Home » Why The 6.4-Liter Ford ‘Power Stroke’ Diesel Engine Was Such A Pile Of Trash

Why The 6.4-Liter Ford ‘Power Stroke’ Diesel Engine Was Such A Pile Of Trash

Powerstroke 6.4 Diesel Ts2
ADVERTISEMENT

The internal combustion engine has been around for well over a century. In that time, automakers have figured out how to make powerful, reliable engines that last for hundreds of thousands of miles with the proper maintenance. And yet, despite all that experience, every so often, someone turns out a real clanger. Mention this in the Ford community, and they’ll gladly tell you all about the perils of the 6.4-liter Powerstroke.

When it comes to big diesels, the list of customer demands is pretty straightforward. People want big torque, decent power, and good fuel economy. They also want an engine that’s practical to maintain, and one that will go the distance. A huge figure on the odometer is a point of pride for many truck owners. Having to do major engine-out repair jobs before the six-figure mark? That’s quite the opposite.

Vidframe Min Top
Vidframe Min Bottom

Sadly, when it came to the 6.4-liter Power Stroke, Ford didn’t quite hit all of these goals. Instead, there are a number of common problems that can make these engines quite frustrating to run and maintain.

Big Magazine
Ford was pretty excited about this thing. It was supposed to be tough!

Power Joke

Screen Shot 2024 11 01 At 8.21.25 Am
Screenshot: Reddit

The 6.4-liter Power Stroke had one job. It was introduced in 2008 in the Ford Super Duty, and it was supposed to take over from the infamous 6.0-liter Power Stroke, an engine of many woes. The hope was that it would offer improved performance (which it did, if it worked), while the new displacement would help move it away from the bad reputation of its predecessor.

 

ADVERTISEMENT
Screen Shot 2024 11 01 At 8.17.10 Am
Screenshot: Reddit

The 6.4-liter Power Stroke is not actually a Ford design—it’s actually a specific variant of the Navistar MaxxForce 7. The Ford version featured twin turbos in a sequential configuration, and was capable of putting out 350 horsepower and 650 pound-feet of torque in Ford applications. This engine also showed up in a number of International trucks and buses, too, albeit with a different turbo configuration and lower power output.

Screen Shot 2024 11 01 At 8.19.03 Am
Screenshot: Ford-Trucks forum

Despite Ford’s hopes that this would bring a fresh start after the 6.0 (also a Navistar design), it soon became obvious that this engine was plagued with a raft of issues.  The 6.4 would reveal its own list of common failures, from the cooling system to emissions equipment and beyond. These ranged from merely inconvenient, to major problems that necessitated a total engine rebuild or replacement. Indeed, the engine was so bad, Diesel World referred to it as a “throwaway engine,” a “150,000-mile proposition,” and a “ticking timebomb.” Meanwhile, technician site ProSource Diesel noted the engine was “plagued with problems” and that it led to an explosive blow-up between Ford and Navistar (that’s not quite what happened, but more on that later). Hardly a ringing endorsement.

 

Fordengine

 

ADVERTISEMENT

One of the most well-known issues did not directly involve the engine itself, but the radiator that Ford used in the early 6.4-liter models. As was the trend at the time, Ford had used plastic end tanks for the radiators, which proved surprisingly fragile in service. In particular, the crimps that held the plastic  end tanks to the aluminum core were particularly weak. Vibration from the engine and general use would lead to separation or cracks and rapid coolant loss.

As covered by Motor Trend, the solution was simple—fitting an all-aluminum aftermarket radiator would sort the problem. Alternatively, you could fit a core support brace to try and reduce vibration, but this was really only a band-aid fix for what was fundamentally a bad part. In any case, the failures were so common that this severely dinged the reputation of the engine from the outset. Head to the forums—PowerStroke.org, Ford Truck Enthusiasts, even Diesel Technician Society—you’ll find dozens of stories on this issue.

005055f4d6ca96f3cf679e8222445717
Ford went with plastic end tanks on the 6.4’s radiator, which were poorly attached and liable to fail easily. via FordPartsGiant
Mmrad F2d 08v2
All-aluminum radiators are a popular aftermarket upgrade, such as this Mishimoto version from CMA.
Radiator
Stories of radiator failures are all over the forums.

