Inside the 1,000 lb-ft 6.7L Cummins

ksss wrote:
As these pickups approach or are in the range of Class 8 power specs they clearly are not built that heavy. So something has to give. I don't think this is a Ford, Ram or Gm specific issue but rather one all have to deal with and how they chose and to what degree they insert nannies. There certainly is a need to keep guys from twisting driveshafts and causing the kind of damage you see on big trucks when too much go pedal is added. My ZL1 has 5 different traction control settings that limit wheel spin and engine torque, you can also kill all nannies. Maybe these pickups end up with something similar. The point I want to make was that the specs sheets on all three of these trucks is over the top. Power is not an issue on any of them, but how the power is allowed to be used is what is most important in my view. Having 1200 pound feet of torque but keeping it hamstrung so that you can seldom get at all of it doesn't really help except in advertisements.

If torque management comes into play to prevent the engine from over heating on a 100 degree day climbing a 9% grade with a 30,000 lb trailer it is seldom going to affect me. If it is used during shift points while I'm accelerating hard, I am going to appreciate it. I think many people think torque management means the engine is never allowed to produce its maximum torque in the lower gears which I believe is a wrong understanding of the term.

Edit: Our class 8 is capable of putting out 1650 lb ft of torque at the crank ..... not adjusting for transmission loss that is multiplied to over 23000 lbft out the back of the transmission. Maybe when put in 4 low and considering the torque converter can almost double the torque momentarily my Ford might be able to come up with 15000 lbft not accounting for driveline losses.