2017 Duramax Dyno Numbers

goducks10 wrote:

4x4ord wrote:
Something seems wrong with those numbers but I do think the 2017 Duramax will blow the doors off the 2017 Powerstroke. I find it exciting to see the manufacturers take a proven engine and beef it up to make it even tougher and more powerful. I think it is likely that the 2017 Powerstroke is designed to handle much more torque than what it is currently tuned to deliver. Is the Cummins scheduled for a redesign for 2019?

FCA is broke, so no redesign on the horizon.

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2016/12/2018-ram-2500-3500-redesign-delayed.html

Where in the article did it say they were broke? And why do they need an update anyways? The Ram is only a what, 4 or 5 year old platform that Ford just finally caught up with. And how long was it that Ford went without a major redesign? Unless you want to discuss engines, and I see no need in going there as that debacle is well known.

Wow! 400+ and almost 900, at the wheels?
Pure awesomeness out of a pickup truck!

The fact that the dyno is producing 90.5% of rated engine HP is very impressive. But when the same dyno run is saying peak torque is 96.6% of rated engine torque it makes me wonder if the dyno is displaying the correct rpm? 90.5% of the rated engine torque would be a more believable 824 lbft.

All manufacturers understate the numbers somewhat. There are manufacturing differences so not all the engines will put out the same numbers. If someone tests an engine and it does not put out the advertised numbers they could sue for false advertising. So there is some understatement to cover the differences.

Like others are saying, all these trucks have more power than I need.

IdaD wrote:
The smartest thing they did was dumping the crappy fuel pump.
...

One of the reasons we went RAM/Cummins was 'cause we're often buying suspect diesel in small, remote towns.

Hopefully the new Denso fuel pump will be more robust than the Bosch CP4. But does it have the track record of the old CP3 in the RAM? If it's been used successfully in 3rd world Toyotas then it can probably handle remote Northern Canada diesel.

Can someone who knows something about these chassis dynos comment. I've never actually seen a chassis dyno. I'm betting the horsepower number of 403 is meaningful. The torque and rpm numbers though are probably torque and rpm of the dyno's rollers...not adjusted to represent engine rpm??? So the 880 lbft of torque is really meaningless without knowing what the roller rpm to engine rpm ratio is.

What they should have posted was back to back 2016 run and 2017 run.

And one can pick apart dynos as well. 2 dynos, different conditions, etc, etc,etc.
Either way, we all know there's more than a 4% loss from crank to pavement.
So either, it's a rigged test ( we can open the popcorn bar up on that one) or GM was/is conservative in their ratings and that Dmax is a powerhouse!

"Is the Cummins scheduled for a redesign for 2019?"

Yes, a top dog at the Cummins Factory told me she was working on the 19 Cummins and she said it will be the 6.7. From what I have read the 19's will have ALL emissions down stream of the engine. That alone is supposed to bump power by 10 percent.

19 is the 100 yr anniversary for Cummins and the 30 yr anniversary for Cummins/RAM.

Cummins12V98 wrote:
"...
19 is the 100 yr anniversary for Cummins and the 30 yr anniversary for Cummins/RAM.

Please remind me to send a card when it gets closer!