10% losses? The industry standard rule is roughly 15% on cars. Mow add in a transfer case. 16% is actually pretty good.

People complaining about the power are missing the point of this engine. I applaud Ford for making a big, simple, and hopefully reliable v8

15% drivetrain loss on a 4x4 automatic transmission with 35" tires is excellent...which puts Ford's power ratings spot on

Motor that works hard, last long, doesn’t break the bank. Welcome back Ford. Might see this in a new F350 for me.

I’d rather have more reliability than 30 more horsepower.

None of the numbers matter when it's a 8k savings and still running strong 10 years down the road.

I'd rather have old school big block reliability then modern day disposable performance.

16% loss isn't bad for a truck with 3/4 ton axles and big tires and rims. So Nathan you are absolutely wrong.

Less complexity is almost always more durable.

People just want a trucks that works good, needs nothing, lasts long

Everyone talking peak numbers but look at that torque curve!!! I believe in Andre's video the torque was kicking in at 2000 rpm. What a beast.

Does anyone notice the torque curve comes in very early 2000 rpm

My 7.5 460 is 30 years old and still running great! I can't wait to rebuild it!

I predict Ford will sell more of these than any other truck engine.

So excited for this beast, the engine was built as stout as a diesel internally. You guys at TFL are killing it👍🏻

Probably the best engine and transmission by Ford since the 5.0 Stang back in the 80's. This engine was built for the commercial market alternative to the diesel. With the EPA regulating diesels to death and the market demanding a big gas engine, Ford made one for the Uhauls, Ryder and Enterprises in the market. While it works in the 250, it was really made for those other markets.

Sucks ford didn't put a manual behind the 7.3

Dyno a 6.4 hemi and a 6.6 gas GM, see what kind of numbers those put down. Thanks for these types of videos. I don't think there's any other automotive reviewers out there that do these kind of videos. For real world results, you guys are the best, thanks!

These numbers seem solid, 16% loss on an automatic with a huge drivetrain to lump around seems solid. Look at some other dyno results. The factory numbers are accurate.

Love that oldschool big V8. Awesome.

I applaud ford for taking the conventional route. There is a time and place for experimentation, and Ford learned the hard way (see also:6.0, 6.4 powerstroke) that the powerplant in your heavy duty offerings (fleet sales) is neither. The amount of money they lost in warranty claims, and lost sales in successive years would have paid for the development of several new engines. It would seem that they started with the blank space in the engine lineup between the 6.2 and diesel offerings, decided on a power figure, and went for the most cost effective and reliable way of getting there. Tuning an ecoboost to those numbers could've been an option for the 250, but would've been unsuitable for anything heavier. Pretending that they did develop Nathan's hypothetical ecoboost v8, I have only one question- What kind of MPG do you honestly think the truck would pull down? Every single ecoboost driver I have ever talked to all say the same thing- "you can have eco, or you can have boost, you cannot have both at the same time". A 2.7 in a crew cab 4x4 f150 does great on fuel- without a load. Apply a load and the MPG's drop to single digits. Now, scale that up. The mpg loss due to increased load or a heavy foot are far greater in small displacement turbo engines than for larger engines of the same power levels. There are many reasons for this, such as the additional fuel required to keep combustion chamber temps in check, parasitic losses due to increased load on the cooling system, efficiency loss due to increased backpressure in the exhaust system as the RPM's climb, etc. A larger engine experiences many of the same issues, but on a smaller scale. The intake air temps will climb slightly due to increased underhood temps, but they will generally remain within 50-60 degrees of ambient air temp, the engine will need more fuel, but the additional fuel needed to keep combustion chamber temps in check, and, to a lesser extent on a gas engine, egt's down is a fraction of its turbocharged counterpart. The increase cooling load is also present, but once again on a much smaller scale. The exhaust on a larger displacement engine moves through the manifolds, pipe, cats, muffler and exits the truck in a timely fashion- so heat transfer to anything other than the immediate areas in direct contact with these gasses are minimal. Contrast that to a turbocharged engine, where we are effectively storing hot gasses, under pressure for longer periods of time (the best turbochargers usually operate at or around a 1:1 boost/ backpressure ratio at full load, so if we have 30psi on the intake side, there will be a similar number between the exhaust port and the turbocharger ) which allows for additional surface area (pistons, cylinder walls, valves, etc) to be exposed to these additional temperatures for longer periods of time- and we have to add fuel, and increase cooling to accomidate this. Yes, at the sort of altitude y'all test at, the ecoboost feels like a rocket ship, but performing similar testing at sea level would yield a much smaller difference, and that smaller difference, coupled with the increased maintenance, fuel economy (as described above), cost of developing the engine, and consequences for getting it wrong are why we will likely never see an ecoboost in a 350 or larger platform. There is a place for small displacement gasoline turbo engines, but the technology does not scale well (see also: everything in the 2nd paragraph, but with additional surface area for heat soak), and with current tech, It isn't heavy duty gasoline applications.

