Found this review on line, of the three heavy duty pickups.

Something seems amiss. First the fact that there was a quarter mile test. And then looking at the results, the two with the highest power ratings score near equal times. Yet the Lowest rated truck bests the other two by 3/4 second empty and .9 seconds loaded They seem to say it was the Alison that was the difference. I just don't accept that unless the Alison had a much lower 1st gear. If that is the case/ does the GM fall flat on it's face in a 30 to 70 MPH test. I would accept the 30 to 70 mph test as a test experienced by most people that tow.

buddyIam wrote:Something seems amiss. First the fact that there was a quarter mile test. And then looking at the results, the two with the highest power ratings score near equal times. Yet the Lowest rated truck bests the other two by 3/4 second empty and .9 seconds loaded They seem to say it was the Alison that was the difference. I just don't accept that unless the Alison had a much lower 1st gear. If that is the case/ does the GM fall flat on it's face in a 30 to 70 MPH test. I would accept the 30 to 70 mph test as a test experienced by most people that tow.Hu?? :hSince when does Ram have more power then GM?GM makes 397 HP and Ram makes 370 HP. And before anybody starts; torque is not horsepower and never will be. As far as Fords HP numbers; test after test has shown they are cheating like %@%*(*@!!!!

Turtle n Peeps wrote:buddyIam wrote:Something seems amiss. First the fact that there was a quarter mile test. And then looking at the results, the two with the highest power ratings score near equal times. Yet the Lowest rated truck bests the other two by 3/4 second empty and .9 seconds loaded They seem to say it was the Alison that was the difference. I just don't accept that unless the Alison had a much lower 1st gear. If that is the case/ does the GM fall flat on it's face in a 30 to 70 MPH test. I would accept the 30 to 70 mph test as a test experienced by most people that tow.Hu?? :hSince when does Ram have more power then GM?GM makes 397 HP and Ram makes 370 HP. And before anybody starts; torque is not horsepower and never will be. As far as Fords HP numbers; test after test has shown they are cheating like %@%*(*@!!!!Plus you cannot take HP out of context or look it as the only variable. Vehicle weight, gearing, traction, etc all play vital rolls in a drag race.

Wow! You guys act like somebody called your sister a hooker.They're just stupid trucks, not a religion!Sorry I posted the link.

Big Three road tests | Good Sam Community

buddyIam
Explorer
Nov 05, 2014
I think one with a stroker. The other a thruster.
Majja13
Explorer
Nov 05, 2014
buddyIam wrote:
I wonder what kinda thrust that hooker takes?

Is that with a Stroker in it?
ForestGump
Explorer
Nov 04, 2014
BlackSilver wrote:
Wow! You guys act like somebody called your sister a hooker.

They're just stupid trucks, not a religion!

Sorry I posted the link.

:D Cool indeed
DirtyOil
Explorer
Nov 03, 2014
When they remove the human factor from these tests then we'll really have something to chat about. Install some servos... cab and exterior sound recorders, motion sensors... etc. etc. then compare the results. Most of us will buy based on price, options, comfort, style and colour, some will buy based solely on advertising.
mich800
Explorer
Nov 03, 2014
Huntindog wrote:
FishOnOne wrote:
Huntindog wrote:
Ever wonder how GM arrived at 397 HP?

And how Ford always has nice round even numbers?

Simple, and has been proven before.

GM tested the Dmax for reliability and power, then dynoed it to SAE standards to see just how much power it makes.

Ford wanted a nice round number that would exceed the Dmax. So they tuned for a number on the dyno, but not to SAE standards.

Think about the difference between peak HP, and continuous HP.

The Ford can indeed make the advertised HP/TQ for a short time. Then the computer dials back the power to keep it from hurting itself.

The GM can make their lower HP/TQ much longer. Long enough to meet the SAE standards, and likely continuously.

So in effect the GM wins on the road,,, time after time.

I disagree... The last Ford power curves I've seen on the 6.7 PSD looked pretty darn flat to me.
Fish, I expected that you would disagree.

But it is a FACT that the GM is the only one doing dyno testing to SAE standards.

The documentation has been posted here before. I know you have seen it.
Power curves are not what I am talking about.

And you cannot deny that the Ford numbers are ALWAYS nice round numbers, that just happen to be higher than GMs.

I remember a GM engineer being asked about why they came up with 397 HP, when a nice round 400 could have been achieved. His response was to the effect of:: We have done a lot of testing with the Dmax. 397 is what the number came in at, and we are comfortable and confident with that number.

