โSep-28-2016 01:00 PM
โSep-30-2016 01:33 PM
sparechange wrote:dodge guy wrote:
I think the big thing that some of us are saying is too stop with the HP wars, hold them where they are at and work on mileage instead. I see no reason why the new crop of diesels can't get at least 3+ more MPG! If they they put the effort into that instead of power lots more people would sit up and take notice.
Years ago they said a gas V-8 would never get better than 20 mpg. Guess what mid 20's is what they are now getting!
I agree with most everything you said accept the modern v-8 getting over 20. There's a website that tracks user uploaded mpg by vehicle and year (fuelly.com) and from what I've seen most on average are worse than diesels. Usually around 15-16 combined. I could be wrong but I spent a lot of time looking around on there and talking to guys at work with halftons a couple years ago when I was truck shopping
โSep-30-2016 01:22 PM
Adam R wrote:
While there are similarities between a 1500 and a 3500 and may share similar sheet metal, they are not the same truck. One weighs considerably more than the other, sits taller and is built with heavier duty components.
Adam R wrote:
Yes, it can do it, but I'd be willing to bet the mileage difference between a 3.0 Eco and an early 5.9 pulling a 12,000 trailer is pretty similar.
โSep-30-2016 01:07 PM
Adam R wrote:
Just for fun, lets see someone put a 3.0 Eco in a 3500 MC and see how it does for mileage. That would be an interesting comparison.
Adam R.
โSep-30-2016 12:44 PM
ShinerBock wrote:Adam R wrote:
but fortunately for a diesel, the difference in mileage numbers between a 200hp engine pushing a full sized truck down the road and a 400hp engine is negligible.
I would disagree with that. I would bet that a 240 hp Ecodiesel gets considerably better fuel economy than a 370 hp Cummins does pushing the same full size truck down the road. At least 5 mpg better, but probably more.
Also, I think the argument here (TnP, please correct me if I am wrong) is the fact that people saying they want more fuel economy than the power of today diesels. Basically instead of the high powered apples we are getting, they want fuel economy oranges while keeping the same power. What should be stated is that with a diesel if you increase the engines ability to use up more of the fuel's energy giving you better fuel economy, more power is also created given that the displacement is the same. Well, unless you inject less fuel per injection event. At that point, if you want to have better fuel economy while not increasing peak power then you have to decrease displacement.
I will use the Ecodiesel again. Due to the manufacturers using technology like common rail, VG turbos, electronic injectors, and more valves the 3.0L Ecodiesel is able to have the same power output of an early 5.9L 12v Cummins while having much better fuel economy. The Ecodiesel is able to burn fuel more efficiently than the old 5.9L therefore it is getting more out of each drop of fuel.
However, if you are talking about the exact same engines using the exact same technology that only gets X% of energy out of a drop of fuel, then TnP is correct that the fuel economy will not be effected negatively if peak power output is increased.
โSep-29-2016 10:44 PM
Me Again wrote:Grit dog wrote:
And the eco will get about the same mileage as a BT4 or a 3liter Perkins or any other similar size diesel. So what's your point?
I just can't leave! Watching these discussions is like a train wreck, just gotta see what happens next!
So why are the old two cycle Detroits so fuel hungry? They are noted fuel hogs in boats and on the road. Chris
โSep-29-2016 10:34 PM
ShinerBock wrote:Adam R wrote:
but fortunately for a diesel, the difference in mileage numbers between a 200hp engine pushing a full sized truck down the road and a 400hp engine is negligible.
I would disagree with that. I would bet that a 240 hp Ecodiesel gets considerably better fuel economy than a 370 hp Cummins does pushing the same full size truck down the road. At least 5 mpg better, but probably more.