They didn't mention the insane torque it had at a low rpm on that video though

The 7.3 will be one of Ford's best engines for years to come.

I’ve been to the dyno with my car about 50-60 times through different dynos. Not one time has anyone said there is a %10 loss. It’s been a %15 for straight drive cars and %20 for automatics. So 358rwhp is right where it should be really. In the long run the gas motor will cost less than the 6.7, sorry diesel owners. With a %15 loss that’s 477ftlbs and 421hp. Plus all dynos are different. I’ve had a 20rwhp difference between dynos.

I'll take the slightly underwhelming power figures in exchange for an engine that will most likely have fewer problems as it ages, as well as producing basically peak torque at 2,000 rpm. Also, big pushrod engines are just better.

Why doesn’t anyone ever talk a plowing snow? Towing not the only thing these trucks are used for!

It seems like this truck loses about 16.2% of its power through the drivetrain which is actually quite good for a heavy, automatic vehicle such as this. What’s more impressive is that at ~408 rwtq, it’s actually making more than the advertised torque. Ford rated the torque at 475, but this reading shows about 486 lb-ft. Should be a really strong hauler 💪.

The guy at 5 star said they hit the speed limiter...... there's still more in it.

These are work trucks not dragsters .No need to make things over complicated when you don't need to.

The average person has very little appreciation for duty cycle. That's where the new 7.3 shines. This truck can pull at over 50% load at constant duty, and over 65% at 50/50 cycle.

Since Dyno's vary from machine to machine, you should only take the information as a before and after comparison of doing a performance upgrade. You could easily run it on a different dyno and see 20hp/tq more or less than what that machine read. Just use the same dyno when evaluating performance mod gains. Unfortunately the video being referenced is a sample size of 1 and scientifically limited in saying that is THE value.

Old school push rod v8, no multiple camshafts, no turbos to deal with, easy maintenance, cheaper repair bills, better reliability. I'm a fan of it

Can’t wait to hear one with custom exhaust

I really hate the fake good cop bad cop skit. Comes of so phoney.

Speaking of Godzilla and King Kong who’s ready for the Godzilla vs Kong movie this year!?

I just bought a Lariat Pkg and put about 600mi on it, then put a fairly new 3200 lb 2 place horse trailer on it for about 14hrs total. First 7hrs were no horse in it, 2nd 7hrs we had one horse in the trailer now towing 4500 lbs +/-. The motor and Lariat pkg did exactly what I wanted to do. I felt it actually performed better with pulling a trailer. MPG was 13mph unloaded and 10mph loaded in tow-hall mode. The transition seemed to be the key to making this work as it kept it no lower than 5th gear going up some steep grades at 60~70mph with most of the time in 8~10 at highway speeds (65-70). I can see where a tune will help the lower end 0-30mph pull and acceleration, but after that this pkg performs. Really like this truck so far. Under a load this truck does seem different vs. unloaded or in a tow situation. Well done Ford, i'm impressed so far with now just over 2k+ on this pkg and looking for things to tow :)

The 2019 Power Wagon lost almost 100 hp and 100 lb-ft of torque in one dyno I watched. That Godzilla engine keeps it pretty real compared to the 6.4 Hemi.

I can see Chevy and Fiat guys hating on this. But that’s why they’re chevy and fiat guys

This is a work truck not a raptor. Its output is perfectly respectable for a gas engine in a work truck. Also, 16 percent is really solid for a pickup. This isnt a challenger. It has heavy wheels, heavy tires, heavy driveshaft, heavy transferase internals, and most different than a car, an extremely heavy axle. The ring and pinion, carrier, and axleshafts and hubs are simply massive. The rear axle weighs north of 350 lbs and the rotating mass is probably around 150 lbs. 16 percent is really spectacular for a heavy duty truck. Ford v10’s dominated towing before the 7.3 came out and their wheel hp, was closer to just above 200 hp. The 7.3 has more wheel hp by far than the v10 made at the crank. Anyway, the 10 speed is likely using very little horsepower compared to the rear axle which i believe, is the biggest producer of loss. Its a evil in a heavy duty truck that is required. That strong, full float axle is what makes a heavy duty truck, a heavy duty truck!

