New I-6 info...

[Tulecreeper]

I'm not so sure I'd be making the claim that the 6.4 can out pull any other 3/4 or 1 ton gasser. Maybe past engines, the 6.0 was bullet proof but not very powerful.

Today though, the 6.4 is pretty down on power vs the relatively new GM 6.6 and definitely vs the new-ish 6.8 and 7.3 from Ford.

Ramffml: I said "most", and "like-sized". The 7.3 is not like-sized.

 

[ramffml]

Ramffml: I said "most", and "like-sized". The 7.3 is not like-sized.

Fair enough, I guess I just don't understand what you're suggesting then because when it comes down to it, the 6.4 is underpowered vs the gas competition. The guy you responded too was saying the 6.4 is old and outdated, and then you came and said "it can out pull most of the competition" and that's not true. I'm agreeing with the other poster, the 6.4 needs an upgrade as its not competitive anymore.

 

[Wild one]

Fair enough, I guess I just don't understand what you're suggesting then because when it comes down to it, the 6.4 is underpowered vs the gas competition. The guy you responded too was saying the 6.4 is old and outdated, and then you came and said "it can out pull most of the competition" and that's not true. I'm agreeing with the other poster, the 6.4 needs an upgrade as its not competitive anymore.

The biggest advantage to the truck 6.4 is it's ability to work at full load for 12 minutes on 87 octane,i don't think Fords Godzilla has that same ability.If it does,i've never seen it posted anywhere

 

[Lsujker]

Tired of that word outdated. When I hear outdated, I think parts are prevalent and motor has been refined over time. Need more of that.

 

[ramffml]

The biggest advantage to the truck 6.4 is it's ability to work at full load for 12 minutes on 87 octane,i don't think Fords Godzilla has that same ability.If it does,i've never seen it posted anywhere

The 7.3 actually comes/came in 3 variations, a pickup truck version, a box truck version, and a "high efficiency" version used in RVs. They derate the box truck and RV versions something fierce, like down 130 hp or something by the time it hits the RV.

pickup 7.3 = 430 hp, 475 lb/ft torque
box truck = 350 hp, 468 lb/ft torque
economy = 300 hp, 425 lb/ft torque

This guy has a very detailed explanation of it all:

Ford F250 7.3L Godzilla Engine **Heavy Mechanic Review** | Lifter FAILURES Explained

I review this 2023 F250 superduty with the 7.3L Godzilla gas V8 Engine and discuss the lifter FAILURE issues seen with this Engine as a Heavy Duty Diesel mec...

www.youtube.com

 

[ramffml]

Tired of that word outdated. When I hear outdated, I think parts are prevalent and motor has been refined over time. Need more of that.

There is definitely that element there, for sure. That's what attracted me to the hemi back in 2019 as it was a very old/known quantity at that point. That was before I knew anything about hemi tick though ... ..

 

[crash68]

The slant 6's, I swear, they would run on only 3 quarts of oil, but talk about a sewing machine, LMAO. Now, U did have to have something in the radiator...even the legendary "brown" colored water/anti freeze, hee hee.

The slant 6 engine would run with any form of oil in the crankcase, even cooking oil...(don't ask as I won't tell) LOL

 

[Riccochet]

That was my intention to my statement, that the 6.4 is not competitive to the competitions current offerings. Not that it isn't capable, I own one, I know it's capable. Outdated fits when compared to the GM 6.6 and Ford 6.8 and 7.3. Just as the 6.0 was outdated in the GM, and the 6.2 in the Ford. Which is why they updated them.

Personally, I wouldn't mind them keeping the 6.4, just update the tune and give it some more beans over the next couple years until they come out with something else. I'd love to see a 7.0 426 for the HD trucks. A man can dream!

 

[TestPilot57]

I'm not so sure I'd be making the claim that the 6.4 can out pull any other 3/4 or 1 ton gasser. Maybe past engines, the 6.0 was bullet proof but not very powerful.

