Cummins 6.7L Gasoline Engine in a Ram?

[ShinerBock]

Haven't been on this forum in a while so I am not sure if this has been discussed in the past few months.

Back In February, Cummins unveiled their new fuel-agnostic strategy meaning that various engines in their line-up can be spec'd for different fuel types like propane, natural gas, hydrogen, and yes even gasoline. To clarify, that doesn't mean that one engine can run on all of these fuel sources, but rather you can have them spec'd to run on one of these fuels only and not just diesel.

These engines will share 80% of their parts. From the head down these engines will be mostly the same as the current Cummins diesel. From the head up you will have different parts to for the various fuel types along with different fuel and air delivery systems. So essentially you will have the same reliable diesel engine components, but in gasoline form.

They said that the B6.7L will be the first to be offered with its fuel-agnostic strategy in 2024. Medium duty customers will be able to spec the B6.7L to run on gasoline. I am not sure what plans Ram has for the 6.4L, but I would love to see a gasoline powered Cummins 6.7L turbo in a Ram HD. Not sure how they will handle the heat associated with gasoline turbo engines.

What do you think?


Cummins unveils fuel-agnostic internal combustion engine strategy


Cummins 6.7-liter gas engine part of new fuel agnostic strategy

[JRscooby]

ShinerBock wrote:

It is not necessarily the fact that emissions systems on gas engines are figured out, it is just that the US EPA has a hard on against diesels and therefore have stricter requirements on diesels. Even though gas engines are more harmful to the environment due to their inefficiency and today's direct injected engines emit a lot of particulate matter, diesels emit a lot of NOx which is only harmful in very heavily populated areas. In les populated areas, NOx dissipates into the upper atmosphere and gets turned into a good thing since NOx is a helpful greenhouse gas which is also created by lightning, forest fires, and many other heat sources.

So, it is not that they just haven't gotten diesel emissions figured out, it is just that they keep getting stricter and stricter because the activist powers that be seem to have a disdain for them. If you look at all of our emission requirements and fuel economy test standards, they are all made to get the best possible outcome out of a gas engine, not a diesel or CNG vehicle. Although, after the SCR/DEF systems, they have been getting a lot better.

Not to get into a political discussion about which poisons are best, look at the history of pollution control on vehicles. The manufactures worked to clean the exhaust between ex valve and end of tailpipe. This caused a tremendous drop in performance and economy. My '73 Nova, (350, auto, steering brakes and air) would go about half as far on a gallon as my '72 half ton (350, auto, steering brakes and air). Bell, if drivers took the day off, and I worked my '72 F350 (360, auto ps,pb, and Holmes wrecker/body) I could come close to same MPG as the car.
But over time they have learned to clean up the combustion. Now we get much better power, better MPG, and cleaner exhaust.
At start, most pickups where used for work, not many miles so exempt. But because of the issues with emission equipment, more people started buying pickups just for transportation. This demand cause the cab to grow, and the bed to shrink to the point now most pickups look like the just forgot to put the trunk lid on. To clean the tailpipe of most passenger vehicles, had to regulate heavier and heavier trucks. Then we talk about diesels. We are in the part of evolution where we are trying to clean exhaust after made the mess is made. Performance/economy suffer, plus the failures of emission equipment reduce the dependability.

[ShinerBock]

JRscooby wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:

Back in the day, I had the most powerful gas engine you could buy(plus mods) in a truck to tow my 8k lb trailer. Truck had a 4 speed and after one trip towing through the Texas hill country, I traded that truck in for my first diesel. I am not saying that the truck could not pull it, it just didn't do it to my preferences and expectations. Of course, everyone's preferences and expectations are different though.

So, don't get defensive about the "My trailer is too heavy for gas" (which is not what I said). I just said that diesel is the only way "I"(as in me, myself and I) would go with "my" trailer. Not saying a gas couldn't pull it, just that I wouldn't want to be driving any current gas engine HD to do it. If I had to pull it with a gas truck, then I would probably go with a Ford 7.3L unless this Cummins 6.7L gas engine comes out and it is turbocharged.

None of my 427s where built. I would call the parts department at GMC dealer, load new, not rebuilt, but new engine in pickup, and change it in a parking lot. All same as what was installed in new twin-screw trucks.
Now I was stopped for overload, driving a diesel, at age 14. But 6 years later, buying my own truck, I bought what I could pay cash for, worked it until I could upgrade. Hauling asphalt, first truck to plant got first load, and first truck to paver, first unload. Near a roadrace, grossing over 30 tons. All the 671s and some of the 871s could load behind me all day long. Now when we hooked up the pups I was EZ to pass.
My point is with the technology available back then engines burned gas, and moved what needed moved. Coupled with the fact that emission systems on spark fired engines are pretty well sorted out, and compression fired is not, I can see light duty, (less than 30,000 gross) might be better to use gas.

It is not necessarily the fact that emissions systems on gas engines are figured out, it is just that the US EPA has a hard on against diesels and therefore have stricter requirements on diesels. Even though gas engines are more harmful to the environment due to their inefficiency and today's direct injected engines emit a lot of particulate matter, diesels emit a lot of NOx which is only harmful in very heavily populated areas. In les populated areas, NOx dissipates into the upper atmosphere and gets turned into a good thing since NOx is a helpful greenhouse gas which is also created by lightning, forest fires, and many other heat sources.

