlike F-Series Super Duty pickups though, Ford's diesel-powered Super Duty chassis cab trucks will not receive a power upgrade. They’ll stay at today’s power levels.


“[Trucks with] dyno-certified engines will not be affected by this power and torque increase,” Brewer said.

But wait. There’s more.

It's not just best-in-class power figures that Ford is taking back from GM. It's also going to increase (again) maximum towing and hauling numbers. The one-ton Ford F-350 dual-rear-wheel is getting hardware improvements that will increase maximum payload and maximum fifth-wheel towing to best-in-class levels. Increased use of high-strength steel in the frame will boost the maximum payload to 7,070 pounds, up from 6,520 pounds, and max fifth-wheel towing to 22,600 pounds, up from 21,600 pounds.

“We're using high-strength steel in the number six cross member in the frame the handle the increase payload,” Brewer said. “That change, along with the horsepower and torque increase, helped increase [fifth-wheel] towing.”

There's no increase in conventional towing and payload for F-250 and F-350 single-rear-wheel trucks or the F-450 pickup. Unlike the free software upgrade, current owners of F-350 DRWs will not be able to retrofit their trucks to the new towing and hauling figures. Only 2011 Job 2 F-350 duallys will carry the higher ratings.

2011 Ford F-350


These diesel wars are rediculous. How much power is needed to move a load safely?

Well,like always I said Ford is #1,doesn't matter what #'s show us Chevy/Dodge...Ford Superduy aways be a #1 brand,always!!!
1.Best Towing!
2.Best Payload!
3.Best HP!
4.Best TQ!
5.Best Fuel Economy!
The 5 most important things in a diesel truck to me!
Best Frame!
Best Chassis!
Best looking truck!
Best overall truck!
.......and etc.
Thank you Ford!
!!!You always the BEST!!!


I wonder how long that will last. jeje

It would be nice if Ford supported their older, CRAPPIER vehicles like this, my 6.0 is a friggen joke

Seems like before when they added a little bit of horse power, torque would marginally improve also. Now with a little extra horse power, torque just absolutely skyrockets with it as a byproduct. This is awesome.
I don't know why Chevy fans (Bob) are upset by this news. Competition is great, just please keep making the American trucks the best.

@ Keith

Higher MPG (part throttle considerations) have zero to do with maximum engine power (max HP/TQ).

So they changed the part throttle parameters of the fuel maps to gain fuel efficiency, this shouldn't be confused with creating power maximum power. Two entirely different spectrum.

And again they changed the mapping for the transmission to not upshift as soon, holding gears longer This has nothing to do with maximum HP/TQ if the change was mapped at WOT condition with an increase of the redline RPM.

There's no way to increase HP without an increase in TQ. HP is simply a calculation derived from the base measured value TQ. HP showcases how long that torque is applied. In this case the extra 65 ft lbs at the peak rating is only available for a very small amount of time, thus the 10HP increase. If 65 ft lbs was added throughout the RPM range the HP increase would have been substantial more.

It's really that simple.

This is the first time im almost six years that a Powerstroke has had more power stock then a Duramax....

Congrats Ford, bout time you came to the party...


That is becuase Navistar screwed them up.

You Ford humping guys crack me up! Ford has to copy all of GM'S ideas. all Ford did was reverse engineering by taking a gm's best ideas and using gm's new 4.5 liter diesel design and applying it to their new diesel.

GM was first to offer tow haul mode, first to offer a hydrofoamed frame. first to offer common rail fuel injection.

Ford hates to be second behind gm so they can make the adds that tout their towing and hauling capabilities.

I'll bet money that the durmax won this years shootout and you can take that to the bank.

So let it be written, so let it be done!

OK, I see it coming now. GM to get the Duramax up to 407HP /835 lb-ft. Ford prepares for this and is ready for a 3rd upgrade of 450HP/900 lb-ft by the end of the year.

@Chevy man,

Ford trumps Gm in every aspect and are a hands down better truck"? "Is that a joke? Ford was left in the dust till just now that ford came up with a "Software Update", "SOFTWARE UPDATE"? REALLY? seems cheap doesnt it."

"Oh and hey pal, "Government Motors" Is old now. I think all you ford fanboys have to start thinking of something new."

Okay first of all, are you serious ford was left in the dust before the update?hahah thanks for the quick laugh, maybe you should take a look at the link, which te testing was done BEFORE the update haha
hmm wierd how ford comes out on top right? not to bad for being left in the dust? and if ur talking about acceleration numbers, dont even bother because your not buy a diesel to drag race, if u wanna do that, go buy a mustang, which will also kick dust in the face of the camaro and challenger
But have fun reading the article and eating your own words...and oh ya i did mention a couple extra names for that socialist auto company you like to call GM, did you miss them? the peoples GM and the soviet union of general motors

It's hydroforming, not hydro-foaming. Mike Levine said on a radio show that the new Super Duty was the best heavy duty truck hands down. Yep, he said hands down! PM just picked the Super Duty over GM and Ram. I can pretty much assure you the GM did not win the shootout but we'll see in 13 days.

