Battle of the heavy weights

Me Again wrote:
Wonder why Duramax's and Powerstroke's are not common in marine use? Not enough cast iron and to much aluminum? High cost to tool the aluminum parts as cast iron. No aluminum heads on Cummins engines.

LMAO, why is cast iron so important to you? Jimmy had aluminum engines in the 50's. And we are talking about blocks. And you don't think we can do it now days? :h

Reminds me of when the DMax first came out the "other brand" people said the heads were going to melt. :R

Me Again wrote:

And you will never see it in marine use! Chris

I think the marine use issue is what's called a non-sequitur (unless somebody is pulling a TT behind a boat). One could also ask how many Cummins are seen in locomotive use. What's the difference?

I kinda wish someone would put a Cat under the hood of a pickup.

larry barnhart wrote:
Cummins makes engines for many things so the company can build enough engines to supply their buyers. Maybe ford and GM cannot make enough engines for marine use. Just thinking without knowledge. New V-8 cummins has put out information it will be aluminum heads.
chevman

And you will never see it in marine use! Chris

Cummins makes engines for many things so the company can build enough engines to supply their buyers. Maybe ford and GM cannot make enough engines for marine use. Just thinking without knowledge. New V-8 cummins has put out information it will be aluminum heads.
chevman

Hannibal wrote:
boat engines gas and diesel would never make it.

Boat engines are always going up hill and never get to cost down the other side. Of the engines we are talk about, which ones do duty in boats???

That is right a hand full of 7.3 PS made it to boats and thousand and thousand for B series Cummins. My boat has two 4BT150's Cummins. The same as the 6 cylinder short changed by 2 jugs.

These engines run hour after hour at 200 RPM below max rated RPM with an allowance of a certain time period every 8 hours to be ran at full rated RPM. I believe mine are 1 hour in 8, but it has been a while since I read the manual on that.

Wonder why Duramax's and Powerstroke's are not common in marine use? Not enough cast iron and to much aluminum? High cost to tool the aluminum parts as cast iron. No aluminum heads on Cummins engines.

I-6's will not win races with like HP V8's. But for years most of the high HP modded engines were Cummins. I watched Lenny's Cummins at Dyno-Mite Diesel on the rollers put down just under 900HP and 1400+ TQ, with sparks come off the rollers. And that was way back in the summer of 2005.

Same day my factory rated 235hp/460tq at the crank did this at the rear wheels. After this run I changed turbo's and fix the throttle not opening all the way. And this is a mild bomb with time box and stage 1 injectors. It is around 325/650 now times 1.14-1.17 for crank readings.
http://myplace.frontier.com/~goedmonds/id19.html

Why do they not run them on the dyno first, so we can see what they brought to the test.

That's it, no more road test until each truck is dyno'd at close to what we walk in and buy!

Chris

45Ricochet wrote:
That's funny Troy, I smoked a PSD 6.7 also with my little 5.9. I said it so it must be true :H
Disclaimer: not stock
Enough of the "self proclaimed" comments. I'm sure you have video capabilities on that Galaxy S4 or IPhone :B
How did Ronnie put it, Trust but Verify or something like that :W

LOL, the poor guy in the Dodge didn't even know he was in a race with Troy! :B

45Ricochet wrote:
That's funny Troy, I smoked a PSD 6.7 also with my little 5.9. I said it so it must be true :H
Disclaimer: not stock
Enough of the "self proclaimed" comments. I'm sure you have video capabilities on that Galaxy S4 or IPhone :B
How did Ronnie put it, Trust but Verify or something like that :W

I have a hard time believing that Rick!

Trust only God... Everyone else show me data! :W

That's funny Troy, I smoked a PSD 6.7 also with my little 5.9. I said it so it must be true :H
Disclaimer: not stock
Enough of the "self proclaimed" comments. I'm sure you have video capabilities on that Galaxy S4 or IPhone :B
How did Ronnie put it, Trust but Verify or something like that :W

Guys come on... we all know the truth... Tonka > GM > RAM > Ford

Lessmore wrote:

ib516 wrote:
The fact is, Ford likely tested their current truck against the new 850tq Cummins powered RAM, realized they would get spanked in the next magazine test, so redesigned and re-engineered the 6.7L diesel to be put in their "2015" model, and ran a few tests. Then they realized that their next model will "beat" the competition's current model :S so they made up a little commercial.

It's good advertising. What kind of an automaker would spend all that time and money to film a commercial unless they "won"? If the 2013 or 2014 version of the 6.7L diesel Ford offers could "beat" the competition, they would have ran that in their ad. What I take from that is that they came up short. I also take that the 2015 Superduty powerplant is likely harder on fuel but produces more power than the 2013 Cummins engine. I also think that the Ford with a 4.30 axle and uprated, but not available engine will "beat" the competitions 3.73 and 4.10 behind engines that are available. That is also a :S "no duh" moment.

Sometimes what is not there is just as important as what is there.

"Sometimes what is not there is just as important as what is there."

Sounds like something Sherlock Holmes would say.:)

I agree with you regarding the scenario you have outlined.

Think you're right on the money.

Skillful bit of PR and advertising by Ford.

Hang tight I'm sure Ford has more to offer than this small preview of what's to come. Again nothing trivial, but spin it how ever you like.

And to the other comment about being spanked, I raced a '13 2500 RAM with my '12 Ford (unloaded) and I smoked him. In addition I drove some '13 RAM's and the power is literally behind my Ford.

To summarize this test IMO is a truck that is the fasted up the hill towing a trailer, represents the truck that will tow that weight up the hill with the least effort. :W