Exhaust up-pipes were also commonly known for cracking and causing exhaust leaks. Typical symptoms included increased noise, poor drivability, and diesel soot all over the firewall. Owners on forums largely split their complaints between strange sounds from the exhaust, and the frustration of learning they’d have to pull the cab off to execute a fix.

Much like the radiators, the solution was swapping to a hardier aftermarket product. Companies like BD Diesel produce alternatives that are intended to be a more reliable option than going with another OEM part.

ADVERTISEMENT
Upbpipe
It’s a common failure, but a pain in the ass to repair, as many owner’s forums will tell you.
1043909 1 1024px 480x480
Aftermarket solutions for the exhaust issues exist, like this BD Diesel kit.

More serious problems, though, involved the engine internals themselves. The pistons of the 6.4 are well known for developing cracks. They often propagate out from the lip of the fuel bowl in the center of the piston. While this is considered more likely in tuned examples, it happened to plenty of stock engines, too. Stories abound on the forums, from PowerStroke Nation, to PowerStroke Army. Particularly interesting is an early 2010 post from the Diesel Technician Society. When these engines were still knew, the problem was not well known, and a cracked piston was seen as a very strange occurrence indeed. Later posts from more recent years treat this as a regular thing that isn’t surprising in the least.

High mileage and an aggressive driving style don’t help, but cracked pistons can happen to any 6.4 at any time. This problem has an obvious tell—poor running, smoke pouring out of the tailpipe, and excessive crankcase pressure.

Fddsfasdfjeay

When this happens, it’s game over. You’re up for a full rebuild, assuming the damage isn’t so catastrophic as to have trashed the block itself. Indeed, a cracked piston can send debris rattling around the cylinder, or guide hot combustion gases to torch the walls. You’re often up for a full bore and hone in the event a piston lets go in this way.

ADVERTISEMENT

Indeed, there are plenty of videos all over YouTube documenting this problem. A particularly bad example can be seen in this video from BarnTech:

Cracasdfasdf
An obviously cracked piston.
Asdfdf
Combustion gases are able to pass right through the piston and can impinge on the cylinder wall.
Waasdf
The damage to the cylinder bore is obvious.

The issue is often put down to the design of the pistons used in the 6.4 Power Stroke. They have a “lipped” design, featuring an undercut area in the fuel bowl. It’s believed that combustion gases tend to create a hot spot in these undercut areas, eventually causing pinholes and cracks and eventual piston failure.

There is a solution, but it’s not cheap. Some engine builders, like Choate, recommend using “delipped” pistons in a 6.4 rebuild. They have a more open fuel bowl on top of the piston that doesn’t suffer this same issue.

Earlyon
Early on, owners and techs were surprised by cracked pistons. By the mid-2010s, it was a well-known problem on the 6.4 engine.

Smog Problems (Smoglems?)

Modern emissions equipment also hurt the 6.4-liter Power Stroke, particularly in the fuel economy stakes. Ford fitted the engine with a diesel particulate filter (DPF) in order to meet emissions requirements, something which has become common in the industry. The problem is that DPFs need high exhaust temperatures to burn off built-up particulate matter over time. If the vehicle is primarily driven slowly or in stop-go traffic, exhaust temperatures remain low and the DPF begins to clog. At this point, the engine must run a “regeneration” cycle where additional diesel is injected to create hotter exhaust to burn off the build up. This kills fuel economy in a big way.

ADVERTISEMENT

Deleting the DPF is a popular mod with many truck owners, and avoids a lot of these issues. With no DPF, the truck can be retuned to eliminate all regen cycles, which saves fuel and all the associated hassles this causes. However, it’s highly illegal to do, whether you’re an individual owner or running a shop. Deleting DPFs is a great way to get the EPA on your ass in short order, and the penalties are severe. Fines in the millions of dollars are not uncommon.

