Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 07-01-2016, 09:27 PM   #11
Mini-Skoolie
 
BlueHeart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Traverse City
Posts: 15
It is true that the 6.0 has a bad reputation. Being the first egr equipped engine to be produced by International for Ford caused numerous growing pains. Most of the perceived issues stem from the fact that it is a more finicky engine when it comes to maintenance. Especially compared to the old and slow, but proven 7.3l liter.
The causes of the known issues are well documented as well as their remedies. The biggest issue when looking at a 6.0 liter equipped van, is the lack of space under the hood. While it is more difficult, it can be accomplished. Most of the posters who talk bad about the 6.0 have no personal experience, but have "heard from a friend of their's or knows a mechanic who swears they are the worst."
I would tell you from experience with both the 7.3 and the 6.0, I would much rather have the 6.0l with the far better 5 speed transmission. The percieved negative connotations associated with the 6.0l have deep roots in the Ford diesel forums and that perception is steadily being erased as knowledge and experience replaces fear and ignorance.
While many 6.0 liters have suffered issues due to lack of maintenance, modification and general ignorance into it's performance parameters, many are out there running without issue.
I don't know about you, but I don't buy a vehicle based on thinking it's never going to need service or require possible repairs. All vehicles have certain historical tendencies and it's up to you as the purchaser, to take advantage of the situation. Obviously with the bad reputation the 6.0 liter has, use that to your advantage in negotiations. Why pay the same amount or more for a several year older 7.3 liter with a less reliable transmission, less torque and less horsepower?
If you purchase a van with a 6.0 liter and save several thousand dollars in the process, set that savings aside for potential "bulletproofing" and find a mechanic who specializes in working on them. Not just a diesel mechanic, but a true 6.0 mechanic. They are not the same, which has also contributed to the reputation.
I could continue, but I have to let my dog Chopper out. Flame suit is on!
BlueHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2016, 11:26 PM   #12
Bus Geek
 
EastCoastCB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Eustis FLORIDA
Posts: 7,904
Year: 1992
Coachwork: Ward/AmTran
Chassis: International
Engine: dt466
Rated Cap: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueHeart View Post
It is true that the 6.0 has a bad reputation. Being the first egr equipped engine to be produced by International for Ford caused numerous growing pains. Most of the perceived issues stem from the fact that it is a more finicky engine when it comes to maintenance. Especially compared to the old and slow, but proven 7.3l liter.
The causes of the known issues are well documented as well as their remedies. The biggest issue when looking at a 6.0 liter equipped van, is the lack of space under the hood. While it is more difficult, it can be accomplished. Most of the posters who talk bad about the 6.0 have no personal experience, but have "heard from a friend of their's or knows a mechanic who swears they are the worst."
I would tell you from experience with both the 7.3 and the 6.0, I would much rather have the 6.0l with the far better 5 speed transmission. The percieved negative connotations associated with the 6.0l have deep roots in the Ford diesel forums and that perception is steadily being erased as knowledge and experience replaces fear and ignorance.
While many 6.0 liters have suffered issues due to lack of maintenance, modification and general ignorance into it's performance parameters, many are out there running without issue.
I don't know about you, but I don't buy a vehicle based on thinking it's never going to need service or require possible repairs. All vehicles have certain historical tendencies and it's up to you as the purchaser, to take advantage of the situation. Obviously with the bad reputation the 6.0 liter has, use that to your advantage in negotiations. Why pay the same amount or more for a several year older 7.3 liter with a less reliable transmission, less torque and less horsepower?
If you purchase a van with a 6.0 liter and save several thousand dollars in the process, set that savings aside for potential "bulletproofing" and find a mechanic who specializes in working on them. Not just a diesel mechanic, but a true 6.0 mechanic. They are not the same, which has also contributed to the reputation.
I could continue, but I have to let my dog Chopper out. Flame suit is on!
So people should buy buses with known problem engines then set money aside for specialized shops that deal with the lemon engines?
I'd rather have a 25 year old engine with 300k on it that a new electronic epa machine. I want an engine any bubba that works on tractors can fix.
__________________
.
Roll Your Own Build Thread
EastCoastCB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2016, 11:09 AM   #13
Mini-Skoolie
 
BlueHeart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Traverse City
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastCoastCB View Post
So people should buy buses with known problem engines then set money aside for specialized shops that deal with the lemon engines?
I'd rather have a 25 year old engine with 300k on it that a new electronic epa machine. I want an engine any bubba that works on tractors can fix.