Today though, the 6.4 is pretty down on power vs the relatively new GM 6.6 and definitely vs the new-ish 6.8 and 7.3 from Ford.

TBH I've never driven a 6.4, but the 7.3 "Godzilla" in our E450 motorhome is amazing, considering it's almost always moving near the GVWR.

 

[TestPilot57]

The 7.3 actually comes/came in 3 variations, a pickup truck version, a box truck version, and a "high efficiency" version used in RVs. They derate the box truck and RV versions something fierce, like down 130 hp or something by the time it hits the RV.

pickup 7.3 = 430 hp, 475 lb/ft torque
box truck = 350 hp, 468 lb/ft torque
economy = 300 hp, 425 lb/ft torque

I didn't (yet) read the article.

But the reason, same as any engine in any application, is load.

The average pickup is fully loaded 10% of the time, at best. So they can max the HP.

The average box truck is partially loaded 50% of the time, hence a substantial derate.

The average RV is near 100% loaded 100% of the time, hence the serious derate.

We had an Isuzu FTR Box truck, 26,000 GVWR. It had a turbo 7.4 diesel with something like 230HP. That engine is easily capable of double that, but they are selling it to people that want it to last 500k miles. So they dial it back.

 

[DanAR]

My brother, my wife and I took my Mom’s leaning tower of power 6 Plymouth Scamp to the top of Pikes Peak many years ago. As we were approaching the last crest before the visitor center parking lot we were down to about 1- 2 mph with the pedal floored, blowing black exhaust and backing up a line of traffic. My brother finally crawled out the window while creeping along and pushed us to get us the last few feet over the crest and coast down to park. After a visit and cool down we were on our way back none the worse.

 

[Wild one]

That was my intention to my statement, that the 6.4 is not competitive to the competitions current offerings. Not that it isn't capable, I own one, I know it's capable. Outdated fits when compared to the GM 6.6 and Ford 6.8 and 7.3. Just as the 6.0 was outdated in the GM, and the 6.2 in the Ford. Which is why they updated them.

Personally, I wouldn't mind them keeping the 6.4, just update the tune and give it some more beans over the next couple years until they come out with something else. I'd love to see a 7.0 426 for the HD trucks. A man can dream!

To keep a decent rod/stroke ratio ,so the engine will last a 100,000 miles would take a taller block,or shove the wrist pin up to the top of the piston,which creates it's own issues,with piston rock and ring flutter.

 

[Riccochet]

To keep a decent rod/stroke ratio ,so the engine will last a 100,000 miles would take a taller block,or shove the wrist pin up to the top of the piston,which creates it's own issues,with piston rock and ring flutter.

There's a ton of 360LA's bored and stroked to 428 ci that run forever.

I'd expect them to make a new block, get rid of shallow lifters, drop the cam an inch or two, bigger bore. No way I'd expect them to reuse the 6.4BGE block for a 426 build. That's just stupid.

 

[Wild one]

There's a ton of 360LA's bored and stroked to 428 ci that run forever.

I'd expect them to make a new block, get rid of shallow lifters, drop the cam an inch or two, bigger bore. No way I'd expect them to reuse the 6.4BGE block for a 426 build. That's just stupid.

You're dreaming if you think they're gonna come up with a new block to make a 426,lol. You're also dreaming if you think a 428 cubed LA will make a 100,000+ miles with-out a rebuild,if it does,it's the oddball in the crowd,not the majority,lol. If you understand rod/stroke ratio's,you'll know why a 428 cubed LA block won't last ,the rod is always putting stress on the outer cylinder wall,by forcing the piston into the loaded side of the cylinder wall,and consequently shortening the piston and cylinders life expectancy.
One of the reasons why old school small cube engines like 318's/302's/283's had a good rep for living and taking a pile of abuse,is because they had a good rod/stroke ratio.Short stroke/long rod engines are generally longer lifed then a long stroke/ short rod combo.

