Forum Discussion
- I love it. I have been waiting for that! The comforts of my wife's Armada and a nicely powered diesel with very comparable weight/power ratio. I won't be trading or selling my CTD Ram anytime soon, but I would gladly fork up for a newer truck of that makeup and give it a solid chance at a long life in my garage.
- Say, that's one nice grocery getter Turtle N Peeps! :B
Turtle n Peeps wrote:
Fish wrote:
Just out of curiosity what did you race that cummins with?
32 Chevy with a 572. I ran a 9.6 and he ran a 9.4 with his coolant acting as water injection. :W
My point with the head bolt deal was this: I have never seen a diesel with 4 head bolts last. Some others may know of one but I don't. They all had head sealing issues even bone stock. That's why Ford got away from the stupid 6.0/6.4 four bolt design when they went with their own engine design. "Ford" got it right this time "with this issue". No sealing issues with their 6.7 at all. In all fairness, same goes for the other two. Funny when they go to a more than 4 bolt design the sealing issues go away.
Will this engine be the one that breaks the rule? I don't know? Cummins has a dam good design team but even the best make mistakes and cut too many corners sometimes.
I'm also not a big fan of chains to drive things after seeing what happen to my 6.5 chain. It was junk, and I do mean JUNK at 130K. And this is a heavy OEM chain. Look what is happing to the Ecoboost timing chains. Again, more problems with stupid chains and this is with a super light duty engine let alone a big diesel engine with heavy valves and high valve spring pressure.
Can Cummins design around these issues? I sure hope, so but there is no way in hell I would be a test monkey on a 50 grand bet on the table. There is a lot of gamblers with a lot of money on this forum. I'm not one of them. :)
I like that '32 Chevy. And it halls balls too! :Brjstractor wrote:
This article ref a Tundra Cummins V8 was posted quite a while ago. Not a peep out of Toyota since this rumor started back in late 2013, early 2014. Very seriously doubt it's gonna happen.kw/00 wrote:
Looks like you'll likely get your wish. Hopefully Toyota will too produce a truck with decent payload. Here's my source
I wished that engine was available to other brands of trucks such as Toyota. The Nissan has never caught my eye and frankly its not a truck that I would buy. However it would be nice in a Tundra. Or if GM got going on the rumored 4.5 duramax for the 1/2 tons that would fit the bill for a lot of RV 1/2 ton owners. Regardless I can see a lot of sales for Nissan due to the engine alone, good move on there part.
IMO, Nissan beat Toyota to the punch with the 5.0 Cummins V8 with the help of Fred Diaz (former Ram CEO) who jumped ship from Ram to Nissan a few years back.
Toyota's operating philosophy is so, so conservative it's painful--lol! On the plus side, there is a perception that Toyota vehicles are more reliable given their reluctance to make big dramatic changes.Fish wrote:
Just out of curiosity what did you race that cummins with?
32 Chevy with a 572. I ran a 9.6 and he ran a 9.4 with his coolant acting as water injection. :W
My point with the head bolt deal was this: I have never seen a diesel with 4 head bolts last. Some others may know of one but I don't. They all had head sealing issues even bone stock. That's why Ford got away from the stupid 6.0/6.4 four bolt design when they went with their own engine design. "Ford" got it right this time "with this issue". No sealing issues with their 6.7 at all. In all fairness, same goes for the other two. Funny when they go to a more than 4 bolt design the sealing issues go away.
Will this engine be the one that breaks the rule? I don't know? Cummins has a dam good design team but even the best make mistakes and cut too many corners sometimes.
I'm also not a big fan of chains to drive things after seeing what happen to my 6.5 chain. It was junk, and I do mean JUNK at 130K. And this is a heavy OEM chain. Look what is happing to the Ecoboost timing chains. Again, more problems with stupid chains and this is with a super light duty engine let alone a big diesel engine with heavy valves and high valve spring pressure.
Can Cummins design around these issues? I sure hope, so but there is no way in hell I would be a test monkey on a 50 grand bet on the table. There is a lot of gamblers with a lot of money on this forum. I'm not one of them. :)Turtle n Peeps wrote:
FishOnOne wrote:
Turtle n Peeps wrote:
FishOnOne wrote:
jus2shy wrote:
Surprised that the final mass is 800 lbs. That's pretty darn good. Also surprised that on another video, they stated payload of the Titan XD to be north of 2,000 lbs. So that payload and 12k towing is perfect for those that want a smaller 5'er or travel trailer. I think Nissan has targeted the right group. I also love how simplistic the compound turbo setup is. The turbo assembly only has 4 moving parts counting the wastegate, M2 turbine nozzle, and the turbine/compressor wheel assemblies for both turbos. Far more elegant than International's attempt with the VG turbo and large fixed turbo. Hopefully it works out in the real world as well.
Surprised Cummins used only 4 head bolts per cylinder and all that chain on the front of that engine is crazy.
What's wrong with 4 head bolts per cylinder? Ford ok'ed the use of that design in all of the 6.0 engines that went in their trucks. GM also had only 4 bolts/ cylinder in their 5.7 diesel and it was.....
Oh.............hmmmmmmm..........I see your point now! :B
As far as the mile long chain goes; what's wrong with that? Again Ford used that design with their Ecoboost and they had............... oh...........hmmmmmmmm...........I again see your point. :B
FYI you can have 6 head bolts/cylinder and still have head gaskets blow... i.e. 6.7 cummins.
I totally agree.....................when you put 100 lbs of boost to it!!!! Pop goes the weasel!!!