The DPF causes other issues, too. Many owners will tell you the 6.4 is known for “making oil.” That is, when checking the dipstick, you might find that the engine oil has climbed above the maximum level. What’s actually happening is that diesel fuel is entering the engine oil. The mixing is undesirable, as the diesel fuel compromises the lubricating qualities of the engine oil. The common understanding is that this happens due to the injection of excess diesel on the exhaust stroke for DPF regeneration, with some sloshing down into the crankcase during this process. However, it can also occur due to leaking injectors or seals on the high-pressure fuel pump.

Whatever the cause, if left unchecked, this can cause engine damage. The tell-tale sign is an engine oil level that has somehow climbed above the maximum. That’s the key hint that fuel is getting into the oil and causing a whole lot of havoc. While the stated oil capacity is 15 quarts on a Super Duty with the 6.4, excess fuel mixing with oil can see 20-plus quarts of fluid in the oil system.

Max Fil
Checking the dipstick, this owner found the oil level had risen significantly between changes—all because of diesel getting into the engine oil. Emptying the sump revealed the level had increased by a full five quarts.

Regular oil changes are the way to manage this. Those in the know change oil every 5,000 miles—following Ford’s “severe conditions” service interval rather than the normal guide of 10,000 miles. This is a well-known fact amongst engine builders. In particular, DFC Diesel says that the 6.4 “requires meticulous maintenance to prevent major failures.” It also notes that reliability concerns often center around the complex emissions equipment.

ADVERTISEMENT

Yes, Fire From The Tailpipe

DPF issues were also linked with a particularly embarrassing recall in the early days of the 6.4’s run. 37,400 Super Duty trucks were recalled due to fears of “flaming tail pipes,” caused by excess fuel leaking into the exhaust and igniting.

Screenshot 2024 10 31 150824
Flames out the tailpipe may sound cool but they’re considered highly inappropriate by the NHTSA. This led to a recall early in the 6.4’s life. 

Ford caught it early and was thankfully able to rectify the issue quickly. The fix involved flashing the ECU to avoid excess exhaust temperatures that could cause fire and flames. Still, it was a concerning matter that even led to a small grassfire in Texas that was mercifully extinguished in short order, as covered at the time by NBC.

Ford got on to the issue quickly, so the flaming tailpipes are only a footnote in the engine’s troubled history. Still, I was able to find one great video of this occurring all the way back in 2007.  This 2008 model year Super Duty had the 6.4-liter Power Stroke, and you can see the tailpipes blazing away.

It wasn’t just that the 6.4 had a lot of issues; it was also a bear to work on. The 6.4 took up plenty of space under the hood, and a great many jobs required removing the truck’s cab for access. This frustrated anyone who had to work on these vehicles, with complaints common on owners forums. “With even less working room under the hood, cab removal is all but necessary in order for any type of extensive engine work to take place on the 6.4L Power Stroke,” noted Diesel World magazine. “Blown head gaskets, cracked up-pipes, and even high-pressure fuel pump, oil cooler, and turbo replacement can all warrant the separation of the cab from the frame on these trucks.” Even for jobs that didn’t necessarily need the cab removed, it was often faster and more efficient to do so versus wrestling through the hood and wheel wells.

ADVERTISEMENT

Tuning Potential

There was one thing that did win the 6.4 some fans—its tuning potential. Much of this came down to its fuel system. Out of the box, the 6.4 had a fuel pump and supporting components that were capable of flowing lots of diesel at high pressure. Capable of flowing roughly 20% more fuel than pumps on contemporary Duramax and Cummins engines, it provided great tuning potential. It meant that if you added oxygen (read: more boost) you could make lots more power without having to swap out major components.

Other stout features of the 6.4 engine design helped in this regard, too. The strong connecting rods in the 6.4 were also a boon in this regard, as were the hardy 5R110W transmissions that Ford fitted to these Super Duty models. The engine even featured a single combined bed plate which held all the main crank bearings—avoiding the issues where bearings might shift and fail at higher power levels.

The 6.4-liter Power Stroke is popular amongst tuners despite its issues.

Various aftermarket solutions exist for tuning the 6.4-liter Power Stroke. Most simply involve flashing the engine control unit with a different tune to squirt in more fuel and up the boost. According to DrivingLine, it’s possible to push the stock engine well past 550 horsepower and 1,000 pound-feet of torque with a tune and some minor mods. Of course, it’s worth remembering one thing—the harder the 6.4 is pushed, the more likely it’s going to face problems down the line.