Considering there were many trucks tested i'm sure GM had best MPG's with their small wheel/tiress.

Actually Bob, Clessie Cummins invented Common Rail injection in the 1940s, (not invented by GM in 2001). Every diesel engine in the automotive world has it mainly thanks to Bosch.
GM got the reverse flow idea (because I know that's what you're talking about) from VM Motori, who developed the 2.9L V6 for GM. So GM did not invent it, and I don't think VM Motori invented it either. Ford built the diesel engines with CGI blocks a long time before GM showed off the 4.5L prototype.
Finally, it's clear that you don't even know what hydroforming is. If you did, you would know it wasn't "hydrofoaming."

You guys are getting unit injection confused with what we now call common rail. On that line of thought, you could say GM's 2 cycle Detroit Diesels had 'common rail' back in 1938! No matter. Say, am hearing the Duramax will get a power upgrade in early 2011. Maybe that story the GM engineers had about the 'rubber band' in the Duramax wasn't really true. Have to admit, it was a funny thing for the GM people to say......

@Bob,hahahahahahaha!!!! :)))))))))
yeah Bob you said it,you right,
Chevy used a hydrofoamed frame :)))))))))

The G80 locking diff. In the Z71 is the better diff. Works in both 2WD and 4WD, i should know since i own a 2007 Chevy Silverado Z71 with that diff. And my 06 GMC Sierra has it too, its a great diff.

Nice upgrade by Ford, and for once a car company does the right thing and offers the upgrade to customers who already bought the vehicle. Curious to see what RPM peak torque, and HP are delivered at, but assuming it is still at 1600 RPM's for peak torque, and 2800 RPM's for peak HP this is what the numbers would look like:

Peak Torque = 800lb-ft @ 1600 RPM's = 243.7 hp at peak torque.

{ 800*1600/5252 } = 243.7

Peak Horsepower = 400hp @ 2800 RPM's = 750.3lb-ft at peak horsepower.

{ 400*5252/2800 } = 750.3

For comparison using the same calculations for the 1.0 version of the engine management we would have:

Peak torque = 735lb-ft @ 1600 RPM's = 223.9hp at peak torque.

Peak Horsepower = 390hp @ 2800 RPM's = 731.5lb-ft at peak horsepower.

So it appears that the real meat of this upgrade should be right in the mid range of the powerband where it is most useful (an extra 20hp right in the middle of the operating range is pretty damn useful), while still giving a significant increase in torque (18.8lb-ft) all the way to peak power output.

The updated Duramax looks like this:

Peak Torque = 765lb-ft @ 1600 RPM's = 233.1hp at peak torque.

Peak Horsepower = 397lb-ft @ 3000 RPM's = 695.0lb-ft of torque at peak horsepower.

Notice that in order to hit peak horsepower the Duramax requires an extra 200 RPM's over the Powerstroke, assuming the same operating range after the update to the Ford. Also of note is that the Duramax can not maintain over 700lb-ft out to peak horsepower, but is able to keep building power 200 RPM's after the Ford has fallen off.

nana na na hey hey good bye chevy, nana na na hey hey good bye

Fordfan01...... Ford took bailout money in 2007 you idiot. Also in 2007 Ford LOST the HD Shootout. Suck on that Duramax smoke.

Zakisa, go buy a 2007 Chevy then LOL

Honestly can any of you dumbfounded numbskulls STOP involving politics is EVERY single article posted on this site?

On topic: Honestly, I am leary about the new 6.7. New motor. New problems. Cummins, Duramax and the old 7.3 were proven designs, and as far as the first two, they have been used for 20+ and 10 years in light duty trucks. They are tried and true at this point.

What do I feel GM's answer will be? I would like to see a CGI version of the current motor, just on the fact that the CGI makes a stronger block. They could keep it a 6.6 and just do up the lower end, possibly the upper as well. This I feel would be cheaper than redesigning a new displacement motor, etc. Also, GM developed the 4.5 as a CGI motor to begin with.

I dunno about the Ford diffs, but the G80 is a time bomb. Get one wheel spinning and apply a load and boom it goes. Seen it happen in 1500's and hd's.

@ ZakisaGMlover,

Not that it has anything to do with the topic at hand, Ford did not take any bailout money from taxpayers in 2007 as you claim. Nor did they take any funds in the 2009 bailout. So you are either making things up to make yourself feel better, or you are a half literate imbecile. Perhaps both.