So, it is not that they just haven't gotten diesel emissions figured out, it is just that they keep getting stricter and stricter because the activist powers that be seem to have a disdain for them. If you look at all of our emission requirements and fuel economy test standards, they are all made to get the best possible outcome out of a gas engine, not a diesel or CNG vehicle. Although, after the SCR/DEF systems, they have been getting a lot better.

[FishOnOne]

ShinerBock wrote:

JRscooby wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:
I think cummins see's the writing on the wall for the future of diesels in this market segment and the trend of more Hemi's replacing the cummins (My observation) so as a company they have to evolve.

Also I don't see Stellantis' designed 3.0 gas engine making it to the HD duty line up.

I think the fact that there are more gas engines in the HD segment than there used to be is not limited to Rams. With today's more powerful gas engine options and more gears, I see a lot more gas engines in the HD segment of all brands than I used to to. Of course, most of these are the guys that really didn't need a diesel to tow what they do and only had diesels before due to the dismal performance of the older gas engines. If I only had to to tow 10k, then I would likely have gotten a gas HD over a diesel. With my trailer, diesel is the only way I will go.

If I could of made a living running 20,000 miles a year I would of parked a 427 GMC the day I retired. As for "My trailer is too heavy for gas" back in the early '70s I would haul a load every day where my GCVW was about 55 tons.

Back in the day, I had the most powerful gas engine you could buy(plus mods) in a truck to tow my 8k lb trailer. Truck had a 4 speed and after one trip towing through the Texas hill country, I traded that truck in for my first diesel. I am not saying that the truck could not pull it, it just didn't do it to my preferences and expectations. Of course, everyone's preferences and expectations are different though.

So, don't get defensive about the "My trailer is too heavy for gas" (which is not what I said). I just said that diesel is the only way "I"(as in me, myself and I) would go with "my" trailer. Not saying a gas couldn't pull it, just that I wouldn't want to be driving any current gas engine HD to do it. If I had to pull it with a gas truck, then I would probably go with a Ford 7.3L unless this Cummins 6.7L gas engine comes out and it is turbocharged.

I had a '98 F150 5.4 and that thing was a turd with the 4 speed. Ran it in 3 gear and it towed like a champ but burned fuel like crazy.

[JRscooby]

ShinerBock wrote:

Back in the day, I had the most powerful gas engine you could buy(plus mods) in a truck to tow my 8k lb trailer. Truck had a 4 speed and after one trip towing through the Texas hill country, I traded that truck in for my first diesel. I am not saying that the truck could not pull it, it just didn't do it to my preferences and expectations. Of course, everyone's preferences and expectations are different though.

So, don't get defensive about the "My trailer is too heavy for gas" (which is not what I said). I just said that diesel is the only way "I"(as in me, myself and I) would go with "my" trailer. Not saying a gas couldn't pull it, just that I wouldn't want to be driving any current gas engine HD to do it. If I had to pull it with a gas truck, then I would probably go with a Ford 7.3L unless this Cummins 6.7L gas engine comes out and it is turbocharged.

None of my 427s where built. I would call the parts department at GMC dealer, load new, not rebuilt, but new engine in pickup, and change it in a parking lot. All same as what was installed in new twin-screw trucks.
Now I was stopped for overload, driving a diesel, at age 14. But 6 years later, buying my own truck, I bought what I could pay cash for, worked it until I could upgrade. Hauling asphalt, first truck to plant got first load, and first truck to paver, first unload. Near a roadrace, grossing over 30 tons. All the 671s and some of the 871s could load behind me all day long. Now when we hooked up the pups I was EZ to pass.
My point is with the technology available back then engines burned gas, and moved what needed moved. Coupled with the fact that emission systems on spark fired engines are pretty well sorted out, and compression fired is not, I can see light duty, (less than 30,000 gross) might be better to use gas.

[JRscooby]

mkirsch wrote:
sent PM

Any GMC Twin-Sixes?

[ShinerBock]

JRscooby wrote:

ShinerBock wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:
I think cummins see's the writing on the wall for the future of diesels in this market segment and the trend of more Hemi's replacing the cummins (My observation) so as a company they have to evolve.

Also I don't see Stellantis' designed 3.0 gas engine making it to the HD duty line up.

I think the fact that there are more gas engines in the HD segment than there used to be is not limited to Rams. With today's more powerful gas engine options and more gears, I see a lot more gas engines in the HD segment of all brands than I used to to. Of course, most of these are the guys that really didn't need a diesel to tow what they do and only had diesels before due to the dismal performance of the older gas engines. If I only had to to tow 10k, then I would likely have gotten a gas HD over a diesel. With my trailer, diesel is the only way I will go.

If I could of made a living running 20,000 miles a year I would of parked a 427 GMC the day I retired. As for "My trailer is too heavy for gas" back in the early '70s I would haul a load every day where my GCVW was about 55 tons.

