Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-30-2013, 09:27 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Chewie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 600
A twin turbo 5.0 would be awesome.
__________________

__________________
I used to have a really nice motorhome
2016 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited
Chewie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2013, 01:20 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
schrederman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Weatherford, TX
Posts: 977
The Mustang's 5.0 is still normally aspirated... and pops out 444 horses. I have the 360 hp version and the same trailer as Twisty. I have had no complaints. It is not a diesel but it pulls my TT OK. I have been thinking about a diesel for some time because I do feel the 5.0 gasser will suffer in the mountains and higher altitudes. With the 1/2 ton diesels coming out, I'm playing wait and see. I'll probably let them work out the bugs for a couple of years. Then again... I may be springing for a 3/4 diesel when I get back from my next trip...
__________________

__________________
J & D in Lovely Weatherford, TX
2016 Jayco White Hawk 28DSBH TT
2014 Ram 2500 Crew Cab 4X4 6.7L Cummins
schrederman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2013, 06:40 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 361
Hate to hear Chewie having a bad experience but mine has been nothing but good. I have a 2012 F350 6.7 with 15k on it and 8k of it towing. It has never missed a beat and I couldn't be happier with it. Changed oil every 5k and fuel filters every 10k. Everyone I have came across in campgrounds with the 6.7 had nothing but good things to say. Seems like no matter what make you have (ford, Chevy or Dodge), has had a bad experience with either of them. I agree with you Twisty, nice to see Ford redeeming themselves from the 6.0 debacle.
__________________
2012 F350 Lariat CC SRW 6.7L Powerstroke
pwrstroke2012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2013, 12:07 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
turnerpa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 204
As promised an update on this new engine. I picked up the truck yesterday and drove about 150 miles home and wow just smooth power, quiet, power on demand, just overall impressive! Once I got home we hooked onto the tt and took it out to a local campground, honestly, this truck made me almost forget there was anything back there! Pulls our TT like a dream and has all the power in the world on demand. Our TT is right about 7k loaded and ready to tow. I couldn't be happier at this point with this new motor!!
__________________
turnerpa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2013, 12:41 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
GASPEDDLER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 755
Enjoy your new beast!
__________________

2012 F-350 4x4 King Ranch Super Duty CC 6.7 Turbo Diesel 3.55 e-locker
2011 Palomino Puma 30KFBDS with Side Paw Kitchen and Bunkhouse
Equalizer E2 Hitch
GASPEDDLER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2013, 04:13 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,412
I was hesitant about the 6.7 after the 6.0 and 6.4 debacle, but stepped out on a limb to try one. Very glad I did. I have been very pleased with it. I have a good friend that runs a wrecker service that I spoke with before buying. He said he has yet to pull in a new Ford 6.7 in our area. He couldn't say the same about the new Dodge's or GM's.
__________________
dustman_stx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2013, 04:33 PM   #17
Site Team
 
acadianbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: St. Paul, Minnesota
Posts: 2,914
NAVISTAR did a lot of damage to Ford with the 6.0 and 6.4. It surely cost Ford some market share.
__________________
http://i421.photobucket.com/albums/pp297/acadianbob/IMG_2757.jpg
2012 F150 FX4 Ecoboost, 2016 Surveyor 274BHS
2003 Yamaha FJR1300, Demco Premiere Slider
1969 John Deere 1020, 1940 Ford 9N, 1948 Ford 8N
Jonsered 535, Can of WD-40, Duct Tape
Red Green coffee mugs
acadianbob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2013, 05:06 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Chewie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 600
I think Ford had caused some of the problems with the 6.0 or otherwise known as the Navistar VT365 in medium duty and commercial trucks. Ford had kept upping the hp and torque to stay competitive and I don't think the original design was for that much power, thus all the failures. Just my opinion though.

Btw, I had a 6.0 with all the typical failures. It was a nice engine when it ran. Sounded good too. Just a shame it never had the longevity.
__________________
I used to have a really nice motorhome
2016 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited
Chewie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2013, 10:02 AM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chewie View Post
I think Ford had caused some of the problems with the 6.0 or otherwise known as the Navistar VT365 in medium duty and commercial trucks. Ford had kept upping the hp and torque to stay competitive and I don't think the original design was for that much power, thus all the failures. Just my opinion though.

Btw, I had a 6.0 with all the typical failures. It was a nice engine when it ran. Sounded good too. Just a shame it never had the longevity.
A lot of the issues with them was the addition of emissions equipment. The blown head gaskets should never have happened. A good gasket and ARP studs fixes that- and should have been done from the factory.
__________________
dustman_stx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-04-2013, 10:22 AM   #20
Senior Member
 
Chewie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ohio
Posts: 600
Right, that's what I mean. Ford added equipment and hp/tq in a platform that really wasn't designed for those kind of numbers. The VT365 was detuned compared to the "powerstroke."
__________________

__________________
I used to have a really nice motorhome
2016 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited
Chewie 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




ForestRiverForums.com is not in any way associated with Forest River, Inc. or its associated RV manufacturing divisions.


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:29 PM.