Horsepower is horsepower?
If that theory is true (in real circumstances), then a 385hp 6.7L Cummins diesel shouldn't spank a 381hp Toyota Tundra when both are tested 0-60 towing a 5740# boat. But it did. Must be the adva...
Forum Discussion
wilber1 wrote:
These discussions always result in comparing power and torque curves of normally aspirated gas engines to turbo diesels and making it about gas vs diesel. The diesels real advantage is efficiency, not how it makes power, particularly now that many gas engines are also using high pressure common rail direct injection.
When the subject of reliability comes up, it then becomes "ya but that would never work for long haul trucking". The goal posts keep moving. Who knows how reliable the gasser would be if it was built like a long haul diesel, but then you would have an engine that cost as much to build as the diesel but much less less efficient, so why would anyone do that.
With the present state of the art, efficiency is the diesel's ace in the hole over DI boosted gas engines, not how they deliver power.
It's kind of interesting that the compression ratios of Mazda's Skyactive world gas and diesel engines are the same 14:1. Who thought that would ever happen.
I don't think it's as much the efficiency of the motor as it is the available power in each fuel. The diesel is built heavier to withstand the power of the fuel not necessarily built for the long haul. Just so happens you get one with the other. Even the HD truck engines are built lighter than the long haul trucks because they don't produce as much power (torque)
