Jump to content

C/K Man

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

49 Good

About C/K Man

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  1. Remember that direct injection is the reason the compression ration could be raised without have to retard timing too much or increasing NOX emissions. DI is an enabler. I think the Ford 7.3L will be a big improvement over the current V-10, but it will be interesting to see exactly what kind of power Ford gets out of it. They still have not said, and the talk of how the engine runs at stoichiometric fuel/air ratios 'all the time' has me wondering. The interior views of the prototype engine show some good, but some bad too from a performance standpoint. Since this engine is destined for larger truck applications only, I think it may very well end up like the Ford 6.2L, an engine with little aftermarket high performance support. I don't see it having the wide applications the LS/LT engines do.
  2. That's it, you have the cause and effect backwards. BTW- have you ever changed the small filter screen under the oil pressure switch? If it is restrictive, it could affect oil flow to the lifters.
  3. You will have to go to a dealer and spec. one out to find the unladen weight. Too many variables. I believe the front axle on the 4X4's is a Dana 70F, but not sure yet.
  4. It looks to me that the L8T is an iron block Gen. V without AFM/Dynamic Skip Fire. I see a lot to like in this engine, particularly the increased displacement, forged crank, and siamesed cylinder block with bored cooling passages. I would like to see E85 capability in the L8T eventually, but I think the 6L90 and 3.73:1 gear ratio will be fine. I hope the exhaust manifold bolts don't break under hard use, something I see in 6.0L's often. As for the Ford 7.3L, I have questions! I looks like a good truck engine, but so for I don't see much that makes me believe it will have much of a future as a high performance/crate engine. While it certainly has displacement and the bottom end looks strong, the valve train doesn't look like it will tolerate very high r.p.m.'s. The valve stems and springs look very tall, and the pushrods are also quite long. Lots of inertia and I wonder about stability at high r.p.m.'s with an aggressive camshaft. The bore spacing is 4.65" and they are running a 4.22" bore, so it looks like the 7.3L also has a siamesed cylinder block. However, it appears Ford has machined slots between the cylinders to permit coolant flow between them. These slots are open at the top (block deck), which might be a problem if someone decides to hang a blower or turbo on one of these things. Heads look to have real decent porting, but I don't see a lot of cooling passages in them. These are just superficial observations, and I do think the engine will be good in it's intended applications. But it ain't no LS! Just don't see that kind of versatility in the 7.3L.
  5. That's a good question. GM 2500 HD pickups had 16" wheels until 2011 when they went to 17" because of the new brakes. My best guess is it has to do with where the drop is on the stock wheels. It's far to the outside to clear the caliper, maybe aftermarket wheels have the drop closer to the center..
  6. Aluminum?

    I have been looking at new Super Duty's, and the body panel fit is pretty bad on them. Lot of uneven gaps, particularly the doors. Also, lots of complaints about water and wind leaks on the Ford forums.
  7. Aluminum?

    I though that would be the case went I heard the body panels were all different except for the roof. What is really funny is the new Ford Ranger is all steel.
  8. I am told the only body part shared with the 1500's is the roof. Are the HD's going to have aluminum hoods, doors, and tailgates?
  9. I have seen a little more of the 7.3L's insides, and have noticed a few things. First, the head bolts are very short. The pushrods, valve springs, and valve stems are quite long. Not sure why they did this, it doesn't appear they needed to be that way to clear the intake ports. Appears to have siamesed cylinder bores with open slots machined between them. I understand the desire to get a little coolant flow between the cylinders, but I wonder if the slots will compromise head gasket sealing. The L8T has siamesed cylinders too, but with bored coolant holes between the cylinders (GM has done this on hi-po crate engines). Block deck surface between the cylinders uncompromised. 7.3L's exhaust ports and manifolds look very good. 7.3L block casting looks very thin in places, I am very curious to find out what it weighs. Overall, the 7.3L looks like a good engine for larger trucks, but does not appear to have a lot of high performance potential. I also see Ford is keeping the 6.2L around in the F-250 and 350. I take that to mean the 7.3L will probably be a lot more common in the larger commercial trucks than pickups. The funniest thing about the 7.3L is after 20+ years of hearing how outdated the LS engines are compared to the Ford Modulars, the 7.3L has PUSHRODS!
  10. Ford isn't dropping their 6.2L from the F-250's and 350's, so maybe the thinking is the new 6.6L will compete with the Ford 6.2L and Ram 6.4L, with the larger engine going up against the Ford 7.3L for larger trucks. I think the 7.3L will be somewhat rare in the 250's and 350's, most HD pickup buyer going with gas power want to keep the purchase price low and get the best fuel economy possible.
  11. 6.6 gas

    Do we know that 4:11's will not be available in the 2020's? When I bought my 2012 3500, seemed that all the 6.0L trucks on the lots were 2500's with 3.73's. I had no trouble ordering a 6.0L 3500 with 4:11's, and it pulls fine. Gas mileage is what you would expect, but I didn't buy it for fuel economy.
  12. 6.6 gas

    No, 103.25mm (4.065") bore, 98mm (3.858") stroke. Looks like the 6.6L has the standard LS deck height.
  13. RCSB sighting

    That's a nice looking truck! I personally do not care if Chevy offers a RCSB or not, but that Sierra is a looker. I would buy one even if it only came with the 4.3L or turbo 4.
  14. These frames are dipped, so there isn't too much concern of them rusting on the inside. The wax coating can be damaged on the outside, but it can be easily touched up. The factory coating is available in aerosol cans. newdude raises a good point, some 'anti-rust' coatings can damage the factory coating. I use the factory coating, and touch it up from time to time. This TSB has information on the frame coating: https://gm.oemdtc.com/7624/service-update-14002-underbody-appearance-2014-chevrolet-silverado-gmc-sierra
  15. 6.6 gas

    Notice the engineer said that E85 capability was not available at launch. Might mean that it is coming, just not in 2020.

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.