New 2015 Ford Superduty 6.7 Updates

Morgan@Midwest Diesel & Auto · Jan 16, 2014

donniesd said:
I bet they are waiting for dodge to post numbers for the 2015 cummings, and will then do a software update.

No other manufacturer is going to up their numbers past ford. Reason being the cummins and duramax platforms are tapped out. They are having troubles with emissions now. Did you know that a duramax typically uses double the amout of urea than the ford? They don't want higher hp because they have nothing left without major redesign. On the other hand ford just sits there at the top, waiting, saying "try it, I dare ya". So unless one of the other manufacturers pushes I wouldn't count on ford doing anymore than necessary to top the others. Why push harder and cause more warranty issues if you can leave it turned down low enough to still be ahead of the others?

Powerstroke Cowboy · Jan 16, 2014

Not to mention Morgan the New cummins use a lot of urea. I have a friend with one and he says he has to add some every fill up... If not he will run out on the second tank of fuel. If this is true. Then yes i would say they are tapped out for sure! AND that would prove the ford is a better and cleaner engine. and runs more efficient.

Spindrift · Jan 16, 2014

Ford needs to start paying attention to tow ratings if they want to be at the top of the heap.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

powerstroked08 · Jan 16, 2014

Spindrift said:
Ford needs to start paying attention to tow ratings if they want to be at the top of the heap.

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

Agreed!

Morgan@Midwest Diesel & Auto · Jan 16, 2014

The ratings really don't meant a pile of sh*t in the real world. There's no way I hell a magazine or rating system can truly relate to real world towing capacities and how stable the truck "feels" at a given weight. I'd put 30k lbs behind my superduty WAY before I'd put it behind the same equipped d-max.

SEABEE08FX4 · Jan 16, 2014

Sledpull said:
The ratings really don't meant a pile of sh*t in the real world. There's no way I hell a magazine or rating system can truly relate to real world towing capacities and how stable the truck "feels" at a given weight. I'd put 30k lbs behind my superduty WAY before I'd put it behind the same equipped d-max.

This ^^^^

I've never rode in a truck that felt more planted loaded or unloaded than the Ford SD trucks. The SD platform in all honesty is still the best one available from the big three for all around use and enjoyment. Working here I get to not only work on a lot of these truck but also get a lot of seat time in them. The Fords always feel 10 x better than the other two. And the 6.7's pull anything you pull behind them like its a joke, they may not be the fast one out of the big three but over all quality and use is hands down the Ford all day. I personally can't wait till we get a 15 shop truck in here and see what this new motor is all about.

Yellow1000 · Jan 16, 2014

SEABEE08FX4 said:
This ^^^^

I've never rode in a truck that felt more planted loaded or unloaded than the Ford SD trucks. The SD platform in all honesty is still the best one available from the big three for all around use and enjoyment. Working here I get to not only work on a lot of these truck but also get a lot of seat time in them. The Fords always feel 10 x better than the other two. And the 6.7's pull anything you pull behind them like its a joke, they may not be the fast one out of the big three but over all quality and use is hands down the Ford all day. I personally can't wait till we get a 15 shop truck in here and see what this new motor is all about.

X2. Loaded it's a damn solid truck. I'm sure a few of us including myself have far surpassed the "factory suggested max load".

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and ****.

Spindrift · Jan 16, 2014

Then why does Ford allow the Dodge/Cummins platform to win the hauling game?

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

RedRice589 · Jan 16, 2014

Spindrift said:
Then why does Ford allow the Dodge/Cummins platform to win the hauling game?

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

Because they still sell more trucks it's not all about being the number 1 in a magazine. It's the repeat customers from a nice smooth well handling platform. IMO I will definitely go check out the other 2 trucks in a couple years when I need a new one but I don't think there is a nicer option if you want comfortable and capable.

Danny26 · Jan 16, 2014

Spindrift said:
Then why does Ford allow the Dodge/Cummins platform to win the hauling game?

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

Cummins is winning the numbers game (which prob wont be the case with the new 450 in 2015) but from the tests I have seen the ford is faster at identical weights except at altitude, and the new turbo should fix that.

John_P · Jan 16, 2014

Spindrift said:
Then why does Ford allow the Dodge/Cummins platform to win the hauling game?

Sent from my DROID RAZR HD using Tapatalk

--------------------------------------------
According to "Diesel Power" the 2013 F-450 6.7 PSD was hurt in the competition with the Dodge CTD CR 6.7 at Davis Dam, Az. due to the twin scroll turbo on the Ford 6.7 PSD. Mike McGlothlin wrote a good editorial on the competition between the trucks and said the smaller inducer wheels on the Garrett GT-32 coupled with the lack of better exhaust braking hurt the F-450. But, with the 2015 Ford F-Series Super Duty Diesels coming up with the
bigger and better Garrett GT-37 and a larger inducer wheel (64 vs 73mm)
I think the new 2015 Ford is going beat the Dodge CTD CR. Recently I saw a Ford video on their own test at the same location and Ford beat not only the Dodge, but also the Duramax.

powerstroked08 · Jan 16, 2014

I agree that the super duty is a way more stable platform to tow/haul with but it was lacking in the exhaust brake department. I hope that the new turbo takes care of that issue. But it seems ford is leaving the dodge have a leg to stand on by letting them have the higher capacity. Maybe they have a good stratagy? Either way I really hope the '15 upgrades really show. And is that correct they are leaving the same junk turbo on the 550's? I don't know how many of them I have heard of grenading around here. I would like to think they would address that issue.

donniesd · Jan 16, 2014

Mac Haik Ford is taking pre-orders. Saying estimated 16-18 week delivery after orders are placed (Did not know when). Going on Saturday to get my KR in!