ADVERTISEMENT

We’re Breaking Up (Yes, It’s Your Fault)

An acrimonious situation between Ford and engine-manufacturer Navistar, began to brew in the 2000s. As covered by Wards Auto at the time, Ford demanded Navistar cover its share of the warranty costs for the 6.4 engine. When Navistar refused to pay, Ford began deducting these costs from its payments to Navistar for engine shipments. A bold move, and one that escalated the situation significantly.

D7wro1me9x5d1
Ford’s relationship began with International in 1979, with the first diesel trucks hitting the market in 1983 with the IDI 6.9-liter engine. The diesel engine business eventually moved under the Navistar name.

Things got much uglier in February 2007, and the matter soon ended up in court. Navistar had halted production because, in its own words, Ford had “stopped honoring the terms of agreement under which the engines were built.” The company wasn’t afraid to air its dirty laundry, and the official press release made for bitter reading. Navistar takes the opportunity to brag about how good the 6.4-liter engine is, and how the partnership had played a role in Ford’s leading position in the truck market. Take it all in:

Navistar International Corporation announced today that it is suspending production of the Power Stroke® diesel engine that it builds for Ford Motor Company because Ford has stopped honoring the terms of agreement under which the engines were built.

Navistar’s principal operating company, International Truck and Engine Corporation, has been the exclusive diesel engine supplier for Ford’s heavy duty pickup trucks since 1979 and recently launched a new 6.4L Power Stroke® diesel engine that meets 2007 emissions standards while increasing performance, durability and fuel economy.

Ford, using International-manufactured Power Stroke® diesel engines, has enjoyed leadership market share of close to 50 percent for many years. Navistar believes the new Power Stroke 6.4L diesel engines provide Ford the opportunity to maintain or improve this leadership position. Trade editors who have driven Ford’s 2008 F-250 equipped with the Power Stroke® have given it rave reviews.

International currently produces the new 6.4L Power Stroke® diesel engine at its engine plants in Indianapolis, Ind., and Huntsville, Ala., and as a result of the dispute over commercial terms, production of those engines at both facilities will be halted immediately. The Huntsville operation will continue to produce engines for other customers.

Navistar said that it pays its suppliers and employees under contract terms and that it expects Ford to honor the terms of its agreement.

As you might imagine, Ford didn’t take this threat to Super Duty production lying down. Two weeks later, in March 2007, the courts would force Navistar to resume shipping engines. At the same time, Ford would have to pay in full for all shipments while the matter was before the courts. This was vital to keeping one of Ford’s most important production lines running.

Dfdfa
Where it all began, so many years ago.

By this point, though, the damage was done. Each company was furious with the other, and all the while, Ford’s reputation was taking a beating in the marketplace. In the meantime, further legal issues sprung up around a future 4.4-liter diesel engine Navistar had been developing for the F-150. It would take two more years to solve the matter. In 2009, as reported by Reuters, the two companies settled all lawsuits between themselves, and decided to part ways after 30 long years together in the domestic truck business.  The diesel engine supply contract would end on December 31, 2009, with Ford making an “undisclosed payment” to Navistar to bring matters to a close.

After the legal and warranty disaster that was the 6.4 and 6.0, Ford had to move on. (Note that, though Reuters says “….the two sides had sued each other over pricing and warranty claims related to the current run of diesel engines Navistar has supplied for Ford’s F-Series trucks,” Wards notes “The auto maker sought reimbursement equal to what it said it overpaid for the engines and for financial obligations owed by Navistar as a result of warranty claims tied to the previous-generation diesel engine sold to Ford.” So both engines were involved in the separation).

ADVERTISEMENT

The Power Stroke name remained, but this time it would be placed on in-house designs instead. The company was eager to put the hellish reputation of the 6.0 and 6.4 engines in the rear view mirror, and many Ford customers felt the same way.

The 6.7
The 6.7 Power Stroke proved better things were possible.