Nope, not at all. Especially those whose mechanical experience and understanding is lacking.
I also wouldn't recommend the 6.0 liter to someone who only occasionally drives their vehicle. The 6.0 liter is perfect for the person who doesn't want to establish roots or enjoys the trip as much as the destination.
We're all here because we believe we can build a better version or less expensive version of an RV than what is available. Many of us have been told that "our way" is wrong or that we should just accept what is available because the manufacturers know how to do it right. Some of us like the aspect of recycling and repurposing otherwise abandoned vehicles and some of us just like to do things different.

This is where the 6.0 liter shines. It is rated higher in horsepower and torque than the 7.3 liter and is smoother, quieter and more efficient when used for larger payloads. The efficiency aspect comes into play with the the far superior 5 speed multi geared 5R110 transmission in comparison to the 4 speed 4R100. Transmission reliability skyrockets as well.
But let's get back to your statement I quoted. The 6.0 liter has a bad reputation that started circulating amongst the diehard 7.3 liter purists who see the 6.0 liter as a failed attempt to replace the "ultra reliable" 7.3 liter. What these purists don't take into account is the government mandated emissions requirements around the corner at the time. Ford was about to update both the HD F series and E series chassis and decided to be on the forefront of the technological change curve.
In no way is the 6.0 liter a "lemon" engine. Yes, there are many documented issues in the first years of production that known "7.3 fixes" did not fix. In fact, some of IH's (International)fixes made more problems. By the 2005 model year, knowledge was starting to creep into the fear mongering camps and expose itself to the masses. Not only were issues starting to lessen drastically, but the root causes were being realized and managed if not completely eliminated.
Despite the "bad perception", Ford sold more 6.0 liters than the competition sold Cummins and Duramaxes combined!
I would be very happy to continue spewing knowledge and truth on the "6.0 leaker", but feel this post will expose those without enough unbiased knowledge to the possibility that it may be a viable powertrain to consider based on their needs. Maybe with enough interest, we as an accepting group can discuss this further in another thread.
BlueHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2016, 12:06 PM   #14
Bus Geek
 
EastCoastCB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Eustis FLORIDA
Posts: 7,904
Year: 1992
Coachwork: Ward/AmTran
Chassis: International
Engine: dt466
Rated Cap: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueHeart View Post

Nope, not at all. Especially those whose mechanical experience and understanding is lacking.
I also wouldn't recommend the 6.0 liter to someone who only occasionally drives their vehicle. The 6.0 liter is perfect for the person who doesn't want to establish roots or enjoys the trip as much as the destination.
We're all here because we believe we can build a better version or less expensive version of an RV than what is available. Many of us have been told that "our way" is wrong or that we should just accept what is available because the manufacturers know how to do it right. Some of us like the aspect of recycling and repurposing otherwise abandoned vehicles and some of us just like to do things different.

