deisel pick up, powerstroke or turbo?

[gwithrow]

is there a difference? I have been told to only look at the 7.3 deisel...but I often see these two words used interchangably...and since we are looking at model years, from 1995-2000, it would be good to know if there is an engine we should avoid...thanks

[buck_1one]

A history of the 7.3 Power Stroke turbo diesel From Wikipedia:



In mid 1994, the 7.3L Power Stroke diesel was introduced. Although the previous 7.3L had the same displacement, there weren't any other similarities between the two. The Power Stroke is an electronically controlled, direct injection engine with a 4.11 in (104.4 mm) bore and 4.18 in (106.2 mm) stroke creating a displacement of 444 cu in (7.3 L). It has a 17.5:1 compression ratio, and has a dry weight of approximately 920 lbs. This engine produced up to 250 hp (190 kW) and 525 lb·ft (712 N·m) of torque in automatic trucks during the last years of production, and 275 hp (205 kW) and 550 lb·ft (746 N·m) of torque in manual trucks. The 1994.5 to 1996/97 DI Power stroke had "single shot" HEUI (hydraulically actuated electronic unit injection) fuel injectors and ran a 15° high pressure oil pump (HPOP) to create the necessary oil pressure to fire the fuel injectors. 1994.5-1997 trucks used a cam driven fuel pump, whereas the 1999-2003 trucks used a frame rail mounted electric fuel pump. The California trucks in 1996 and 1997 had split shot fuel injectors whereas the rest of the trucks didn't get split shots until 1999. The difference between the split shot and single shot are the single shot only injects one charge of fuel per cycle, whereas the split shot releases a pre light load before the main charge to initiate combustion in a more damped manner. This controlled injection helps reduce the sharp combustion 'knock'. It utilizes a single turbocharger with a turbine housing size of 1.15 A/R. In 1999, an air to air intercooler was added to cool the charged air from the turbo making it more dense. The cooler, denser air would increase the horsepower potential of the engine, while also reducing exhaust gas temperatures (EGTs). Eventually, the turbine housing was changed to a .84 A/R housing and a wastegate was added. With larger injectors, the HPOP was advanced to 17° to change fueling characteristics. The 7.3 L DI Power Stroke was in production until the middle of model year 2003 when it was replaced by the 6.0L.

[backwoodsman7]

(It sounds like you're looking at Fords.) The only diesel engine Ford used during those years was the Powerstroke. It's 7.3L, but usually if you say 7.3 it refers to the non-Powerstroke 7.3 used from 1988-1994. The big difference between the two is that the 7.3 is all mechanical, and the Powerstroke is all electronic.

If you think like us wacko paranoid survivalists, when it comes to diesel engines, mechanical is good, electronic is bad. So if it were me, I'd extend your years just a bit and get a '93 or '94 7.3. The earlier 7.3's had some water jacket/cylinder liner problems, but they'd been fixed by then.

If you run into an older one in good shape with the 6.9, those are good too.

[ace admirer]

the older 7.3 (its not a ford its an international built, thank
God) was not turbowed....slow off the stoplight...but a great engine.

the newer 7.3 was usually turbowed,,,,its a tiger off the stop light (after 1800rpm anyway).

i'll start a war over this ,,,,but the engines after the 7.3 seem to be having a bunch of teething pains,,,,

the 7.3 is the best thing that has happened to light work trucks since rubber tires...

[buck_1one]

I think, as with anything brand new, the first years are going to be more problematic. Giving them time to work out all the bugs and problems that didn't come up during research makes the last years much better.

Just so you know Ford stopped using the 7.3 PSTD because it would not meet federal emissions, not because of any problem with the engine.

In the years you listed, if it were me, I'd be looking more for the 1999 and 2000 models. Improved injectors, inter-cooler, etc.

To me the PSTD was vastly better then the old IDI (non Power Stroke Turbo Diesel). More hp more tq better mpg. I've used both the 6.9 IDI and the 7.3 PSTD. I hated the IDI from the day we got it, the PSTD on the other had was fantastic, in comparison.