Last weekend I raced this old Cummins with a bunch of real nice head studs holding the head down. Guess what happened? Yep, pop goes the weasel!!! Or in this case, the head gasket. :B I don't know how much boost he was running on my run but a few weeks ago it was 147 LBS!!!! :E
As far as the chain goes. My chain was JUNK on my 6.5 diesel at 130K. And this engine still had cross hatch marks in the bores and the lower end bearings looked like brand new. The heavy valve spring pressures and the HPFP load just eats these things up. Anybody know what the heavy duty option for the 6.5 diesel was to drive the cam? Yep, gear to gear.
There is a reason heavy duty diesels go with gear to gear and stay away from chains. Chains are for bicycles! :B
Don't confuse a 5.9 cummins vs a 6.7 cummins for head gasket failure. But I do agree the 5.9 can take a lot of abuse as long a the deck and head are perfectly flat with robust clamping.
Just out of curiosity what did you race that cummins with?FishOnOne wrote:
Turtle n Peeps wrote:
FishOnOne wrote:
jus2shy wrote:
Surprised that the final mass is 800 lbs. That's pretty darn good. Also surprised that on another video, they stated payload of the Titan XD to be north of 2,000 lbs. So that payload and 12k towing is perfect for those that want a smaller 5'er or travel trailer. I think Nissan has targeted the right group. I also love how simplistic the compound turbo setup is. The turbo assembly only has 4 moving parts counting the wastegate, M2 turbine nozzle, and the turbine/compressor wheel assemblies for both turbos. Far more elegant than International's attempt with the VG turbo and large fixed turbo. Hopefully it works out in the real world as well.
Surprised Cummins used only 4 head bolts per cylinder and all that chain on the front of that engine is crazy.
What's wrong with 4 head bolts per cylinder? Ford ok'ed the use of that design in all of the 6.0 engines that went in their trucks. GM also had only 4 bolts/ cylinder in their 5.7 diesel and it was.....
Oh.............hmmmmmmm..........I see your point now! :B
As far as the mile long chain goes; what's wrong with that? Again Ford used that design with their Ecoboost and they had............... oh...........hmmmmmmmm...........I again see your point. :B
FYI you can have 6 head bolts/cylinder and still have head gaskets blow... i.e. 6.7 cummins.
I totally agree.....................when you put 100 lbs of boost to it!!!! Pop goes the weasel!!!
Last weekend I raced this old Cummins with a bunch of real nice head studs holding the head down. Guess what happened? Yep, pop goes the weasel!!! Or in this case, the head gasket. :B I don't know how much boost he was running on my run but a few weeks ago it was 147 LBS!!!! :E
As far as the chain goes. My chain was JUNK on my 6.5 diesel at 130K. And this engine still had cross hatch marks in the bores and the lower end bearings looked like brand new. The heavy valve spring pressures and the HPFP load just eats these things up. Anybody know what the heavy duty option for the 6.5 diesel was to drive the cam? Yep, gear to gear.
There is a reason heavy duty diesels go with gear to gear and stay away from chains. Chains are for bicycles! :Bjus2shy wrote:
FishOnOne wrote:
Surprised Cummins used only 4 head bolts per cylinder and all that chain on the front of that engine is crazy.
Huh, did not catch that. Good eye. As for the head lift issue and popped gaskets, it was my understanding that occurred mostly on deleted and tuned vehicles. Haven't read of a head gasket failure on a 13 and up stock truck or many other stock 6.7 engines from previous years.
For chain drive, makes sense for overhead cam engines. Just about all overhead cam engines are chain driven, and given the lower operating rpm of a diesel, it will probably last a good long time before needing service. I do prefer gear drive though. I'll download an owners manual as soon as they come out and see if it is a service item just out of curiosity.
I'm more concerned what the oil dilution (especially when running bio diesel) will have on the long term reliability of the chains and the plastic tensioners.FishOnOne wrote:
Surprised Cummins used only 4 head bolts per cylinder and all that chain on the front of that engine is crazy.
Huh, did not catch that. Good eye. As for the head lift issue and popped gaskets, it was my understanding that occurred mostly on deleted and tuned vehicles. Haven't read of a head gasket failure on a 13 and up stock truck or many other stock 6.7 engines from previous years.
For chain drive, makes sense for overhead cam engines. Just about all overhead cam engines are chain driven, and given the lower operating rpm of a diesel, it will probably last a good long time before needing service. I do prefer gear drive though. I'll download an owners manual as soon as they come out and see if it is a service item just out of curiosity.Turtle n Peeps wrote:
FishOnOne wrote:
jus2shy wrote:
Surprised that the final mass is 800 lbs. That's pretty darn good. Also surprised that on another video, they stated payload of the Titan XD to be north of 2,000 lbs. So that payload and 12k towing is perfect for those that want a smaller 5'er or travel trailer. I think Nissan has targeted the right group. I also love how simplistic the compound turbo setup is. The turbo assembly only has 4 moving parts counting the wastegate, M2 turbine nozzle, and the turbine/compressor wheel assemblies for both turbos. Far more elegant than International's attempt with the VG turbo and large fixed turbo. Hopefully it works out in the real world as well.
Surprised Cummins used only 4 head bolts per cylinder and all that chain on the front of that engine is crazy.
What's wrong with 4 head bolts per cylinder? Ford ok'ed the use of that design in all of the 6.0 engines that went in their trucks. GM also had only 4 bolts/ cylinder in their 5.7 diesel and it was.....
Oh.............hmmmmmmm..........I see your point now! :B
As far as the mile long chain goes; what's wrong with that? Again Ford used that design with their Ecoboost and they had............... oh...........hmmmmmmmm...........I again see your point. :B
FYI you can have 6 head bolts/cylinder and still have head gaskets blow... i.e. 6.7 cummins.