The engine that followed was the 6.7-liter Power Stroke, which was developed in-house by Ford. After the pain of the previous two Navistar-designed Power Stroke engines, it’s perhaps no surprise Ford decided to take matters into its own hands. Compared to the 6.0 and the 6.4, the 6.7 is regarded as a relatively reliable engine with few standout issues.

Ultimately, you could easily say that the 6.4 is a cursed engine. Ford simply didn’t get the reliable replacement it wanted for the 6.0; it just got more headaches, though it didn’t help that it put a bad radiator in the truck, and chose an engine so difficult to work on in the truck’s packaging environment. It’s no surprise that Ford chose to dump the 6.4 entirely and move on to a newer, less problematic design. It’s also wild to think that it — though especially its predecessor — helped precipitate the destruction of a formerly strong relationship with Navistar shortly after the engine’s debut. As it stands, the 6.4 is the subject of many jokes in Ford circles—which are, in their own ways, cautionary tales for anyone considering buying one.

Image credits: BarnTech, AUDIMotive, and Marine Mechanic via YouTube screenshot, Ford

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit
Subscribe
Notify of
52 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dinklesmith
Dinklesmith
18 days ago

Between its powerstroke issues and the 5.4l 3 valve issues, I’m amazed that Ford managed to hold on to so much market share in the 2000s-2010s. The Olds diesel destroyed that brands reputation, as did the Northstar for Cadillac. Granted there were image issues for those brands, but with as persistent as ford engine issues were, I can’t believe GM or Ram didn’t overtake them

Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
18 days ago
Reply to  Dinklesmith

They have loyalists who will BUY them no matter the issues that exist with them…
Unlike the 6.4 PS, the Northstar was remedied to an extent by Cadillac…even with their destroyed reputation…The 6.4 PS has no real fix- as in , it either can go 500k+ miles (very rare, but there are some original examples), or will completely self destruct before 120k…

The ONLY company reputation damages never happened to was Toyota…but that WAS because, they swept things underneath. Eg: The accelerator pedals WERE actually stuck throttles and Toyota lied about it UNTIL they were forced to admit it. They also have a host of other issues I can list ….but the loyalists will rip me apart to death…, like Ford loyalists.

If I remember correctly, these F 250s also have issues with the death wobble…no Ford loyalists who I spoke to ever admitted that it can be a serious issue…
the GMC/Chevrolet IFS at the time were admittedly not as strong, but the LMM was worlds more reliable than the 6.4 PS…even with the emissions equipment it had..The IFS was beefed up in MY11 however, and I have heard of plenty of cases of the IFS holding up in hard use…people who cannot accept it will class it as “dreaming”, but it is NOT.

Now however, the scandal Toyota had recently in MY24, the engines blown in the Tundra being replaced at 25k+, and the Tacoma problems …all severe…

Last edited 18 days ago by Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
Goblin
Goblin
18 days ago

Not apples to apples…

On one side there’s the case of a supposedly decent engine that should last (Toyota’s issues, Hyundai’s 4-cyl recalls, etc) experiencing a (short, medium, or who knows how long) streak of easilly identifiable machining issues causing the problem (bad deburring of oil passages, was it ? Or something like that ?) – which can be put behind with a quick swat of cash and engine replacements. The main issue, other than the expense, is identifying how many engines were affected.

On the other side is what seems to be a shopping list of fundamentally bad design choices which will keep on giving in the unreliability department.

One is solvable, with prompt action and a lot of cash. The other is not solvable othewise than with replacing the engines on all models sold, with a newly designed engine. Which is not doable.

Correction – not doable if you’re a US company.
If you are NOT an US company, then you can get fined 19billion and forced to buy thousands of vehicles back – vehicles that still run just fine, but on whose emissions characteristics you lied.

You get a pass for being stupid or for playing stupid, but not for being too smart for your own good. Wink wink.

Last edited 18 days ago by Goblin
Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
18 days ago
Reply to  Goblin

Makes sense.
But the engine that is In the Tundra is NOT a simple one…and requires the cab to come off as well.

Goblin
Goblin
17 days ago

Warranty recall = Manufacturer’s problem.

Not the dealer’s (they get paid for the work), nor the clients’ (they get a new engine).