15% drivetrain loss on a 4x4 is low. You get about 15% drivetrain loss through a manual transmission. 18% to 20% through an auto. Then add approximately 2% for the transfer case. So you are closer to 22%. I'm an ASE certified tech in drivetrains. Specifically manual transmissions. Just for a little of my background. Overall engine output would be underrated by Ford once again, by about 10%.

It's all about how early that torque curve comes in on a NA motor. Nathan you need to educate yourself on how good that is for a NA v8.

Leave the turbos to the v6 and 4 cylinders. V8 American made big block needs to stay as it is.

The 360 was less powerful that a 390. Yet when you tear the engine down you see that the 360 was beefed up for reliability. Resistance to strain is more important on a large truck. And that resistance also leads to more weight and inertia. Which in turn gives the engine more mass to throw at the load it is hauling. Mileage isn't the only efficiency that matters in a big truck. The efficiency of each combustion cycle is made easier when you have the mass to make the crankshaft want to keep spinning. That's why the old Windsor could lug itself form a dead stop in 2nd gear. Not just torque but inertia of mass.

It sounds absolutely realistic. Let’s see a 6.6 / 6.4 / 7.3 comparison. The supercharging argument also goes for Nathan’s power wagon baby too - where’s the blown hemi?? HD trucks still gotta do HD things.

I would like to see an F250 7.3L v8 Gas vs the NEW 6.6 GM Gas 2500 Truck!!! Who build a Better V8 Gasser?!

Looks like the power band on the 7.3L is high and flat, so it’s making a lot of power early and the delivery should feel smooth. Also the 10 speed in the super duty is massive, and a lot of the loss. I also can’t see how those numbers are weak tho

I feel the need to point out that a lot of people are comparing it to the diesel drivetrain loss A Diesel's going to have less drivetrain loss because. Boost is dependent on the load. So for a diesel the more you load it the better the power numbers will be. This 7.3 is just fine. If you watch the dyno video yes we see torque management occurring. this helps longevity and also and probably more importantly means that when you really low down the truck you're not getting random torque spikes. nobody wants to be full throttle heading up the Ike and all of a sudden get a random surge of power followed by a random big ass dip. the other thing people forget is this vehicle is tuned correctly for fuel efficiency with a stoichiometric fuel ratio while fully loaded. Most vehicles run rich which creates more heat and burns more fuel. Also point out that when they do the ike run we will not see a fuel economy improvement. This is because despite being a stoichiometric ratio.since all the normally-aspirated trucks are starving for air there going to be pretty close to a stoichiometric ratio. Otherwise the cats like literally melt from the unburned fuel.

Dude I love that I could watch you guys all the way without an ad! Thanks for being truck guys

The parasitic loss is due to turning a massive drivetrain.

Just like how Semi Trucks only make 400 HP average and 1000+ torque out of 12+ liters, it is for reliability.

Man, I was always told 30% losses are standard. To only lose 15-16% seems really good and just shows how much better technology has become.

The drivetrain loss is actually very reasonable given it's a 4x4. The numbers are a bit underwhelming but the torque curve is excellent.

7.3 Godzilla is a beast....thanks Roman n Nathan

The dyno test showed a fairly good result and the flat power curve is what you want. Peaky power doesn't perform well in the real world. Keep in mind that Ford doesn't want to risk loosing the very profitable diesel sales!

What about simplicity? I like that it's so simple. Maybe an owner could work on his own stuff again without the need for specialized tools. Looks like there is actually room to work in the engine bay because it's not a wide engine like the OHC's. Price? You dont have to buy 2 or 4 cams for upgrades or replacement. No fancy timing belts and chains. Its port injection. Direct injection is rumored to be causing carbon build up on intake valves. I believe this will be the next LS for hot-rodders in 10- 20 years

Thanks for the video guys, I appreciate all you guys do. On that note I agree with Nathan. Those are some pretty good numbers drop in HP and torque. I know all manufacturers vehicles don’t give you real world HP and torque which I think should be measured at the rear wheels and not at the crank. Now if you want those hp and torque number you as a consumer have to go spend more money on your $55,000 to $60,000 truck. That is ridiculous. Thanks for sharing Nathan and Roman.

