New 2015 Ford Superduty 6.7 Updates

97stoker350 · Aug 31, 2014

prius is for fuel milage

01PSD · Aug 31, 2014

Idk.. I talk to a lot of people who at one point or another ask about fuel mileage. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect such a highly touted powertrain setup to get a little better mpgs... especially if FOMOCO is advertising xx MPG. (Yes they're always inflated LOL)

97stoker350 · Sep 1, 2014

Those values are also with stock tires and babied when testing for mpgs. Tires make a huge difference. He'll my 7.3 on 40s still gets 15 mpg

CATDiezel · Sep 1, 2014

Morgan@Midwest Diesel & Auto said:
Power > mileage... that's what wins the war for the majority of people.

While that's true at 100% throttle. The two identical trucks running side by side are using (theoratically) the exact same horsepower moving the same load. Same bore. Same stroke. Same truck with running gear. One engine is not producing more horsepower to maintain 70mph

So in theory the fuel mileage complaint is legit. (Although I don't care. I have a toyota camry at 35mpg for that)

So in return. One engine is using more fuel to move the same mass the same distance with the same powertrain with ratios. Due to the lack of efficiency. The only real thing that changed is the turbo. The fuel delivery system is virtually the same as far as point of delivery. Might be a little bigger but that's not the point.

Air fuel ratio + timing = xxx amount of NOx. (NO +NO2.... ALITTLE more complicated than that but no need to go into huge detail)

So to make an engine produce less NOX technically it has to burn dirtier. There are LOTS OF equations here to achieve emissions standards. Lack of turbo efficiency had to be made up somewhere else. Increasing horsepower actually is a by flaw design in order to meet the emissions. I could without a doubt guarantee you that a 2015 turbo on a stock 2011 truck would produce a Much higher NOX output. The best way to alleviate that is to increase fuel demand and compression by means of higher cylinder temperatures/pressures. Which in turn produces.... MORE HORSEPOWER!! WIN..LOSE.

SO yes. Morgan your right. Just wanted to give a little more detailed explanation so everyone is crying to FOMOCO.

ALL in name of a more durable turbo.

The 20 11 - 2014 turbo is a fine work of art by theory and efficiency. Just not the most dependable unfortunately.

griz700rocket · Sep 2, 2014

Well said Justin. My .02 cents on fuel mileage is for the guys who use them for work where 1-2 mpg can be a large loss in profits over the life of a truck. Is it possible the "dirtier" 2015 a also causes more regens and loses some efficiency there too?

BK39 · Sep 2, 2014

griz700rocket said:
Is it possible the "dirtier" 2015 a also causes more regens and loses some efficiency there too?

I wandered this myself, the more laggy a turbo, the more black soot in the DPF, so the more it would need to regen I would think.

CATDiezel · Sep 2, 2014

Yes. That's generally the case. But a dirtier burn may not necessarily mean large soot particulates. I'm speaking gaseous dirt.

Here's the trade off. Use more urea or use more diesel. There's a certain point where urea won't react due to cool exhaust also.

The fight between keeping cylinder temps up for the sake of the SCR housing where the urea acts is borderline magic on a variable speed/load engine.

Unfortunately in order for Ford to not get there peepee stepped on by the EPA the safe trade was fuel consumption in allow the dpf to work alittle more all while trying to give the consumer a better turbo that flowed better.

They designed this one around towing and efficiency there. Again a sacrifice for "cruising"

So many variables here its almost impossible to explain. Lol

griz700rocket · Sep 2, 2014

So in theory a deleted 15 should respond even more fuel mileage wise to deleting the DPF? I wonder if the EGR is used more to meet EPA on the 15s also. I'd think that would hurt fuel mileage too.

CATDiezel · Sep 2, 2014

In theory yes. But remember it will require a whole new set of tunes to make that turbo respond the same way the older turbo did.

But factually you will be hard pressed to be as efficient as an 11-14 simply because of the turbo design. Weak it may seem but it was an engineering marvel for a very small map of efficiency.

But with some very customized tuning the 15 should be capable of being very close to the older ones.

Mr.BigOil · Sep 3, 2014

So, the 15 is going backwards compared to the first gen 6.7?

Sorry guys, I disagree. No offense, but those Ford techs are probably a little smarter then the average IDE.

Coming up on 700 miles on my 15, and no regen yet.

CATDiezel · Sep 3, 2014

There not going backwards. Just keeping emissions in check. New standards ..... again..... it's more reliable than the other. I wouldn't exactly say IDE either. These are facts. Nobody said Ford wad going backwards. New standards bring in new designs. To a peebrain one would say it's backwards. But those folks are off the cuff people. Fuel mileage in the trucking industry took a huge hit with ever increasing technology.

Where I could tune and take a 95 model 3406E cat engine and male it turn 7.5mpg I couldn't come close with a c15 acert. Too much engine built around emissions.

Morgan@Midwest Diesel & Auto · Sep 3, 2014

Cat, thanks you for your explanation! Or in layman's terms...

Bigger less lower speed efficient turbo+higher hp rating=more power=using more fuel but still staying reliable and within EPA guidelines

CATDiezel · Sep 3, 2014

Mr.BigOil said:
So, the 15 is going backwards compared to the first gen 6.7?

Sorry guys, I disagree. No offense, but those Ford techs are probably a little smarter then the average IDE.

Coming up on 700 miles on my 15, and no regen yet.

Fwiw. Your truck regens more than the dash tells you. It's all in heat load. It will only flag a FULL REGEN on the dash. The truck is constantly in regens whether you want to admit to that or not. It's just not displayed on the dash. When you get a dash display you are being alerted of a forced 100% regen. Same goes for duramax and cummins. Regeneration can passively occur with engine load and be acceptable to the ecm to meet its demands for time/load/heat.

Fuel quality also plays a very LARGE PART in regeneration cycles.

This is industry standard for all vehicles with exhaust regeneration.

I would almost be willing to bet a coin that if you had your truck hooked up to fords software and they pulled the emissions data for the regen counter (yes they store all regens) your truck has been in regen more than twice already. And yes they also know that if you return a truck back to stock and the regen count is way down the truck has been emissions free. These are hard logged events in the ecm that are stored. Very little space needed for the expected life of the truck to store 20yrs worth of data.

Powerstroke214 · Sep 3, 2014

"Undetectable" though…lol

Great info CAT

CATDiezel · Sep 3, 2014

Morgan@Midwest Diesel & Auto said:
Cat, thanks you for your explanation! Or in layman's terms...

Bigger less lower speed efficient turbo+higher hp rating=more power=using more fuel but still staying reliable and within EPA guidelines

I'm certainly a fan of your work Morgan.