[Bearfootfarm]

You can add a Superchip and get even more power out of those engines

http://www.google.com/search?complete=1&hl=en&source=hp&q=Superchip&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=

[backwoodsman7]

Yeah, those electronic engines sure are nice... until the electronics start breaking, and you get to pay to fix them. Then you'll wish you only had to shell out a few hundred bucks for an injection pump every few hundred thousand miles.

Or until they break and leave you sit with absolutely no warning, as electronic engines are inclined to do. There's not much that can make a mechanical diesel do that.

Don't get me wrong -- if you want a PowerStroke, go for it. It'll reduce demand for the old mechanical stuff, so it's cheaper for me to buy.

[gwithrow]

which is better, I am sure that is a loaded question,the cummins or the powerstroke? but there is also a dodge with the 24v cummins engine....a 99....I am still thinking the f250 is what I want, but if the price and engine are right, I would consider others....

[Beeman]

Always comes down to what are you using it for? There are good and bad in most of them, just stay away from late model Ford's, post 2004. If you're looking at pre 2000 you're going to be looking at trucks with a lot of miles usually. They are most likely coming into the most expensive times of their lives.

[ace admirer]

i agree, i would consider having a 7.3 with more than 1/2 million miles on it checked out by a mechanic before i purchased it.

[Darren]

Originally Posted by buck_1one

To me the PSTD was vastly better then the old IDI (non Power Stroke Turbo Diesel). More hp more tq better mpg. I've used both the 6.9 IDI and the 7.3 PSTD. I hated the IDI from the day we got it, the PSTD on the other had was fantastic, in comparison.

I'd love to find a 6.9 or 7.3 mechanical engine that someone felt never had any power. The reason is that a lot of the Stanadyne injection pumps were never timed exactly. I'm not talking about the pump being turned up. I've had 6.9s that were runners. They didn't take that long to get to 80 mph. It's all in the pump. If it's not timed correctly, it will do well to pull the hat off your head. If the timing is right, it's another thing altogether. Many weren't timed right from the factory. Even rebuilds are only timed to the point it'll run ok. Very few shops spend the time to get it correct.

[buck_1one]

The OP is looking at 1995-2000 model years, that leaves the IDI out. The IDI in any form has less hp, tq, and mpg then the PSTD does/did. Even in perfect setup, the PSTD still wins (by the numbers, not a personal mechanical vs electronic preference).

As to me personally, I hate diesels. The engine in my Bronco has more hp and just as much tq, as the 6.9 IDI. I will concede there is a big RPM difference between the two. The 460 in my F350 has more hp and more tq then the 7.3 IDI, and it does it all within a 600 RPM difference; but I'm sure the 7.3 probably gets better mpg.

Everybody has their likes and dislikes. Each to their own, but the OP is asking about PSTD not IDI.

(edited to add: This is in no way meant to be offensive to anyone, just to the point.)

[lonelytree]

Cummins RULES, Powerjoke DROOLS! Just me not so humble opinion. Another Powerjoke crapped out in Nome last weekend.

[zant]

Cummins are a superior motor,look at a pic of the rods from a PS then check out Cummins.A straight 6 motor in a diesel is better than a V motor.The 6.9 and the 7.3 are both good motors that will go 300k with PROPER maintenence,a Cummins will do 500k...Run away from the 6.0 which is a complete piece of crap(ask the people I helped on the side of the road in N.C.-3rd motor in 90K,showed me comn
plete records).The only thing bad about Dodges is their trannys are garbage-find 1 cheap with a blown tranny and put in a ATS tranny,expensive, so very worth it-when you're pushing 650hp in a 98 Dodge(tires get very expensive)

[mightybooboo]

Originally Posted by zant

Cummins are a superior motor,

That says it all.

The 1997 and previous are mechanical,no electronics on the motor,and no smog testing in any state that Im aware of.Have the super reliable injection pump,the P7100.From 1994 thru 1998.5 when they changed to the VP44,a notoriously easy to kill pump.Your fuel lift pump pressure gets low,bye bye VP44 at big expense,the P7100 could care less.If you get a VP44 get a fuel pressure gauge or pay the piper.