Whether the cab needs to come out, or to be melted in a furnace and recast – that’s the manufacturer’s problem. There is an inconvenience for the client, yes, but it’s worth it and at the end of the day they are better off.

And once it’s done, it’s good. That’s the point. It’s a one-time corrective action on a (supposedly) good design, as opposed to a litany of placebos on a fundamentally bad design.

In the first case the manufacturer acknowledges the issue (willingly or forced), then bites the bullet and fixes it all at once, in the second – they can’t fix it, but have the luxury of constant denial, as every new issue is a new uphill battle for the custommer.

Last edited 17 days ago by Goblin
SarlaccRoadster
SarlaccRoadster
17 days ago
Reply to  Goblin

Didn’t Toyota trucks have desintegrating frames on an entire generation of trucks that they had to replace? you know, the kind of issue that not even Yugo can match
Didn’t Hyundai have millions of engine failures through every single generation of 4-cyl engines for the past 20+ years that they had to recall and replace? you know, record numbers that no other carmaker could match

..and yet you still hear about Toyota’s “legendary reliablility” and about how “today’s Hyundai is not the Hyundai from 30 20 10 5 2 years ago!”

Loyalist perception is their reality

Last edited 17 days ago by SarlaccRoadster
Goblin
Goblin
17 days ago

Of course they did 🙂

Toyota’s frames were made by Dana – a legendary US company building legendary axles and such. Toyota sucontracted them because they wanted the very best, and got burned by a pure and simple trick where Dana didn’t follow the required process and omitted a few things here and there.

Hyundai has issues with badly deburred oil passages, which were wrongly machined. The main issue being that they had huge difficulties figuring out which batches had the issue, as every time they thought they had a timeframe – new issues popped outside of that timeframe. Amazingly enough, said issue occurs only in the US market, on 4 cylinder engines built in the Georgia plant. Same engines built elsewhere have correctly machined oil passeges – go figure.

My loyalist perception is that I’m very loyal to Japanese built Toyotas, when possible, and Korean-built Hyundais. I have one of each and – knock on wood – am a happy camper at a combined 410000 miles between the two of them. I was quite shocked when the front left blinker bulb burned at 110000 miles on my Hyundai, but it is what it is. One has to forgive weakness.

I will not, I repeat – WILL NOT state that the enshittification of everything automotive starts the second it opens a factory in the US. It would be unfair 😛 It’s not like MB or BMW started having quality issues when they opened factories in the US or anything.

Last edited 17 days ago by Goblin
SarlaccRoadster
SarlaccRoadster
16 days ago
Reply to  Goblin

Hyundai/KIA engine recalls are from all over the world (not just made-in-the-US cars) over the Lambda, Kappa, Gamma, Theta/Theta II, Nu series of engines (I think I got all of them there..), and not all of them are for machining issues, some are for leaky high-pressure fuel pumps & rails, improper heat-treated piston rings etc.

At the same time I don’t understand why poor machining in one plant or another, or low-quality control on parts made by a subcontractor are an automatic pass for the manufacturer who sells you the car and puts its name on the badge, not to mention the shitty behavior around denying warranty repairs to people.

Maybe I have different expectations from new cars, as in they should be slightly more reliable than abandoned old Fiats and Alfas I’ve pulled from backyards 🙂

Last edited 16 days ago by SarlaccRoadster
Goblin
Goblin
16 days ago

They are a pass because the design is otherwise sound and would work shold the parts have been built to the required specs. What’s so difficult here…

The Ford engines discussed above seem to have been weakly designed to begin with, with parts not engineered for the job.

Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
6 days ago
Reply to  Goblin

Ford rushes things to the market…that is the main problem with them.

Goblin
Goblin
17 days ago

And do you notice the magic words you actually used ?

Had to replace
Had to recall and replace

As in – fixed. Because it was fixable – an exception to the norm, not the norm.