 

[Dodge 1500 4X4]

the rod is always putting stress on the outer cylinder wall,by forcing the piston into the loaded side of the cylinder wall,and consequently shortening the piston and cylinders life expectancy

Is that what's called piston scuffing?

 

[Wild one]

Is that what's called piston scuffing?

It can contribute to piston scuffing.

 

[HEMIMANN]

The biggest advantage to the truck 6.4 is it's ability to work at full load for 12 minutes on 87 octane,i don't think Fords Godzilla has that same ability.If it does,i've never seen it posted anywhere

Yeah, but remember the hoo-hah over the ignition timing strategy, and the validation readout vs. octane gas used? Can't recall who provided the data, but distinctly remember the default ignition timing is advanced for 89 octane gasoline.

If using 87 octane, the knock sensors let it knock then pull back the timing, then repeat the short term testing for octane for uknown cycles. Then goes into long term checking for octane by allowing knocking every so often by advancing timing.

Well, that don't make it for me - knocking an engine repeatedly to set the timing back. So's I use 89 octane all the time. Slightly less fuel consumption and higher torque makes up for some of the extra gas price anyway.

 

[Wild one]

Yeah, but remember the hoo-hah over the ignition timing strategy, and the validation readout vs. octane gas used? Can't recall who provided the data, but distinctly remember the default ignition timing is advanced for 89 octane gasoline.

If using 87 octane, the knock sensors let it knock then pull back the timing, then repeat the short term testing for octane for uknown cycles. Then goes into long term checking for octane by allowing knocking every so often by advancing timing.

Well, that don't make it for me - knocking an engine repeatedly to set the timing back. So's I use 89 octane all the time. Slightly less fuel consumption and higher torque makes up for some of the extra gas price anyway.

As far as late model engines go,the 6.4 is a low compression engine.
If you haven't read this article,it's worth spending a few minutes reading it.

We Scored a $400 Junkyard 392ci Hemi From a Ram Truck—and It’s the Mother Lode!

Our 392 BGE Hemi build-up journey starts with buying a mysterious junkyard Ram Truck 392 Hemi core. We crack it open and find the mother lode!

www.motortrend.com

 

[HEMIMANN]

As far as late model engines go,the 6.4 is a low compression engine.
If you haven't read this article,it's worth spending a few minutes reading it.

We Scored a $400 Junkyard 392ci Hemi From a Ram Truck—and It’s the Mother Lode!

Our 392 BGE Hemi build-up journey starts with buying a mysterious junkyard Ram Truck 392 Hemi core. We crack it open and find the mother lode!

www.motortrend.com

Does it matter what the compression ratio alone is? The ignition map is developed to match fueling that goes with the low compression cylinder filling - you can make any engine pre-ignite if you advance the spark enough.

So the point is, if your spark advance curve is set for 89 octane gasoline for any particular engine, that's what it should be. Did you see the data maps provided by the member who watched his timing?

 

[Wild one]

Does it matter what the compression ratio alone is? The ignition map is developed to match fueling that goes with the low compression cylinder filling - you can make any engine pre-ignite if you advance the spark enough.

So the point is, if your spark advance curve is set for 89 octane gasoline for any particular engine, that's what it should be. Did you see the data maps provided by the member who watched his timing?

Most engines have an ideal timing curve,and advancing past that curve even with higher octane fuel doesn't add squat for power.Engine Masters did a test of this,and they found the ideal timing curve on 87 octane,was pretty well the same ideal timing curve for 91 octane.The hemi might be geared for 89 octane,but the power loss by using 87 octane in a truck 6.4 probably isn't as much as you think. I bet if you had the truck on a dyno and tested rwhp it wouldn't be as big a loss as you think,and i'm not sure the knock sensors would pull as much timing as you think,unless you were at or below sealevel on a 100+ day,and under those circumstances the knock sensors would be pulling timing on 89 to