The real HP/TQ numbers this is going to hurt!

It wasn't that many years ago 350hp and 900 lbs was considered big power for a semi.

Redwoodcamper wrote:
Give them all EFI live and 250k miles and report back. That's a test we all want to see.

This is why I didn't care about stock power numbers when making my decision. I knew that I was going to tuning my truck no matter what I was getting. A few clicks of my CSP4 switch and I can go from 390 rwhp(level 1) to 513 rwhp(level 4) if I choose to, but I hardly never go past my 450 rwhp(level 2) tune. There is no need to and the truck has pulled my 14k trailer up any grade I have taken it on without falling under the rated speed limit.

I know there is plenty left to be had in a mechanically stock 6.7L Cummins than the stock 370 hp/800 lb-ft. Without changing any hard parts, you can get up to about 513 rwhp/1,105 rwtq. To get above that, then the turbo would have to be replaced for a larger one and deletes. Fuel system is good to about 700 rwhp.

If I calculate for the usual 15% drivetrain loss, the 390 rwhp of my level one tow tune is about 449 hp at the crank which is right at what the current Duramax and Powerstroke had to change turbos or be redesigned to be at.

Tiger02 wrote:
These fellas seem to be fixated on torque much more so than HP. The Ford had almost 50 HP over the Dodge. With torque management and driveline variances it is a wash, even with the Chevy. The GM trucks are the best looking, and if the deal was right they would still get much consideration in my book.

The box that hasn't changed in 20yr is the best looking?

A new HD RAM coming up behind you on the highway w/ parking/cab lights on all cleaned up is about the most intimidating rig I've ever seen - blackout slant nose face lift and all.

They were the first to mold the dually flares into the vehicle, and first to have a MAJOR redesign w/ that ram front end.

Everything else kinda looks like a progression of the same stuff, with larger lights, badges, and grills.


Anyways - yeah anyone that hauls should care more about torque than HP. Especially low-end torque. Ford did a great job optimizing low-end torque on the new 6.7, but the older motors didn't generate torque till much higher. The cummins has always had class-leading low-end torque, which is just a given with a straight-six engine. A good auto trans is ideally-suited to take advantage of that low-end torque. Also why these motors are famous in boats and power-generation.

RCMAN46 wrote:
I believe the GM has won every real world hill climb with stock configuration over the Ram. If there was one they did not win feel free to post a link.

A few seconds difference over many miles of climbing a hill is as meaningless as the number of cup-holders they have. All three trucks could be considered equal in that regard.
But there's much more to towing than that.

BTW, all of those dyno tests are are completely and totally meaningless because the intercoolers are not being utilzed.
Those results mean nothing and aren't even good enough for comparisons.

These numbers mean nothing. Ram was run up to redline on the tach and the other two were not. Everyone knows a inline six builds its power at a lower rpm. Show some real numbers but I still don't think anyone will be hurt.
With all the planned and fake results I believe all three trucks will do the job.

I believe the GM has won every real world hill climb with stock configuration over the Ram. If there was one they did not win feel free to post a link.

Give them all EFI live and 250k miles and report back. That's a test we all want to see.

Just show us the full charts of all three pulls on all three trucks so we can see the whole picture and judge for ourselves.

My uncle has a newer duramax and i have a cummins. Either pulls our 14k loaded fifth wheel with ease. I might give the edge to the duramax due to the transmission. Shifts way smoother i feel. Power goes to the Ram.

.