This is where the 6.0 liter shines. It is rated higher in horsepower and torque than the 7.3 liter and is smoother, quieter and more efficient when used for larger payloads. The efficiency aspect comes into play with the the far superior 5 speed multi geared 5R110 transmission in comparison to the 4 speed 4R100. Transmission reliability skyrockets as well.
But let's get back to your statement I quoted. The 6.0 liter has a bad reputation that started circulating amongst the diehard 7.3 liter purists who see the 6.0 liter as a failed attempt to replace the "ultra reliable" 7.3 liter. What these purists don't take into account is the government mandated emissions requirements around the corner at the time. Ford was about to update both the HD F series and E series chassis and decided to be on the forefront of the technological change curve.
In no way is the 6.0 liter a "lemon" engine. Yes, there are many documented issues in the first years of production that known "7.3 fixes" did not fix. In fact, some of IH's (International)fixes made more problems. By the 2005 model year, knowledge was starting to creep into the fear mongering camps and expose itself to the masses. Not only were issues starting to lessen drastically, but the root causes were being realized and managed if not completely eliminated.
Despite the "bad perception", Ford sold more 6.0 liters than the competition sold Cummins and Duramaxes combined!
I would be very happy to continue spewing knowledge and truth on the "6.0 leaker", but feel this post will expose those without enough unbiased knowledge to the possibility that it may be a viable powertrain to consider based on their needs. Maybe with enough interest, we as an accepting group can discuss this further in another thread.
So if one is traveling and they need one of those uber-specialized 6.0 shops, what do they do?
For a diy-er there are so much better choices. These are so well known for the problems and complexity that it simply isn't just a rumor, man. Lots of folks may worry about emissions, but I sure don't. Give me reliability and something that doesn't require full disassembly of the vehicle and many thousands of dollars to fix.
For the average person on this forum, the 6.0 is a very poor choice.
__________________
.
Roll Your Own Build Thread
EastCoastCB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2016, 04:54 PM   #15
Bus Geek
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Columbus Ohio
Posts: 4,203
Year: 1991
Coachwork: Carpenter
Chassis: International S3800
Engine: DT360
Rated Cap: 7 Row Handicap
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastCoastCB View Post
Don't buy a big bus with a 6.0 either.

hey now I have 5.9 litres in a big short bus.. I cruise 65 all day long and thats without even turning up my engine which would give me even more power...

you dont have to have a monster size engine to have a good running bus..
-Christopher
cadillackid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2016, 05:10 PM   #16
Bus Geek
 
EastCoastCB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Eustis FLORIDA
Posts: 7,904
Year: 1992
Coachwork: Ward/AmTran
Chassis: International
Engine: dt466
Rated Cap: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by cadillackid View Post
hey now I have 5.9 litres in a big short bus.. I cruise 65 all day long and thats without even turning up my engine which would give me even more power...

you dont have to have a monster size engine to have a good running bus..
-Christopher
The 6.0 "Powerstroke" or the 365. Not about size- about expense and complexity.
__________________
.
Roll Your Own Build Thread
EastCoastCB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2016, 05:49 PM   #17
Mini-Skoolie
 
BlueHeart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Traverse City
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastCoastCB View Post
So if one is traveling and they need one of those uber-specialized 6.0 shops, what do they do?
For a diy-er there are so much better choices. These are so well known for the problems and complexity that it simply isn't just a rumor, man. Lots of folks may worry about emissions, but I sure don't. Give me reliability and something that doesn't require full disassembly of the vehicle and many thousands of dollars to fix.
For the average person on this forum, the 6.0 is a very poor choice.
I urge you to research a little more on the 6.0 liter and the current conditions of the diesel market.
Did you have an open mind when thinking about converting a school bus to an RV? Why would you not use that same kind of open minded thinking when approaching the most expensive aspect of your bus. Especially if you don't know that much about the subject powertrain other than what someone has told you?(This is a general statement, not directed to the above quoted.) You didn't immediately believe those who might have said converting a bus was foolish, did you?