After 1997,states are starting smog testing,CA is one.You can thank the jerks that think modifying their engine to smoke heavily on the street is cool,it isnt,it just ticks off the majority,and we know who rules dont we?

"Love my Cummins,hate my Dodge",truer words never spoken.I agree,I love my truck though,even though it has the crappy auto trans,piddly poor brakes,crummy front end(all corrected on mine),all that can be corrected leaving you with the Cummins engine.... unsurpassed IMO.

4wd is outstanding,good mileage,excellent in crappy snow/ice with good snow style tires.Cab oh so roomy and comfy. Its the ONLY medium grade diesel engine in a light truck (pickup) chassis,.

Ford 7.3,excellent reputation also.

Stay away from electronics,do your homework.Fords had some real dud engines and trannys.Turbo problems,dead at 70,000,Ford has some of those,be careful!

As for gassers,when you are getting 200,000-300,000 and well beyond TOP RUNNING condition, never been torn down,High compression,high oil pressure then talk gas to me.Not happening in this world,par for the course with a Cummins,and the 7.3 Ford,very highly respected too.

Reason?Heavier construction,and lower RPM's,thats what makes em outlast gassers,you only get so many RPMS before an engine wears out.

[bikehealer1]

the cummins in my father-in-laws '04 dodge crew cab with the 6 speed manual tranny was awesome.

the 6.0 ford pstd have inherent head bolt problems. the bolts stretch,the head gasket turns to mush,and you have to walk. theres a$750 kit to replace all of 'em.

mightybooboo- i've got an '83 ranger with the 2.8 v6 in it with half a million on the engine. had to park it last year when i lost a lower hose due to a clamp failure ( new clamp from napa too dang it) and cooked the right head gasket. if it wasn't for that I'd still be rolling. new engine in the works....

[HermitJohn]

Originally Posted by mightybooboo

Reason?Heavier construction,and lower RPM's,thats what makes em outlast gassers,you only get so many RPMS before an engine wears out.

But will the body/frame hold up past half million miles? And some people dont use a heavy pickup made for hauling enough to pay the premium price for such an engine. Have to do the math, might even be cheaper to rebuild an older gasser several times compared to just initially buying the diesel.

I see very few of the modern vehicles offering very good value for the money. They are very unfriendly to shade tree repair and the engines are so expensive that very rarely are they economical to rebuild.

How long has it been since the average blue collar worker could justify the purchase of a new vehicle? The price of new vehicles grows exponentially, but the wage of the average blue collar worker has been stagnant for some time and gone down for many as manufacturing jobs scurry off shore and borders opened wide to unlimited illegal immigrants.

[gwithrow]

I appreciate all the input, very good points...now could you recommend a gas engine that will pull? a heavy livestock trailer...not all that often, but I need it to perform when we need it...I think the 3/4 ton is what we do need, but perhaps we can find a gas engine that will do the job?

if we can find the right deisel, then we will go for that....what about the duramax with an allison tranny?
I am looking in the western NC area, so if anyone has any leads on a good truck, please PM me...thanks, oh and it has to be a 4x4 to make it out of some of our fields

[fordy]

Originally Posted by gwithrow

is there a difference? I have been told to only look at the 7.3 deisel...but I often see these two words used interchangably...and since we are looking at model years, from 1995-2000, it would be good to know if there is an engine we should avoid...thanks

..................The 7.3 was made part way thru the 2003 model year . I wouldn't look at anything earlier than a 1999.....Disc brakes was added too the rear axle and ford started installing a 6 manual trany . The Auto behind any 7.3 is a weak link but acceptable , IF you (and previous owner(s)) get it serviced at requisite intervals . , fordy

[HermitJohn]

The older big block V8s, the Chev 454, Dodge 440, and Ford 460 all can pull quite well. Some people liked to put the Cadillac 500 in their pickups to pull on theory of no replacement for displacement. But there werent that many of them ever made and sure it would be hard to find one anymore. Now I have no experience with newer V10 engines and such. But sure there is info out there.

Goodness, makes me feel old, guess my personal experience with vehicles totally ends about 20 years ago. I strongly resisted the computerized generation of vehicles and am still driving carb vehicles cause they are cheap and easy to work on as long as I can get parts.