Ike Gauntlet 2017 3500s DRW 22,800# load

ShinerBock wrote:

4x4ord wrote:


The truck with the flattest power curve and most torque did the poorest..... this really doesn't make sense. The gear ratios of the TorqShift along with the flat power curve of the Powerstroke should have been able to keep the engine rpm at a level where it produces more HP than the peak horsepower of the Cummins at any point on the hill. No matter how you look at it things don't add up. Even at 2200 rpm the Powerstroke should be producing 380 HP. If the manufactures' HP and torque ratings are honest the Cummins could be coupled to an infinite speed transmission and still wouldn't keep up.

My statement agreeing with travelnutz was more of a general statement regarding HP and Torque, and not about the Ike Test.

In regards to the Ike test, I agree that it is a bit of a head scratcher that the Ford had the slowest time with it's power rating. I know that Ford and Cummins use different SAE methods in determining their power ratings so their numbers really should not be seen as apples to apples.

The DPF on the Ford could have been clogged up or creating more back-pressure than the Ram. Another thing I could think that happened would be if the Ford defueled due to high exhaust temps which in turn would lower its power output. To my knowledge, only Ram with its Active Air and GM with its hood scoop have a way of pulling air from the front of the truck which would have an impact on exhaust gas temps.

I seriously doubt the Ford defueled as it would have been clearly noticeable, but it is possible it was in regen.

"What most people dont understand is that the two V8's in this test have higher hp ratings that the mighty I6 but they get those numbers through RPM"


Lets take a look at the spes.

Ram 6.7 385 hp @ 2800 rpm
900 ft/lbs @ 1700 rpm

Ford 6.7 440 hp @ 2800 rpm
925 ft/lbs @ 1800 rpm

Duramax 445 hp @2800 rpm
910 ft/lbs @1600 rpm.

If anything I would say the Duramax is able to make the most power across the rpm range with lower rpms than the Ram or Ford.

Interesting all three make the max hp at the same rpm.


"The truck with the flattest power curve and most torque did the poorest..... this really doesn't make sense."

I believe even though not popular belief the Duramax has the flattest power curve of the three.

After owning two trucks with AAM rear axles, I'd take the 15 second penalty and enjoy the ride.

Lessmore wrote:
Chevies have always been known for outstanding power...all starting back in 1955 with the introduction of the legendary small block Chevy V8. Power and lots of it...has been a bow tie tradition in both gas and diesel engines over the years.

So no....not at all...nope.... I'm not surprised that Chevy came first and Ford was at the tail end.

Some say horse power is horsepower....but in my humble opinion horses are rated differently....there are Shetland horses (blue oval) and then there are Clydesdale's (bow tie). :B

All I can say...is it is a good thing that the Chevy was 'hobbled' with 3.73's to the Ford's 4.10's....or could you imagine what the Chevy times would of been.

Remind my again why these trucks are only pulling 22,800#s? :B

Chevies have always been known for outstanding power...all starting back in 1955 with the introduction of the legendary small block Chevy V8. Power and lots of it...has been a bow tie tradition in both gas and diesel engines over the years.

So no....not at all...nope.... I'm not surprised that Chevy came first and Ford was at the tail end.

Some say horse power is horsepower....but in my humble opinion horses are rated differently....there are Shetland horses (blue oval) and then there are Clydesdale's (bow tie). :B

All I can say...is it is a good thing that the Chevy was 'hobbled' with 3.73's to the Ford's 4.10's....or could you imagine what the Chevy times would of been.

4x4ord wrote:


The truck with the flattest power curve and most torque did the poorest..... this really doesn't make sense. The gear ratios of the TorqShift along with the flat power curve of the Powerstroke should have been able to keep the engine rpm at a level where it produces more HP than the peak horsepower of the Cummins at any point on the hill. No matter how you look at it things don't add up. Even at 2200 rpm the Powerstroke should be producing 380 HP. If the manufactures' HP and torque ratings are honest the Cummins could be coupled to an infinite speed transmission and still wouldn't keep up.

My statement agreeing with travelnutz was more of a general statement regarding HP and Torque, and not about the Ike Test.

In regards to the Ike test, I agree that it is a bit of a head scratcher that the Ford had the slowest time with it's power rating. I know that Ford and Cummins use different SAE methods in determining their power ratings so their numbers really should not be seen as apples to apples.

The DPF on the Ford could have been clogged up or creating more back-pressure than the Ram. Another thing I could think that happened would be if the Ford defueled due to high exhaust temps which in turn would lower its power output. To my knowledge, only Ram with its Active Air and GM with its hood scoop have a way of pulling air from the front of the truck which would have an impact on exhaust gas temps.

Cummins12V98 wrote:

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.

A little late to the party! Things have been scrubbed from this thread you don't see. I was KIDDING Fish because he always has something to say. Guess I should have added a smiley face.

Have a good day!

I actually like cummins9812V comments and he generally has a good attitude. :B

I wonder if all three trucks were meeting emission requirements while the tests were being conducted. I suppose the more sophisticated engines might back the fuel off slightly if the turbo is not maintaining a high enough level of boost at the high elevation? Just a thought....

"What most people dont understand is that the two V8's in this test have higher hp ratings that the mighty I6 but they get those numbers through RPM. If you don't have enough torque on the ground to get you to those higher RPM the hp numbers make no difference. I would love to see them do that same test with a Ram with 3.42 gearing. Other than taking a little longer to get up to speed i would bet it would be extremely close on average speed climbing the hill."

Since they start the timer at a rollin specified speed based on my experience owning 3.42's performing very well and in 5th the RPM's are very close to my current AISIN/4.10 combo in 6th. I think the results would be virtually identical for the RAM or very close. Some grades my old 3.42 truck out performed and some underperformed towing 29K compared to 4.10's towing 33K. No expert here but different gears with different ration at different speeds gave me mixed results.

4x4ord wrote:
I wonder if the trucks performance is based on the manufacturers advertising budget? Why would the Ford pull a 30,000 lb trailer up the hill a minute faster than the Ram and now with a lighter trailer it can't keep up? Why can't the new Duramax blow the doors off the old one?

All good points! I was very surprised the RAM was not way behind.