Also, I think the argument here (TnP, please correct me if I am wrong) is the fact that people saying they want more fuel economy than the power of today diesels. Basically instead of the high powered apples we are getting, they want fuel economy oranges while keeping the same power. What should be stated is that with a diesel if you increase the engines ability to use up more of the fuel's energy giving you better fuel economy, more power is also created given that the displacement is the same. Well, unless you inject less fuel per injection event. At that point, if you want to have better fuel economy while not increasing peak power then you have to decrease displacement.
I will use the Ecodiesel again. Due to the manufacturers using technology like common rail, VG turbos, electronic injectors, and more valves the 3.0L Ecodiesel is able to have the same power output of an early 5.9L 12v Cummins while having much better fuel economy. The Ecodiesel is able to burn fuel more efficiently than the old 5.9L therefore it is getting more out of each drop of fuel.
However, if you are talking about the exact same engines using the exact same technology that only gets X% of energy out of a drop of fuel, then TnP is correct that the fuel economy will not be effected negatively if peak power output is increased.
โSep-29-2016 07:01 PM
dodge guy wrote:
I think the big thing that some of us are saying is too stop with the HP wars, hold them where they are at and work on mileage instead. I see no reason why the new crop of diesels can't get at least 3+ more MPG! If they they put the effort into that instead of power lots more people would sit up and take notice.
Years ago they said a gas V-8 would never get better than 20 mpg. Guess what mid 20's is what they are now getting!
โSep-29-2016 06:55 PM
dodge guy wrote:
I think the big thing that some of us are saying is too stop with the HP wars, hold them where they are at and work on mileage instead. I see no reason why the new crop of diesels can't get at least 3+ more MPG! If they they put the effort into that instead of power lots more people would sit up and take notice.
Years ago they said a gas V-8 would never get better than 20 mpg. Guess what mid 20's is what they are now getting!
โSep-29-2016 02:07 PM
Grit dog wrote:ShinerBock wrote:Grit dog wrote:
And the eco will get about the same mileage as a BT4 or a 3liter Perkins or any other similar size diesel. So what's your point?
I just can't leave! Watching these discussions is like a train wreck, just gotta see what happens next!
I am unsure who you are referring to in this. If it is me, then I don't understand what you are trying to say in relation to what I did.
You. 3litre engine vs 6litre engine is apples vs basketballs.
โSep-29-2016 01:34 PM
ShinerBock wrote:Grit dog wrote:
And the eco will get about the same mileage as a BT4 or a 3liter Perkins or any other similar size diesel. So what's your point?
I just can't leave! Watching these discussions is like a train wreck, just gotta see what happens next!
I am unsure who you are referring to in this. If it is me, then I don't understand what you are trying to say in relation to what I did.
โSep-29-2016 01:33 PM
Me Again wrote:Grit dog wrote:
And the eco will get about the same mileage as a BT4 or a 3liter Perkins or any other similar size diesel. So what's your point?
I just can't leave! Watching these discussions is like a train wreck, just gotta see what happens next!
So why are the old two cycle Detroits so fuel hungry? They are noted fuel hogs in boats and on the road. Chris
โSep-29-2016 01:16 PM
โSep-29-2016 01:14 PM
Me Again wrote:Grit dog wrote:
And the eco will get about the same mileage as a BT4 or a 3liter Perkins or any other similar size diesel. So what's your point?
I just can't leave! Watching these discussions is like a train wreck, just gotta see what happens next!
So why are the old two cycle Detroits so fuel hungry? They are noted fuel hogs in boats and on the road. Chris
โSep-29-2016 01:03 PM
Grit dog wrote:
And the eco will get about the same mileage as a BT4 or a 3liter Perkins or any other similar size diesel. So what's your point?
I just can't leave! Watching these discussions is like a train wreck, just gotta see what happens next!
โSep-29-2016 01:01 PM
Grit dog wrote:
And the eco will get about the same mileage as a BT4 or a 3liter Perkins or any other similar size diesel. So what's your point?
I just can't leave! Watching these discussions is like a train wreck, just gotta see what happens next!