Ram 1500 diesel review
First one I've seen, looks like Ram boosted the tq output for bragging rights in the ads....it's now 430 lbs-ft Linky Still not epa rated, but they got 24 mpg in mixed (city and highway) driving...
Forum Discussion
bimbert84 wrote:
I simply don't understand the compulsion to compare these engines at the same RPM. It's like comparing a running back to a wide receiver but never throwing a pass. That's not a deficiency of the wide receiver -- it's a misuse of his abilities. The same is true with running a gas engine at low RPMs when power is needed. Why would you do that?
The entire purpose of the transmission is to put the engine's power to the ground, yet so many people choose to ignore this. A better spreadsheet would be one that shows maximum available power at any given road speed. Do this and you'll find the diesel and gas engines will be running different RPMs (because they'll be using different gears) at the same road speed.
-- Rob
Totally agree with you, except when one specific set of factors are looked at: fuel efficiency and engine longevity.
Theoretically, you can put a 505hp LS7 smallblock into a Peterbilt, and it'll pull as well as a 500hp ISX, given proper gearing. But whereas the ISX gets 6 mpg an lasts 800k miles, the LS7 would be lucky to get 3 mpg and lasts 20k miles (the highest record for all track miles, similar duty cycle to heavy towing).
I've always stated, the day when we have an affordable generator-traction motor setup like locomotives, is the day when the torque vs hp argument will end.
A locomotive doesn't care if it's a diesel with 100,000 lb-ft, or gas turbine with 3000 lb-ft, you deliver 6000 hp, and it'll drag that heavy coal train up the grade!