Phantom Limb · Jan 16, 2014

Powerstroke Cowboy said:
Not to mention Morgan the New cummins use a lot of urea. I have a friend with one and he says he has to add some every fill up... If not he will run out on the second tank of fuel. If this is true. Then yes i would say they are tapped out for sure! AND that would prove the ford is a better and cleaner engine. and runs more efficient.

Urea consumption has NOTHING to do with engine performance limitations. Urea consumption will increase on the 15' Powerstroke as well. In fact urea consumption will increase on everything using SCR equipment. When you add more urea, certification is achieved while turning DOWN engine killing EGR. The Cummins ISX will achieve the 16' fuel and pollution standards by simply increasing urea flow. The engine will make more power, and use less fuel just by reducing EGR even more. All Peterbilt truck built in 13' and on are already using Cummins new SCR protocol.
BTW, I'm a Ford guy, but I guarantee you that the 6.7l Cummins with SCR has a ton left. Probably more than the 6.7l Powerstroke.

Morgan@Midwest Diesel & Auto · Jan 16, 2014

Phantom Limb said:
Urea consumption has NOTHING to do with engine performance limitations. Urea consumption will increase on the 15' Powerstroke as well. In fact urea consumption will increase on everything using SCR equipment. When you add more urea, certification is achieved while turning DOWN engine killing EGR. The Cummins ISX will achieve the 16' fuel and pollution standards by simply increasing urea flow. The engine will make more power, and use less fuel just by reducing EGR even more. All Peterbilt truck built in 13' and on are already using Cummins new SCR protocol.
BTW, I'm a Ford guy, but I guarantee you that the 6.7l Cummins with SCR has a ton left. Probably more than the 6.7l Powerstroke.

I respectfully disagree. I know it has a lot to with scr strategy, but if ford has equal or better fuel mileage, hp and uses less urea while meeting the same emissions, how doesn't that state that there is a reason for it? The flow of the heads and up-pipe configuration and quite few other reasons are why I made the statements that they will not make more power on the cummins and duramax platforms. The design of the engine itself will out perform the older (10+ year architecture) of the d-max and cummins. I'm not down playing it but without a large change the other two will not succeed ford in hp. Other wise they will be dosing enough urea and regen so often that they will be very costly to drive. Not saying they can't go to a factory compound turbo arrangement with re-designed heads and updated dpf, egr and scr system to make it. Just not in their current states.

Meniacal_Mark · Jan 16, 2014

I have to agree with Morgan on that

Powerstroke Cowboy · Jan 16, 2014

Phantom Limb said:
Urea consumption has NOTHING to do with engine performance limitations. Urea consumption will increase on the 15' Powerstroke as well. In fact urea consumption will increase on everything using SCR equipment. When you add more urea, certification is achieved while turning DOWN engine killing EGR. The Cummins ISX will achieve the 16' fuel and pollution standards by simply increasing urea flow. The engine will make more power, and use less fuel just by reducing EGR even more. All Peterbilt truck built in 13' and on are already using Cummins new SCR protocol.
BTW, I'm a Ford guy, but I guarantee you that the 6.7l Cummins with SCR has a ton left. Probably more than the 6.7l Powerstroke.

Sledpull said:
I respectfully disagree. I know it has a lot to with scr strategy, but if ford has equal or better fuel mileage, hp and uses less urea while meeting the same emissions, how doesn't that state that there is a reason for it? The flow of the heads and up-pipe configuration and quite few other reasons are why I made the statements that they will not make more power on the cummins and duramax platforms. The design of the engine itself will out perform the older (10+ year architecture) of the d-max and cummins. I'm not down playing it but without a large change the other two will not succeed ford in hp. Other wise they will be dosing enough urea and regen so often that they will be very costly to drive. Not saying they can't go to a factory compound turbo arrangement with re-designed heads and updated dpf, egr and scr system to make it. Just not in their current states.

I agree 100% with Morgan on this. Look at the proof right now. Like Morgan said the 6.7 Powerstroke get better MPG then the 6.7 Cummins. AND at the same time using WAY less ura to keep the exhaust clean. That right there speaks for itself.

Seeing that was your first post... Welcome to PSA.

mfoltz · Jan 17, 2014

So does it mean the first 2015 trucks will still have 400 hp until they reflash like they did on the 2011. Does that mean they just flash the computer with new tuning once the truck gets to the dealer. I heard their is going to be a price increase that's why they kept the hp the same for now then they will raise the price once the numbers go up

Mpoage · Jan 17, 2014

mfoltz said:
So does it mean the first 2015 trucks will still have 400 hp until they reflash like they did on the 2011. Does that mean they just flash the computer with new tuning once the truck gets to the dealer. I heard their is going to be a price increase that's why they kept the hp the same for now then they will raise the price once the numbers go up

No one really knows right now. I bet Ford just put the current power numbers up right now and we will find out the updated numbers closer to release of the trucks.