Where is he getting 10% loss from? 16% is actually really good for this truck. You have heavy duty trans and drive shaft and rear end and tires. I hope this was just for content, because his argument is stupid.

... stop giving Nathan crap for miss speaking on 10%.... Andrea breaks it down correctly on the dyno video. Not a big deal, don’t lose your minds.

Nathan, only front drive cars can hit the 10% drivetrain loss figure. That’s because they don’t have a drive shaft, or, more importantly, a 90 degree turn in the power flow at the differential. 16% loss in a 4WD measured at the rear wheels is actually quite good. A testament to the efficiency of the 10spd auto!

It's also a brand new engine, not fully broken in. And as much as the truckbros want this to be a sooper-dooper high power truck engine, it was actually developed to be a long duty cycle piece for use in actual truck applications, not a street-race engine for use in jacked-up brodozers.

When you dynoed the truck,were you in tow/haul?? My 14 f350 6.2 has noticeable power increase when in tow/haul. Curious if it really makes a difference or just seat of the pants feel.

73L VS 62L Even though this TFL review centers around the overall number. We are still impressed with the 7.3L and its more about the differences between each engine to us here at 5 Star Tuning. We wanted to show for those who have a 6.2L and or those wanting a 7.3L what could they expect approx. hp/tq to wheel between the engines.(stock form) We can run in 7th gear (the 7.3) and it will produce a higher number but will hit the factor speed limiter half way in WOT run. We might do that onces we get into development in a a couple of weeks . We also have our 2nd 7.3L coming in today (about time lol) it has a 3.55 gears, we will get some more runs with it to compare

I hate how they have to try and make really bad points for someone to be on the opposing side. Nathan clearly understands drivetrain loss. Also 34" tires. And different dynos. 20% drivetrain loss was pretty spot on.

Just wait till the tuners get hold of them and start doing twin turbos and other stuff And we start getting 1000 + hp 😍😍👍👍 Give one to mr roush and stand back

Nathan always has to bash everything that isn't a powerwaggon

In the tuning world, the term is "area under the curve" and the more area under the curve, the better. The 7.3 is a solid motor that could use a tune to get the most out of it. Right now, it's set up to be reliable and predictable under heavy stress.

The 7.3 produces better numbers than ford says it would. The age old benchmark for par acidic loss is 20%. So your numbers were less than 15% loss on hp and torque. So it is BETTER than advertised.

Yeah as others have said 15% is pretty typical for a 4WD truck. Especially one spinning big heavy wheels/tires.

Once you put a super charger on it with a tune and labor you could have bought a 6.7, just a thought

Missing the point once again. The torque curve is what makes this engine appealing. Speak as someone who owned a v10 in the past that has to run up the mountains at 4000rpm to make any power. Most NA engines today need a lot of RPM to make power which makes them especially miserable off road (low speed) or under high loads.

The dyno test was set up to compare the two trucks. To do this, they selected a transmission gear for each truck that produced a fairly close final drive ratio. This resulted in NEITHER truck producing its max dyno numbers. Had they tried to optimize the results for the new Super Duty, I suspect that its dyno numbers would have been materially higher.

Yall need to research before making a video. Considering the tire size and gear ratio on the truck they tested, those are stout numbers, definitely matching or beating the advertised crank numbers. 4.10 gears and big tires kill dyno numbers.

Impressed by 13.7 avg mpg???

Curious about the mpg now compared to my V8 6.2. I absolutely love my engine and it has been a smooth flawless work horse. Ford made a solid 7.3(Yes I know it's International. But it's in Ford's line up) 5.0 and solid 6.2 gasser. Now a 7.3? Awesome. Wish Ford the best.

I had a 2012 F-150 Ecoboost that I towed a 9500# camper with and did so for many years. I recently sold that truck and bought a new godzilla F-350. The super duty tows more solidly (same camper), doesn't shift as much as the Eco. I am very happy with it. I am talking strictly power, obviously it will tow better as a heavy duty truck, but the new truck has more power, and does less shifting and it doesn't have 1000 miles on it. I think it will get better as it breaks in more.