Back in the day, I had the most powerful gas engine you could buy(plus mods) in a truck to tow my 8k lb trailer. Truck had a 4 speed and after one trip towing through the Texas hill country, I traded that truck in for my first diesel. I am not saying that the truck could not pull it, it just didn't do it to my preferences and expectations. Of course, everyone's preferences and expectations are different though.

So, don't get defensive about the "My trailer is too heavy for gas" (which is not what I said). I just said that diesel is the only way "I"(as in me, myself and I) would go with "my" trailer. Not saying a gas couldn't pull it, just that I wouldn't want to be driving any current gas engine HD to do it. If I had to pull it with a gas truck, then I would probably go with a Ford 7.3L unless this Cummins 6.7L gas engine comes out and it is turbocharged.

[mkirsch]

JRscooby wrote:
As for "My trailer is too heavy for gas" back in the early '70s I would haul a load every day where my GCVW was about 55 tons.

They also moved a space shuttle with a Toyota Tundra. Doesn't mean you'd want to head off on a cross-country trip with it.

I'm guessing your 55 ton loads were relatively local, and if you hit 35MPH top speed you were really rolling.

Seriously though what were you driving? I am fascinated by the last of the big gasoline-powered haulers from the late 60's early 70's.

Any GMC Twin-Sixes?

[JRscooby]

ShinerBock wrote:

FishOnOne wrote:
I think cummins see's the writing on the wall for the future of diesels in this market segment and the trend of more Hemi's replacing the cummins (My observation) so as a company they have to evolve.

Also I don't see Stellantis' designed 3.0 gas engine making it to the HD duty line up.

I think the fact that there are more gas engines in the HD segment than there used to be is not limited to Rams. With today's more powerful gas engine options and more gears, I see a lot more gas engines in the HD segment of all brands than I used to to. Of course, most of these are the guys that really didn't need a diesel to tow what they do and only had diesels before due to the dismal performance of the older gas engines. If I only had to to tow 10k, then I would likely have gotten a gas HD over a diesel. With my trailer, diesel is the only way I will go.

If I could of made a living running 20,000 miles a year I would of parked a 427 GMC the day I retired. As for "My trailer is too heavy for gas" back in the early '70s I would haul a load every day where my GCVW was about 55 tons.

[ShinerBock]

FishOnOne wrote:
I think cummins see's the writing on the wall for the future of diesels in this market segment and the trend of more Hemi's replacing the cummins (My observation) so as a company they have to evolve.

Also I don't see Stellantis' designed 3.0 gas engine making it to the HD duty line up.

I think the fact that there are more gas engines in the HD segment than there used to be is not limited to Rams. With today's more powerful gas engine options and more gears, I see a lot more gas engines in the HD segment of all brands than I used to to. Of course, most of these are the guys that really didn't need a diesel to tow what they do and only had diesels before due to the dismal performance of the older gas engines. If I only had to to tow 10k, then I would likely have gotten a gas HD over a diesel. With my trailer, diesel is the only way I will go.

[FishOnOne]

I think cummins see's the writing on the wall for the future of diesels in this market segment and the trend of more Hemi's replacing the cummins (My observation) so as a company they have to evolve.

Also I don't see Stellantis' designed 3.0 gas engine making it to the HD duty line up.

[SuperBus]

I worked on a Department of Energy project with Cummins a few years ago designing part of a high-pressure gasoline engine. I imagine the entire project is public now due to the fact it was funded by DoE. It was pretty amazing how much power and torque was generated by this relatively small engine, very comparable to the diesel version that was designed alongside it as part of the same project. I am sure this gas version of the venerable B series will be just as impressive.

I don't expect the cost savings to be realized in initial cost though - a lot of fancy stuff was going on with the DoE engines, and most components weren't as lightweighted as one might think. With the cylinder pressures being developed, a lot of stout parts and trick design was needed. The savings is realized in fuel efficiency and lower fuel prices. Duly noted a less sophisticated emissions system will definitely reduce the overall cost in the vehicle though.

[ppine]

Diesel technology is superior. That is why Dodge is coming up with this idea to use different kinds of fuel. When EVs become popular and gas engines are fading, diesel engines will remain popular because of their versatility, long life and innovation.

[Bionic_Man]

I wouldn't count on the end of the Hemi in trucks just yet.

If you build a Grand Wagoneer online, the only option for the heavy duty towing package is the 6.4. If for some reason the Hurricane isn't duty rated for towing, the Hemi will need to soldier on.

[ShinerBock]

After doing some more reading about the "Hurricane" inline 6 Chrysler plans to replace it's V8's with, I firmly believe that this Cummins 6.7L gas version will replace the 6.4L. They are stating that these inline 6 Hurricane engines will replace both the 5.7L and 6.4L in the cars and half tons so it wouldn't be economical to make the 6.4L just for the HD trucks. They don't make enough HD trucks to warrant it being the only vehicle to have the engine. I guess we will have to wait and see.

TWIN TURBO MUSCLE CARS: WILL DODGE USE THE HURRICANE INLINE-SIX TO REPLACE SCAT PACKS & HELLCATS?