Ford did, in 2006, borrow over $23 billion from private sources in order to revamp itself. This gave them more flexibility and the ability as a company to act more quickly than GM (Gubment' Motors) and Chrysler.... er I mean FIAT to turn them selves around. Not only are they now able to conduct business without Uncle Sam and his goons interfering with basic decisions, but there seems to be a great deal of goodwill towards Ford for not taking a bailout.

I for one would not have considered buying a Ford product 3-4 years ago for any reason, and now between their much improved new products and independent (as opposed to govt' subsidized) status I will give them a look in the future.

@ the Bobsie twin list of alias's just keep on growing and growing:
Bobby Go Chevy
GM's Joan of Arc
Bobsie twin
Mama's boy
comrade Chev

You sound just as stupid regardless what name you use!

@DM - I agree
10% engineering, 90% PR hype.

Ford will remain #1 with other tricks up the sleve, ford is the true work truck, and have more trucks on the road with original trannys, ford is the tranny king, they have there way in everything Ford Rules!!! GM is more of a disaster than ford, ford isint chevy has been forever.

Zackisa, you are half right. The article never chose a clear cut winner. The GM 3500 was thier choice for one ton. The Ford F-250 v-10 was thier choice for three quarter ton. Looks like a split to me.
I don't know if the Ford HD's use the same diff as the F-150, but if they do, the F-150's diff is better than anyones. Look at the light duty shoot out.


Hey "Lou", i think i hear your mom calling, Isnt it past your bedtime?

Whenever I hear people boasting about the locking dif in the Z10, I go back to the traction test. The non-FX4 F-150 version without the locking dif beats the fancy Chevy Z10 with the locking dif. The F-150 goes right up the hill in 2wheel drive. But the Z10 has to come to a stop, engage 4wheel drive and then go up the hill. The bottom line is this, the Ford is all go, and the Chevy is all show.

Watch and learn....

Speaking of the CGI block- has anyone here actually seen a 6.7L Powerstroke block? Sure, CGI is stronger and harder than regular cast iron, but it looks to me like Ford used CGI technology primarily to make the block lighter. It is very thin in many places, and it seems to me that Ford is using less of a stronger material to maintain strength in a lighter block. I am not ready to jump on that bandwagon quite yet!

Well this is great news. In a year or two Cummins and Duramax will have over 400 hp and over 800 ft/lbs. Leap frogging is gonna get all three so much power we won,t need Tuners. go diesel go.

Now that's a clever company! Nice to see a bump in power/towing/fuel economy all at the same time. I really like the look of that dually (bottom pic). I'm not a fan of chrome but that truck does look nice. I'd like to get a similar setup but with the black grille.

Too bad they didn't hook you guys up with the update for the shootout, we'll probably see an article on the update again when you get to test it against version 1.0

Another ford fail, it does little good to claim you have the most power when your trucks break down and don't last as long as the competition, (GM). The good thing for ford is that ford girls know next to nothing about pick ups and quality and still believe the ford faux story about being the "best selling" when they include dump trucks and box trucks as pick ups to pad their sales figures.

All GM guys,

Ford makes the engines in mexico cause they pay the workers with Nachos, Taco's and Burritos. "Cheaper labor"

Just like GM going to import vehicles made in china starting in 2011/2012.

At least my Vehicle wont be assembled by 7 year olds

@Sierra_WT, LOL Love your comment!! Classic!!

@Alex - IIRC the Ford electronic locker works in 2wd. It is stated it works like the Raptors and IIRC you do not need to be in 4wd in the Raptor. It disengages at over 30mph and re-engeages when you go below 30mph.

Thanks Keith! Good to know it works in 2wd!

You have got to know your not the only shoot-out around. After your MONTH long embargo, what is the point? PM has the numbers, even though thiers, 'and yours' are outdated. Whats is left? Your impressions? Ya like I'm goint to spend 50 G based on what you say.
I've asked you before, and even tried your 'other' email. I never recieved a reply so I'll try here. Why the embargo? You are beaten by weeks, I don't see how you will have any new content. The 2011 Rams are unobtainium. I'm left puzzled by your me-too attitude.

@ all the ford lovers.... I have to agree that the Goverment Motors joke is old... did ya also hear that the berlin wall came down!!!! cause that joke is just about as old. As for the HP and torque wars.... give me a break how much is too much. I will support any auto manufacture that comes out and says hey we might not have the hightest HP and torque but we can get 40 MPG and still pull the crap out of a fully loaded trailer... I would buy a full size truck with 300 HP and 500 lbs\ft that gets 40 MPG and that does not cost $65,000. Us truck guys need to re-think our priorities man.

@Alex - YW. I know what you mean when I saw 4wd only I was like huh? You'd need the locker more in 2wd than 4wd. One of the reasons I didn't get the off road package when I bought my Titan was the E locker only engaged in 4wd low. Seemed silly as I want to avoid using 4wd unless I need it.

@Ty: I'm sorry I haven't seen your earlier e-mails.