5 Star Tuning is in South Carolina...it was not tested in Denver!

I would like to see the 7.3L run on the dyno with factory 33’s instead of 35’s.

Is the drivetrian broken in yet? Let's say 360 WHP 410 ft.lbs. 16.3% loss equals 430 SAE HP. Then another 13.7% loss equals HP at the crank/gross HP of 498.

Another thing to note is that Ford (and other manufacturers) always leave some power on the shelf. That way, they can give the engine an obligatory bump of a few HP each year cheaply without changing anything significant. A little change to the intake, tune, etc can incrementally improve the numbers for years. For instance, when the Coyote first came out, Ford knew what it was doing because they cast the DI bosses into the block years before they actually used them. They knew they would need them later. The Coyote has increased from 412hp to 480hp in 9 years with no major redesign and still maintains about the same mpg and better (less) emissions than the 412hp version. I think that's what they're doing here...providing a fresh new engine with reliability that will get incremental bumps in hp and torque for years to come.

Review the 2019 ram 6.4hemi with the new 8speed

Roman's right, Nathan's wrong.

Everyone forgets meeting epa might have something to do with it. Same reason the 8.l1 vortec was low power. Choked up to meet sound and emission restrictions.

Too many people fixated on the dyno numbers. We already know the 7.3l is rated to tow thousands more than the 6.2l. That’s what matters to me.

That 2020 7.3 is a Tremor with different wheels and tires, maybe a disadvantage for that particular truck?

Forgot to talk about it being a natural aspirated engine at altitude

Everyone tends to forget all the Nannys new vehicles have. Tuned to keep traction and constant power instead of just burning out the tires. Turn of traction control, stability, see the difference on any truck

My favorite quote which reflects reality more often than not: "You're wrong because I paid $55K for this."

It’s stupid that the EPA doesn’t rate heavy duty trucks. If anything heavy duty users/commercial users care more about fuel economy than half-ton truck users.

Nathan also likes the #Titan....consider that....NateDawg you are wrong

You guys are killing me! No one gets by with only a 10% loss of power through a heavy duty drivetrain. A loss of 15% is more feasible. Then you add in the 35” tires on the Tremor and you increase rotational mass, thus reducing numbers at the wheel even further... Then there’s also the fact that they explained very well, you can’t get accurate numbers if you can’t use the optimal gear. They were hitting the limiter at 95mph. All of those things will effect numbers in a negative way. With the proper gear and with smaller tires they’d probably pick up significant hp and tq! You guys are car/truck guys?! Honestly?

I am getting 15.7MPG with my 2019 6.4L 2500 RAM Laramie, and I paid $10k less than a similar equipped Ford F250. I don't get how Ford justifies the price for their trucks.

Nathan, please do some research on typical driveline losses. I like your channels, but when your arguments are this false you just loose credibility for your brand. I love the “no your wrong” segments. But let’s be wrong about the opinion and not the science.

Should be called Gaszilla

The power losses in that Dyno pull are completely normal and in line with a HD pickup. Ford designed this engine with a pretty broad sprad of applications, INCLUDING their medium duty Trucks, where reliability with employee drivers holding the thing to the wood up a grade are de rigour... If anyone paid attention when they revealed this new engine, it's got forged internals and heads that look like they potentially can flow a LOT of air. I predict it will be a Hot Rodder's dream for those wanting more power in their play trucks, and be an economical, reliable servant in guys work trucks.

The 7.3 was designed to go into Ford's medium duty trucks as well and Ford has done a lot of marketing and research on the commercial truck side. There are plenty of fleets that don't necessarily need all the power of a diesel and can't justify the cost of buying and maintaining a diesel.

Good info,I agree it's a first year production. Give Ford time too bring a muscle option on the 7.3.Im sure Rousch will have performance parts available soon.

I'd love to see this engine in a F150!

I get its meant to be a fight. But Nathan should probably get real data. 16% drivetrain loss is completely normal. Hell some vehicles 20% is normal. 10% lmao show a vehicle with that little. Also something none of them mentioned they didn't even get a full pull and they weren't in a 1:1 gear so the numbers could change a lot if you actually get a full pull in a 1:1 gear ratio

Roughly 15% loss through a 10 speed and a transfer case is great! The old standard was 15% for manual and 20% for autos back in the day. I think this motor is exactly what it needs to be