Last edited 17 days ago by Goblin
TheDrunkenWrench
TheDrunkenWrench
19 days ago

I worked at an International dealer as a tech from 2013 to 2016, and you missed a few failures on the Maxxforce 7 (6.4 PowerStroke)
-lift pump failures
-high pressure fuel pump failures
-torn wastegate actuators (overboost and limp mode)
-push rods that ate through the rocker arms, necessitating an entire new valve train (sometimes they’d bend bad enough to mess up the head gasket, cause they were partially encapsulated by it)
-EGR cooler failures
-severe intake and turbo coking from crankcase recirculation and EGR
-thermostat failures (which is odd, as it has 2 of them)
-fuel rail pressure sensor failure causing pressurized fuel to wick up the harness, requiring replacement of the entire under valve cover harness.

I’m sure I’m forgetting a few, but man did those engines ever pay a lot of my hours.

On the plus side, they definitely had the most giddyup out of any of the Navistar offerings. But we made note of any truck that ever made it past 200k km with one of these flaming dumpster piles.

Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
18 days ago

Still I SEE these Diesels for sale in Qatar….

Thomas Metcalf
Thomas Metcalf
17 days ago

I love how Navistar steadfastly refused to admit that the engines were giant turds with huge issues.

TheDrunkenWrench
TheDrunkenWrench
17 days ago
Reply to  Thomas Metcalf

I mean, it’s pretty on-brand for them.

Thomas Metcalf
Thomas Metcalf
17 days ago

International Harvester is THE case study on how not to run a business, so yeah.

TheDrunkenWrench
TheDrunkenWrench
17 days ago
Reply to  Thomas Metcalf

Thankfully, diesel techs are paid hourly. We’d all have lost our shirts if International had a flat rate model.

FixnJunk
FixnJunk
19 days ago

Any company that clings to HEUI injection is a failure from the start. HEUI injection was considered obsolete before it ever entered the Ford market via Navistar. Unfortunately, Ford proved with the 6.7 that they still can’t build a diesel engine even with all of the time that they hung on to the failed Navistar engines to buy them time.

TheDrunkenWrench
TheDrunkenWrench
19 days ago
Reply to  FixnJunk

The 6.4 was a common rail engine. No more HEUI system.

American Locomotive
American Locomotive
19 days ago
Reply to  FixnJunk

HEUI was state of the art in 1994 when it first showed up on Fords. Everyone else was still running mechanical injection, or mechanical injection augmented with some mild electronic control.

But yes, by ’03 when the 6.0 powerstroke made its debut, HEUI was definitely inferior compared to common rail systems.

Jason watson
Jason watson
19 days ago

Our. 6.4 service truck made it to 240000 then finally bit the dust.

LMCorvairFan
LMCorvairFan
20 days ago

Have you hated your Ford lately? I gave up on Ford years ago and here they they are still knocking the hits out.

Jason watson
Jason watson
19 days ago
Reply to  LMCorvairFan

I love my F150

Jatkat
Jatkat
17 days ago
Reply to  LMCorvairFan

Eh. I love the Fords I currently have (97 Grand Marquis and an 11 Escape) and really like their current product offerings. That being said, I have also seen the worst Ford has to offer when I worked as a mechanic.

Chris Stevenson
Chris Stevenson
20 days ago

Wild that they kept the Power Stroke name. I would have thought a clean break when they brought the engines in-house would have been wanted.

Slow Joe Crow
Slow Joe Crow
20 days ago

Ford used that name on some other diesels in various markets so I guess there was enough brand value to overcome the lemons. The 2.8 TGV was branded Power Stroke, although the Transit and 2007-2016 Landrover Defender engine was branded Duratorq

UnseenCat
UnseenCat
20 days ago

As the owner of a Cummins ISB in a Dodge pickup, the Ford diesel line has always been the “Power Smoke” to me. ;P

Ben
Ben
20 days ago

People want big torque, decent power, and good fuel economy. They also want an engine that’s practical to maintain, and one that will go the distance.

If it’s a diesel it has to be able to handle tuning for higher power too. You’ll note that at least some of these problems are caused/made worse by tuning, and people don’t differentiate well between failures caused by tunes and actual problems with the engine as shipped. And even when they do, lack of tunability is considered a big black mark on a diesel engine, even if it’s already good in stock form.

FixnJunk
FixnJunk
19 days ago
Reply to  Ben

????

