Ike Gauntlet 2017 3500s DRW 22,800# load

SouthpawHD wrote:

JustLabs wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:
Thanks for posting

That's all you are going to say????

Any reason for this post, other than to bait someone into an argument?

And you don't consider yourself a troll...lol

You hit the nail on the head! Even after warnings, it doesn't stop with these two.

I'll second that

IdaD wrote:
I haven't watched the video but were these guys running at wide open throttle or were they holding back to stay within the speed limit? If the latter is the case this is meaningless. If the former is the case this is still meaningless because the fastest one is only 15 seconds quicker than the slowest one. Power isn't really a distinguishing quality with these newer diesel trucks and that's been the case for awhile.

I haven't watched the video yet either, but I am pretty sure that it takes 8 minutes to run up at the 60 MPH speed limit.

Me Again,

DUH! HP is merely a theoretical calculation moniker derived from how fast the TORQUE applied to the drive wheels rotates them thus creating measurable RPM. HP is NOT a direct measurable value! Zero torque = Zero RPM and thus Zero HP could even be calculated. Even 1000 lbs feet torque with zero RPM = zero HP. There is Zero RPM if there's insufficient TORQUE to rotate the wheels. HP is merely a theoretical value calculation, not a measured value!

A "horse" does not have a given pulling or rotational strength value as there are vast differences is sizes and pulling strengths of all the various horses. A given size horse's pulling strength can be actually measured but which horse?

The more FORCE (TORQUE) one applies to wheel shaft, the more RPM's it will turn! No where is the word HP used or even involved to make the wheel turn to any RPM's!

TORQUE and RPM are measurable but NOT HP as it's only a theoretical calculation!

Most people on here are not even towing close to 23,000 lbs so who cares ? Pick the one you like and go with it for crying out load. They all have good and bad points and everyone has a personal preference. Who cares what brand truck it is ? If you hook it up to tour camper and get where you are going and back that is all that matters. It isn't a race to the campground. If one brand fits your needs better than that is the correct choice. You can't go wrong with either one. Neither is better than the other, but they are different. I have always been a Gm guy, but I would have no problem driving either with the exception of the cost.

travelnutz wrote:
So obvious that both Ram and Ford are incredibly happy that the GM Duramax truck doesn't offer a 4.10 rear ratio because the gap would be a heck of a lot more than 15 seconds. Maybe even a whole minute + as so much more torque (another 10%) would be delivered to the drive wheels that turns them. Educated people know that it's TORQUE and only TORQUE that turns the drive wheels to the RPM desired or wanted. Higher rotation of the drive wheels means faster velocity of the vehicle as the drive wheel OD's are basically equal on all 3 trucks.

Rear ratios: 4.10 / 3.73 = 1.1 or 10% more torque delivered to the drive wheels. Maybe a little difficult for some of you to comprehend, but try!

Also obvious that GM has no need to offer a 4.10 as it already delivers more rotational force to the drive wheels of it's truck than either Ford or Ram.

Let the uninformed begin their BS rambling now! Just show clearly how much you don't really know or understand!

Read the article that me again posted and maybe you will come to realize that you haven't got a clue .

Highest HP gets to the top first, not torque! Chris

http://www.lainefamily.com/hp.htm

It looks like they need to run the new 445 HP/ 915 lbft Duramax up against the old 397 HP/765 lbft engine.


click

JustLabs wrote:

Cummins12V98 wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:
Thanks for posting

That's all you are going to say????

Any reason for this post, other than to bait someone into an argument?

And you don't consider yourself a troll...lol

You hit the nail on the head! Even after warnings, it doesn't stop with these two.

ib516 wrote:
15 sec over 10 min is only a 2.3 percent difference. So really, pretty insignificant.

I agree. Wouldn't stop me from buying any of the three. I say pick which one you think looks the nicest and you have yourself a nice truck.

So obvious that both Ram and Ford are incredibly happy that the GM Duramax truck doesn't offer a 4.10 rear ratio because the gap would be a heck of a lot more than 15 seconds. Maybe even a whole minute + as so much more torque (another 10%) would be delivered to the drive wheels that turns them. Educated people know that it's TORQUE and only TORQUE that turns the drive wheels to the RPM desired or wanted. Higher rotation of the drive wheels means faster velocity of the vehicle as the drive wheel OD's are basically equal on all 3 trucks.

Rear ratios: 4.10 / 3.73 = 1.1 or 10% more torque delivered to the drive wheels. Maybe a little difficult for some of you to comprehend, but try!

Also obvious that GM has no need to offer a 4.10 as it already delivers more rotational force to the drive wheels of it's truck than either Ford or Ram.

Let the uninformed begin their BS rambling now! Just show clearly how much you don't really know or understand!