There are really only two choices anyways. Since GM has consistently spanked the Ford in many tests, either the Ford is over rated, or the GM is under rated.
It would make little sense to under rate a truck, as that will cost sales.
But if you get a higher rating by any means possible, including loose testing standards, then you can advertise that rating, and many will believe it.

I have not seen the articles you are speaking of. But there is far more to timed tests than just HP. Trans gear ratios and efficiency, wheel and tire weight, aerodynamics, total vehicle weight, torque limiting off the line just to name a few. I am not saying you are wrong but if hp was the end all of these tests than every vehicle with the same hp car, truck, moped would have exactly the same elapsed time.
Huntindog
Explorer
Nov 03, 2014
FishOnOne wrote:
Huntindog wrote:
Ever wonder how GM arrived at 397 HP?

And how Ford always has nice round even numbers?

Simple, and has been proven before.

GM tested the Dmax for reliability and power, then dynoed it to SAE standards to see just how much power it makes.

Ford wanted a nice round number that would exceed the Dmax. So they tuned for a number on the dyno, but not to SAE standards.

Think about the difference between peak HP, and continuous HP.

The Ford can indeed make the advertised HP/TQ for a short time. Then the computer dials back the power to keep it from hurting itself.

The GM can make their lower HP/TQ much longer. Long enough to meet the SAE standards, and likely continuously.

So in effect the GM wins on the road,,, time after time.

I disagree... The last Ford power curves I've seen on the 6.7 PSD looked pretty darn flat to me.
Fish, I expected that you would disagree.

But it is a FACT that the GM is the only one doing dyno testing to SAE standards.

The documentation has been posted here before. I know you have seen it.
Power curves are not what I am talking about.

And you cannot deny that the Ford numbers are ALWAYS nice round numbers, that just happen to be higher than GMs.

I remember a GM engineer being asked about why they came up with 397 HP, when a nice round 400 could have been achieved. His response was to the effect of:: We have done a lot of testing with the Dmax. 397 is what the number came in at, and we are comfortable and confident with that number.

There are really only two choices anyways. Since GM has consistently spanked the Ford in many tests, either the Ford is over rated, or the GM is under rated.
It would make little sense to under rate a truck, as that will cost sales.
But if you get a higher rating by any means possible, including loose testing standards, then you can advertise that rating, and many will believe it.
hone_eagle
Explorer
Nov 03, 2014
A lot of 'transmission protection' goes on these days of big tork engine output.
FishOnOne
Nomad
Nov 03, 2014
Huntindog wrote:
Ever wonder how GM arrived at 397 HP?

And how Ford always has nice round even numbers?

Simple, and has been proven before.

GM tested the Dmax for reliability and power, then dynoed it to SAE standards to see just how much power it makes.

Ford wanted a nice round number that would exceed the Dmax. So they tuned for a number on the dyno, but not to SAE standards.

Think about the difference between peak HP, and continuous HP.

The Ford can indeed make the advertised HP/TQ for a short time. Then the computer dials back the power to keep it from hurting itself.

The GM can make their lower HP/TQ much longer. Long enough to meet the SAE standards, and likely continuously.

So in effect the GM wins on the road,,, time after time.

I disagree... The last Ford power curves I've seen on the 6.7 PSD looked pretty darn flat to me.
john_bet
Explorer II
Nov 03, 2014
blt2ski wrote:
john&bet wrote:
Boy, I am glad you guys that are in such a big hurry don't drive behind the '13 28k+ school bus that I drive daily. With only 250hp and a 2500 rev limit and a 5 speed Allison it takes over 1500' to get it up to 55 mph on flat ground.

Or the 1992 IHC dump truck I have, with a 175/335 NA 7.3 diesel with a 7 speed spicer. Helps that I have 4.33 gears, 32" tires, and a 10.08-1 first gear to get going at 26k lbs too! Altho I can get 30k lbs to move up a 30% grade, sloooooooooooowly that is!

Marty
I know what you mean. I live on the same county road as a stone quarry and an asphalt plant. The dump trucks enter the same hi-way I do. I also deal with a lot of semi's on US-50. My buss has a DT-466.
buddyIam
Explorer
Nov 03, 2014
Huntindog

I sure wish some of these testers would put these trucks on a dyno instead of quarter mile track.

How far would the Ford have to go before the computer would roll back the power.

A quarter mile sure seems like a short time for the power to be cut back. But the ford most definitely got it's butt handed to it.

Now that I think of it, on a normal dyno run the full power is only held for much less than a minute.