350 HP ICE vs. 350 HP Diesel?

well he did say 18000lbs that includes what hes pulling?

OK........Gas-Diesel. What we want is a amount of work done, in a short amount of time, right? Most of us can do 10,000 hp of work, if given enough time. But we want it NOW. Look at same displacement size gas and diesel engines. They are not the same weight or size. The diesel is much heaver, and larger, because it has to be to live while producing the required power. Can a smaller engine do the same amount of work as a large one, sure, but you must either take more time to do it, or consume more fuel to do the same work. Then you must increase the structural size of the smaller engine to produce the required power, and still give an acceptable longevity. Remember the old saying, "there is not substitute for cubic inches". Its the same for gas or diesel. Dead Bang! Someone mentioned the Ford 537 CI engine as a MH engine. The reason that ford quit making it is it was not dependable. The machine shop I usually used, had a lot of these engines go through the shop. I asked if this would make a good hot rod engine, and was told it doesn't even make a good boat anchor. It was to be a good suburban truck engine, but it didn't hold up at all, and was very expensive to rebuild. For those poking Davenet, I would not poke the Bear, as you do not know what his MH weights, or what his engine can, and will do. Just say-in.

dubdub07 wrote:
Not me, an engineer. I prefer gas over diesel as well, when I am driving to work. I couldn't wait to get rid of my HEAVY diesel HD truck and get the HEMI instead. Drove an Ecoboost and I agree, it is a great truck. Little hot rod motor, the 3.5L. Loved it, just liked the RAM interior better (and the HEMI performs pretty dang close to the Ford, with less MPGS). When it comes to climbing the mountains, the reality is my 45mph up 7-8% @ 37,000lbs passes all heavy pulling gassers....and a few Subaru's!

So apparently it IS the fuel, and the turbo.

Bill

You need to get out of that pickup and try a VW Passat TDI! Then your mind might change your mind. Or shall we call it contempt prior to investigation?

And Ecoboost??? One Ecoboost was enough for my son. Every time it saw a hill, it just plain laid down and quit! After the Lemon Law claim, he will never buy one again. Oh, he won big time!!! The problem appears to be solved on the new ones, but time will tell.

Oh, and it isn't just the fuel and the turbo. A properly tuned cam is critical.

dubdub07 wrote:
Towing, the ecoboost does not achieve the same mpg numbers a diesel does. The longevity of a diesel is of little consequence as most don't put more that 100-200k on their MHs anyway. So it boils down to getting up the hill, because these arguements are null for flatland. Going up a grade, 6% and higher, a diesel is going to be the better choice. RPM, heat, durability, power, efficiency....in what arena is a gasser going to win going up I70 to Eisenhower tunnel? Even these grand new turbocharged gas engines, are they going to give what MHs need? We are comparing a futureistic gas engine with real diesel engines. If technology for gas is getting that much better, wouldn't the diesel technology become better as well?

Bill

To answer the question in bold : Horsepower and cost of ownership.

To answer the question about technology and the diesel engine: 2 things...

First, the EPA is now beating down the diesels like they did the gas engine many years ago. The Diesel tech does still get better however as there is definitely a push for more and more HP in the light duty truck market. Durability and efficiency seem to be taking a hit there. Interesting how it mirrors what happened to gas engines starting decades ago.

Second, diesel owners already think that they have the best engines all around so there is no need for improvement. :D

hardtobe wrote:
We are very close to having a gas turbo that will perform and have the durability that the diesel has had. ?????

that will take the place of a 9L 450HP 1250ft lbs torgue in a 38000+++ pusher??
I seriously doubt that

We will see. I think he is talking about the success of the ford Ecoboost V6 in the F150. That little 3.5L puts out 365hp and 420 Lbs/ft of Torque. That's more power than Cat was putting in some very large and heavy busses many years ago and somehow they managed. I can't imagine the power possibilities if they are able to produce similar engines with more displacement.

A lot of people (Myself included) are skeptical about the long term durability of a twin turbo gas engine in a heavy towing application. Some of those F150s with the Max Tow have pretty high GCWR and it will be interesting to see how they fare from people who regularly run them hard.

Towing, the ecoboost does not achieve the same mpg numbers a diesel does. The longevity of a diesel is of little consequence as most don't put more that 100-200k on their MHs anyway. So it boils down to getting up the hill, because these arguements are null for flatland. Going up a grade, 6% and higher, a diesel is going to be the better choice. RPM, heat, durability, power, efficiency....in what arena is a gasser going to win going up I70 to Eisenhower tunnel? Even these grand new turbocharged gas engines, are they going to give what MHs need? We are comparing a futureistic gas engine with real diesel engines. If technology for gas is getting that much better, wouldn't the diesel technology become better as well?

Bill

We are very close to having a gas turbo that will perform and have the durability that the diesel has had. ?????

that will take the place of a 9L 450HP 1250ft lbs torgue in a 38000+++ pusher??
I seriously doubt that

It is the turbo when comparing performance. A gas and diesel with same displacement and no turbo, the gas will outperform a diesel period.

As for efficiency with diesel running much more expensive than gas today a non turbo diesel will cost as much if not more than a gas engine.

Put a turbo on both and the operating costs will be very close with todays fuel pricing.

We are very close to having a gas turbo that will perform and have the durability that the diesel has had.

dubdub07 wrote:

OhhWell wrote:

BillMFl wrote:
The diesel also does much better at high altitude than a gas engine, but many rvs seldom make it to the Rockies.

That's the Turbo again, not the fuel type.

Here is a quote for you....

"Diesel fuel is one of the most efficient and energy dense fuels available today. Because it contains more usable energy than gasoline, it delivers better fuel economy."

Not me, an engineer. I prefer gas over diesel as well, when I am driving to work. I couldn't wait to get rid of my HEAVY diesel HD truck and get the HEMI instead. Drove an Ecoboost and I agree, it is a great truck. Little hot rod motor, the 3.5L. Loved it, just liked the RAM interior better (and the HEMI performs pretty dang close to the Ford, with less MPGS). When it comes to climbing the mountains, the reality is my 45mph up 7-8% @ 37,000lbs passes all heavy pulling gassers....and a few Subaru's!

So apparently it IS the fuel, and the turbo.

Bill

I was specifically referring to the high altitude part which is completely due to the forced induction.

OhhWell wrote:

BillMFl wrote:
The diesel also does much better at high altitude than a gas engine, but many rvs seldom make it to the Rockies.

That's the Turbo again, not the fuel type.

Here is a quote for you....

"Diesel fuel is one of the most efficient and energy dense fuels available today. Because it contains more usable energy than gasoline, it delivers better fuel economy."

Not me, an engineer. I prefer gas over diesel as well, when I am driving to work. I couldn't wait to get rid of my HEAVY diesel HD truck and get the HEMI instead. Drove an Ecoboost and I agree, it is a great truck. Little hot rod motor, the 3.5L. Loved it, just liked the RAM interior better (and the HEMI performs pretty dang close to the Ford, with less MPGS). When it comes to climbing the mountains, the reality is my 45mph up 7-8% @ 37,000lbs passes all heavy pulling gassers....and a few Subaru's!

So apparently it IS the fuel, and the turbo.

Bill