When we do our Shootouts, we invite other media to participate with us. Folks who wouldn't usually have the opportunity to gather 9 trucks in one place or drive them back to back. That includes print media, like Diesel Power Magazine and Truck Trend. We're aware they need time to also prepare print coverage.

I think it's great that others are also doing their comparisons but I don't think you'll find it as rigorous or in-depth as ours. We tested the gas and diesel trucks side-by-side. We tested single rear wheel and dual rear wheel.

I didn't expect Ford to up the power ratings so early for the Super Duty. From my sources, I knew it was coming and asked for trucks with the new power settings. Ford didn't provde them.

We publish August 16. I think you'll find it an incredible guide.

Ty - Look over previous shootouts done by this website. They are far more indepth and practical than what PM puts out. I am also guessing PM tested the Ford against the 2010 GM's if they were done that much earlier. IIRC Mike is testing Ford and GM 2011 models. Dodge is Dodge. Seeing they just significantly revamped their HD's for 2010, I don't think you will see much in the way of major changes by them anytime too soon except for maybe a power boost.

I'll just emphasize that Ford knew when we were doing our testing, when we were publishing and that I asked them before the test for the higher output trucks.

We're making final edits to the HD Shootout now. It's over 25 pages and 13,000 words. There are more than 30 detailed performance graphs, hundreds of photos and video.

You can have hamburger or you can have steak. I think our Shootout is Grade A prime steak.

"I am also guessing PM tested the Ford against the 2010 GM's"

Wrong. It was 2011 Ford vs 2011 GM.

But I am looking forward to the test because it will be in much, much more detail.

This is going to be an exciting shootout. I also wish Ford gave Mike an updated engine. 390/735 seems gutless now. LOL. I hope the updated engine program removed the throttle lag that I noticed.
Mike, any chance you can get hold of the power/torque curve for the updated engine? It would be interesting to compare it to the old graph and also the Duramax.

As a guy I'm all for more power but at some point even I start to see and agree with others who say just give me a truck with 300hp and 500tq and better fuel economy. These numbers are getting insane. I wonder (with a few others) how much longer before some idiot tries to tow something that is to big for one of these trucks and it bites him in the rear and they cause a big accident? As a guy who drives fully loaded 10 & 18 wheelers, I can say it takes a lot more skill, and common sense to drive a vehicle with so much weight. A lot of these people will never put more than a few thousand pounds behind them but then you always get the guy who saw an ad that his truck is good 24,0000 pounds and he says awe it can do more than that for sure... at this rate you will soon need a CDL to use these trucks to their full potential.

@Mike Levine,

This is why I effen love this site. Thanks Bud!!

I think it's more about increasing safety and capability for what people typically use them for. Making it nicer to pull the weights they already pull. I'm certainly not going to go out looking for an excuse to pull a 24,000 lb trailer just because I can. But it's nice to know pulling 10-15,000 lb won't hurt it (it won't even feel it), and will be really easy to drive. I don't know if that's everyones mentality.

I agree with DM that the added torque will probably be over a narrower RPM range than the V1.0 calibration. The V1.0 cal produced 735 lb-ft from 1600 to 2800 RPM. Rated power was produced at 2800 RPM. Note: HP = (TQ x RPM) / 5252, so 735 lb-ft @ 2800 is about 390 HP. Looking at the 6.7L "Coffee Table Book" (available from, the low end torque curve appears to be boost limited, so the engine will probably not reach 800 lb-ft until 1750 RPM lb-ft. At the high RPM end, so you can't make 800 lb-ft at higher than 2626 RPM without exceeding the 400 hp power rating. Since engineers like round numbers, my guess is that they will start reducing torque at 2600 RPM. If they continue to use 2800 RPM as the rated speed, the engine will have to produce 750 lb-ft at 2800 RPM to make 400 hp.

The net effect of these changes is that power in the midrange from 1750 to 2600 RPM will be 22 to 32 hp higher than the V1.0 calibration, and that the power curve from 2600 RPM to 3000 RPM will be a little flatter. This means that there should be more useable power over a wide RPM range, which should translate into measureably better performance. But keep in mind that the power increase at any point in the RPM range is less than 9%, so the performance difference won't be tremendous.

To get about 450 hp without exceeding 800 lb-ft, the rated speed would have to increase to at least 2950 RPM. This would probably require a larger turbo, which would tend to hurt low RPM boost and torque. I doubt Ford would make this tradeoff since the engine spends a lot more time at low RPM than at high RPM.

@ mike levine, after doing all the testing with the 2011 6.7 v1.0 do you really think that 10 hp and 65 torque would make that much of a difference when they are already at that high of numbers. Or is it more the tranny changes that make the difference. I do agree with other posts that at least ford is giving the updates for free to people that already bought one.

The comments to this entry are closed.