F350 Super Duty vs 3500 Denali vs The Ike Pulling 30k lbs

4x4ord wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:

4x4ord wrote:
If the GM had performed the way it should have people would have making excuses for why the Ford took so long getting to the top. Probably someone would have been blaming the turbo.

That is probably because the turbo and intake system plays a huge factor in how much power a diesel can make and sustain. If you put different turbos on the exact same engine/drivetrain and take it up the Ike, the results may be vastly different depending on how diverse the turbos and the intake systems are.

What I'm getting at is had the GM not had issues it would have run up the mountain in under 10 minutes. It really should have beaten the Ford. Had that happened fingers would have been pointing at why Ford's 475 HP engine couldn't keep up with a 445 hp Duramax.

And pointing to the turbo and intake system would be a legitimate argument since it is this system that dictates how much of that 475 hp or 445 hp is lost at altitude. People tend to think that the amount of power a turbocharged engine looses is static with all turbocharged engines. It is not and it depends on the turbo configuration. Some configurations may loose more than others or get hotter sooner because of overspeeding not allowing it to sustain the power levels. Some may be more effected to outside temps and others may not meaning that if the temps were higher(say 80F) then the GM could likely do just slightly worse while the Ford does significantly worse. I am not saying this is or will be the case, I am just using it as an example.