Bus Conversion Magazine Bulletin Board
December 18, 2017, 10:45:29 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: If you had an Online Subscription: You will not have to go out in the rain, sleet, hail, or snow to retrieve it.
   Home   Help Forum Rules Search Calendar Login Register BCM Home Page Contact BCM  
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: FORD POWERSTROKE  (Read 1228 times)
luvrbus
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 18599




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: November 08, 2017, 07:44:21 AM »

John Deere did the casting on the old 8v71 engines ,the series 50 uses the John Deere balancing setup,Deere and Detroit was close for years till M/B came into the picture
Logged

Life is short drink the good wine first
HB of CJ
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: November 08, 2017, 09:29:59 AM »

Not enough power or durability?  The specs look very weak for a fire apparatus.  My old fire department recently took delivery of a Pierce but it had a 500 hp DD15 with some sort of 6 speed auto?  One hundred miles per hour with 6th gear flat wide open.

330 hp and weak torque inside a 42,000 pound Engine is not enough.

They also spend much money on pre lubers and various pre heaters for oil, coolant, what not.  The Type 1 Engine was going to a Company responding close to 5000 times yearly.  Buying low ball sometimes is not the cheapest or best way to go. 

Awhile back they let me drive a fairly new "Triple", (known today as a type 1 engine) and I was amazed at the power.  Much faster than our old American LaFrance engines used back in about 1975.  Also A/C, P/S, A/T, air seats, air bags, etc.  Wow!  Smiley
Logged
CrabbyMilton
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 941




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: November 08, 2017, 01:05:48 PM »

I know. When I first saw the article, I wondered why they just didn't take the easy route and just offer a 300-350HP version of the CUMMINS ISL. That way they would have had the same engine in place that is much easier from an engineering standpoint and the ISL is capable of higher torque anyway which is better for pumping and the ALLISON is long proven for pumper applications. Not saying the FORD tranny is bad but there could be much fingernail biting for awhile
Not every dept. needs 400-600HP but here are a couple theories of mine why they may have done this.

Perhaps a POWERSTROKE 6.7 in the SABER would be aimed at an application such as a rescue or command post where higher torque and power won't be needed since it won't be pumping.

Perhaps since many departments already have the POWERSTROKE 6.7 in their ambulances so there could be a good argument for standardization providing the pumper only needs a 1000-1250gpm pump.
Logged
HB of CJ
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1724




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: November 09, 2017, 01:28:04 PM »

Ambulances or smaller more agile Type 3 light engines MIGHT get away with the POWERSTROKE  IF the application deemed so. 

Pumping does not require that much HP or Torque.  It is getting the apparatus down the road to the fire that requires the heavy horse power.

Long ago, far away.  Of course this was before the dawn of time or about 1972 when I started my fire career.  Everything today is different.

Sad  Sad  I can't go back again.  Oh well!  Sad  Sad
Logged
CrabbyMilton
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 941




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: November 10, 2017, 03:41:34 AM »

Like I said, engine technology has really come a long way in the last 40 years. I remember some of the apparatus around here that had huge WAUKESHA gasoline engines and they often topped out in the 200-250hp range so 300hp was considered a lot of power back then.
That POWERSTROKE could be a good donor for something like a FLXIBLE CLIPPER.
Logged
Dreadnought
"HMS Dreadnought"- 1964 MCI MC5
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 176


Live Fast, Live Well, Live Free!


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #20 on: November 10, 2017, 06:23:39 AM »

I have owned 6.0L Powersmokes since 03 when they came out. They had problems, but when set up properly and "bullet proofed", they are a great engine. (I am rebuilding one now). The new 6.7L, since 2011, is an excellent engine. Ford really has it figured out now.

JC

Well said!

Folks in the US panic and spread false info from this. The 6.0 litre was badly executed and I blame Navistar for that. Big lazy bureaucratic company more into empire building than engineering properly. However the 6 litre installed in the class 5 durastar application was dependable.

The issues of this and the later 6.4 aren't insurmountable. Mainly EGR and head gasket issues in the Ford truck application. And yet folks over state this on and on and on. If I owned a good one that I fixed up- what would be worse would be listening to folks all warning me about the issues.
These issues can be resolved- it's just whether the initial second hand purchase price is low enough to warrant spending that much money resolving the issues permanently and/or whether I love the vehicle enough.

The same US panic exists about Jaguar engines etc

There are other engines- like GM- that can never do any wrong. My Escalade with its L92 version of the LS motor has been one of the worst engines and cars I've ever owned and I've owned some terrible motors, including Alfa Romeos and Fiats. Rear main seal leaks, piston slap, clattery, rough idle. My Jaguar supercharged V8 by comparison has been a paragon of refinement and dependability and torque.
Logged

Live Fast, Live Well, Live Free

1964 MCI MC5 8v71
CrabbyMilton
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 941




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: November 10, 2017, 07:02:09 AM »

It's all about a combination of personal experience and perception.
That does surprise me about your ESCALADE. That engine has been around forever in some form but I guess whenever revisions are made, someone must have goofed up something in the process.
Logged
Dreadnought
"HMS Dreadnought"- 1964 MCI MC5
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 176


Live Fast, Live Well, Live Free!


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #22 on: November 10, 2017, 08:33:36 AM »

It's all about a combination of personal experience and perception.
That does surprise me about your ESCALADE. That engine has been around forever in some form but I guess whenever revisions are made, someone must have goofed up something in the process.

Knowing GM very well and having friends there, they probably had a perfectly good engine and then decided to "VA/VE" the F*** out of it with sourced parts from China and the far east till it was rubbish.

Big companys have the potential to make outstanding quality but they also have a lot of greed and can squeeze everything out. Normally the market would take care of this- but in this case blinded fan boys seem to worship GM and distort stuff
Logged

Live Fast, Live Well, Live Free

1964 MCI MC5 8v71
CrabbyMilton
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 941




Ignore
« Reply #23 on: November 10, 2017, 09:31:53 AM »

I guess you have to conclude that in many ways, GM is just responding to market demand. While you may appreciate heritage and quality as do I and fellow "build it here" people, a great number of the masses don't care where it comes from so long as they get their stuff. If it breaks because of lousy quality or lack of maintenance, no problem they'll just go and buy another one.
Perhaps it's good that GM got out of the bus building business decades ago since who knows how good or bad they would be now.
I'm not sure about the greed end of it since if it was true greed, you would want to build it and stand behind it instead of building sub standard crap and creating many PO'd customers. Can't make much money if the factories close and can't sell cars and trucks that way. Granted, years ago GM only had competition from FORD and CHRYSLER and a handful of others but now there are many more builders but GM still has that old mentality.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2017, 12:56:07 PM by CrabbyMilton » Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!