Michael Beranek
Michael Beranek
20 days ago

Replace “Navistar” with “Firestone” and it’s the same story. Ford is a very high-maintenance girlfriend.

Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
6 days ago

Great answer.

MustangIIMatt
MustangIIMatt
20 days ago

The 6.4 is so bad that newer, lower mileage 6.4 trucks sell for less than older 6.0 and 7.3 trucks.

JDE
JDE
20 days ago
Reply to  MustangIIMatt

By comparison, the 6.0 is relatively inexpensive to make it survive and the fuel consumption is really good. I suppose the bad reputation at one time also made picking one up for really cheap if you were handy enough to deal with the head studs and cooling system issues. so most likely the 6.0’s you are talking about are the ones that are “bulletproofed”.

Angry Bob
Angry Bob
20 days ago

People I know with these engines brag about how many times they’ve had the cab removed from the chassis.

Ranwhenparked
Ranwhenparked
20 days ago
Reply to  Angry Bob

Weird flex

Jatkat
Jatkat
17 days ago
Reply to  Angry Bob

“IT’S ACTUALLY SO EASY BRO, NOT EVEN A PAIN AT ALL BRO”. They sound exactly like the Audi guys justifying “service position”.

Lockleaf
Lockleaf
20 days ago

Thank you for saying Smoglems. I love a ridiculous and horrible portmanteau.

Gilbert Wham
Gilbert Wham
18 days ago
Reply to  Lockleaf

A horriculous portmanteau, if you will.

Rippstik
Rippstik
20 days ago

I miss the pre-emissions diesels, right up until I am following one in traffic with my windows down.

JDE
JDE
20 days ago
Reply to  Rippstik

Meh, those are the Brodozers incorrectly tuned usually. A stock LBZ is pretty clean running usually.

Rippstik
Rippstik
20 days ago
Reply to  JDE

I’d argue that it’s more than that. When I worked in a truck shop, there was a big difference in smell between the DEF trucks and the older non-def trucks.

Manwich Sandwich
Manwich Sandwich
18 days ago
Reply to  Rippstik

As a person with asthma, I don’t miss pre-emissions diesels at all.

Bags
Bags
17 days ago
Reply to  Rippstik

I used to walk to school as I lived less than 1/4 mile from the my junior/senior highschool. School buses were terrible, man. They might be better now than they were 20-25 years ago (probably are) but it pisses me off when people complain about EV buses being “librul agenda” when they supposedly care about their kids. Fine if little Braxlyn gets asthma I guess.
I understand why tractor trailers and dump trucks functionally need to have stacks, but I never understood why school bus exhaust height was “face level for a 6 year old”.

V10omous
V10omous
20 days ago

The truck in the header image is a 2011-16 model with the 6.7L PSD.

Aerostarman89
Aerostarman89
20 days ago
Reply to  V10omous

Came here to say the same thing. At least he is right that the 6.4l is a pile of garbage. Give me a “bulletproofed” 6.0L any day over a 6.4L.

Last edited 20 days ago by Aerostarman89
David Tracy
David Tracy
20 days ago
Reply to  V10omous

(working on this. Thank you, V10omous).

V10omous
V10omous
20 days ago
Reply to  David Tracy

While I have your attention, maybe fix the misleading headline about Stellantis “giving buyers” $7500 in taxpayer money from yesterday?

Minor stuff, but makes the site better IMO.

David Tracy
David Tracy
20 days ago
Reply to  V10omous

Jesus. No, that’s not minor, that’s major. Issuing a correction, and chatting with the team now.

4jim
4jim
20 days ago

Such a shame. The early 6.9 and 7.3 pre-powerstroke motors were fantastic. I know that fuel economy and emissions were part of the problem but the horsepower and torque wars seemed to make things worse.

JDE
JDE
20 days ago
Reply to  4jim

most would not agree, the only 7.3 most really love is the Direct injection Powerstroke variant. the IDI version was not great.

Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
18 days ago
Reply to  JDE

LBZ Duramax is also a great motor (considering its shortcomings as well…)..

Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
Ramaswamy Narayanaswamy
6 days ago
Reply to  JDE

The IDIs were still MUCH better than this 6.4 horror….

52
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x