Maybe you don't understand the reason for having a specialized shop perform work on a 6.0 liter? It's not for repairing issues while traveling, but obviously would be convenient if the situation might arise. Kind of like knowing where a good transmission shop is that specializes in the 4R100, it's for proactive preventative maintenance. Especially for those who are intimidated by the workings of a modern diesel engine.
Not all 6.0 liters "need" these things, but many owners do perform them to get exactly what you say you want, "reliability" without worrying about future "full disassembly" repairs. You don't "need" a specialized shop to perform these preventive procedures, you can do them yourself! DIY, is a huge aspect of the 7.3 and 6.0 liter community. If you can work on a 7.3 liter, you can work on a 6.0 liter. You just need the knowledge and understanding of what can be done to eliminate the chances of failure.
There are tons of accounts of 6.0 liters going well over a half million miles on basic, but thorough maintenance. Yet my last 7.3 liter went through four transmissions in it's 338,000 miles before I sold it.
I am not a mechanic. I work on low voltage electronics, typically fire alarms and chemical suppression systems. I spent close to $2000 on parts to perform preventative measures as well as several upgrades I felt were easier to do at that time rather than wait. I found a Ford 6.0 liter technician willing to perform everything I wanted to do for a thousand dollars. My time is money, so it made sense to have him do the same thing he does every day rather than do it myself. I dropped it off on Friday and picked it up Saturday evening. If I did it myself, it would have taken over a week working every night after finishing my day job. Even paying him, it saved me several thousand dollars over what I was quoted at a local diesel shop. Just like anything related mechanical-wise, there are deals and crooks out there.There are also shops and techs out there who have no understanding of the 6.0 liter who throw parts at it hoping it fixes the symptoms and badmouth it when their methods don't work.
A little research on some Ford diesel forums can give you ALL the information you need to DIY.
My mention of emissions had nothing to do with sticking my nose up at those who might not care about emissions and ALL about why the 6.0 liter originally was percieved as a "lemon."
I do believe you are correct that there are better choices out there for the "average" person on this forum, but some of those choices are far and few between as well as approaching unavailable on certain parts. Adding this to the percieved value of these powertrains mean big dollars when you find a lower mileage version. Values of 6.0 liters have risen over the last couple years and I believe there are several reasons for this.
1. 7.3 liters haven't been produced in passenger vehicles since 2003.
2. The 6.0 liter's percieved shortcomings have been overcome and more people are willing to look past perception and see what a good option it can be.
3. It was produced in the E chassis until 2009 in the 2010 model year when a diesel option was no longer offered.
4. The cost of diesel equipped passenger vehicles has risen to well over $50,000.

The biggest "downfall" to purchasing a E chassis 6.0 liter is the amount of room. There's nothing that would prevent me from purchasing it in a fullsize bus.
BlueHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2016, 06:09 PM   #18
Bus Geek
 
EastCoastCB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Eustis FLORIDA
Posts: 7,904
Year: 1992
Coachwork: Ward/AmTran
Chassis: International
Engine: dt466
Rated Cap: 78
Well I won't even buy the "E" version of my beloved DT466... So for me something as lame as the 6.0 would be OUT. There are TONS of great buses out there that aren't a huge PITA to repair and keep running.
You can drop 10k on a 6.0 and still not even fix the darned thing. I know lots of guys who have had nothing but expensive issues with em.
__________________
.
Roll Your Own Build Thread
EastCoastCB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2016, 06:37 PM   #19
Mini-Skoolie
 
BlueHeart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Traverse City
Posts: 15
Quote:
Originally Posted by EastCoastCB View Post
Well I won't even buy the "E" version of my beloved DT466... So for me something as lame as the 6.0 would be OUT. There are TONS of great buses out there that aren't a huge PITA to repair and keep running.
You can drop 10k on a 6.0 and still not even fix the darned thing. I know lots of guys who have had nothing but expensive issues with em.
Obviously you didn't even read any of my posts.
If they're spending $10,000 and still have issues, they have/had more money than sense.
BlueHeart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2016, 08:38 PM   #20
Bus Geek
 
EastCoastCB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Eustis FLORIDA
Posts: 7,904
Year: 1992
Coachwork: Ward/AmTran
Chassis: International
Engine: dt466
Rated Cap: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueHeart View Post
Obviously you didn't even read any of my posts.
If they're spending $10,000 and still have issues, they have/had more money than sense.
Sounds like the kind of person who buys 6.0's. ANd no need to get all bent out of shape. I've read the giant blocks of text. I get your point.
But why anyone would take on the hassle and expense of a van with a 6.0 crammed into it is beyond me. Even in a full size bus its way more complication and hassle when there are other perfectly good engines available not needing all the special attention and rigging from aftermarket shops and suppliers. By the time anyone's getting these things on the surplus market they're a real nightmare. If the techs at the bus yards are fed up with em, that ought to tell you something.
While we may disagree, I DO see what you're getting at. None of this is meant to be any kind of flame war or anything. Just a discussion with different points of view. But it seems akin to reinventing the wheel to try to take a turd and polish it when there are such better options out there.
Your point about the transmissions is moot when it comes to fullsize buses, btw.
__________________
.
Roll Your Own Build Thread
EastCoastCB is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.