Put a 3V V10 (362hp/457ft-lb) or an 8.1L up against an older generation diesel and that blanket statement crumbles.
The 3V V10 or 8.1L will walk away from a 90s or even early 2000's diesel towing in the mountains.
I had a '99 V10 that I replaced with an '03 7.3 diesel. The diesel won hands down. The V10 really struggled on some of the mountain grades with my 8,000lb travel trailer.
Newer diesel outperforms older V10 Big shocker! But consider it the other way around, a 1993 7.3 diesel Vs. a 1998 V10
Even with the turbo, the 93 7.3 only had 190 hp, and 380 ft. lbs. while the V10 had 310 hp and 425 ft. lbs.
No question the last 20 years of diesels are pretty impressive, but go back any further and they were real dogs, even unloaded could barely get out of their own way.
02 Ford Explorer 4.6 V8 4x4, prodigy and equalizer
07 Crossroads Sunset Trail ST19CK
and no payments
No question the last 20 years of diesels are pretty impressive, but go back any further and they were real dogs, even unloaded could barely get out of their own way.
Go back 20 years, they produced gobs of torque at low rpms, and was able to get a heavy load moving, but not much HP.
What it was rated for, however, it can make all day and night.
To make a diesel do high rpms and hp is kind of like cross dressing.... it can be done.. but often not good looking.
I seriously wish GM and Ford would offer the OPTION of a low power version that gets 2X the life of their stock 2012 offerings.
Or you can pick up a low mileage ctd for half the eco boost price. We stole ours 3 years ago for 20k with 50k miles. Now at 120k and the truck is still perfect. Not towing we avg 23 mpg; towing 13 mpg.
tsetsaf wrote: Or you can pick up a low mileage ctd for half the eco boost price. We stole ours 3 years ago for 20k with 50k miles. Now at 120k and the truck is still perfect. Not towing we avg 23 mpg; towing 13 mpg.
Sweet deal!!
I have notice more that finally try diesel saying dam this has got power to spare!!
Russ & Paula
The Beagles Hedwig and Precious.
Portland, OR.
2005 Copper Canyon 293 FWSLS
2001 Dodge 2500 4X4, 5.9 Cummins 5 speed, 3.55 gears, Pacbrake, Power Puck, 258K
The question is, do you want more power or more economy? Is it used exclusively for towing or like most people, used 90% as a daily driver, 10% for towing. Until you answer those questions, nothing else is pertinent.
No question the last 20 years of diesels are pretty impressive, but go back any further and they were real dogs, even unloaded could barely get out of their own way.
Go back 20 years, they produced gobs of torque at low rpms, and was able to get a heavy load moving, but not much HP.
What it was rated for, however, it can make all day and night.
To make a diesel do high rpms and hp is kind of like cross dressing.... it can be done.. but often not good looking.
I seriously wish GM and Ford would offer the OPTION of a low power version that gets 2X the life of their stock 2012 offerings.
I'd be happy with 200hp, 400ft-lbs.
Me too and very, very happy with my 16 year old 1996 Suburban's 7.4L
big block's 310HP and 410 ft/lbs torque. It is at 160K extremely
hard miles
It is the age old 'HP' that folks focus on and is a chicken or egg
thing in my mind. Does the general buying public only look at HP
because that is all they understand or is it the marketing that only
presents HP as the metric of comparison?
So many don't understand low end torque that this comment is foreign
to them and they don't under stand why or that it works for better MPG
With my big block whether empty or towing....allow the tranny to up
shift to then give it more throttle, but not floored so that the tranny
will downshift.
Keep it there and the speed will raise and the MPG best.
Small blocks have to spin up to much higher RPMs in order to gain
speed (whether in the flat lands or inclines) and most times will
down shift to be able t gain RPMs
Don't know how many levels of detuned power the ECU will go through,
but the main criteria on my era is temp sensed somewhere in the eng
bay.
Mainly phase back advance
Keeping my engine cool enough, but warm enough to go into closed
loop has the best performance and MPG for 'me'
Today's corporate CAFE average MPG mandates has the OEM tailor the
ICE's and automatics toward empty MPG. Which favors high rev'ing ICE's
with close-ratio trannies to make up for that
-Ben Picture of my rig
1996 GMC SLT Suburban 3/4 ton K3500/7.4L/4:1/+150Kmiles orig owner...
1980 Chevy Silverado C10/long bed/"BUILT" 5.7L/3:73/1 ton helper springs/+329Kmiles, bought it from dad...
1998 Mazda B2500 (1/2 ton) pickup, 2nd owner...
Praise Dyno Brake equiped and all have "nose bleed" braking!
Previous trucks/offroaders: 40's Jeep restored in mid 60's / 69 DuneBuggy (approx +1K lb: VW pan/200hpCorvair: eng, cam, dual carb'w velocity stacks'n 18" runners, 4spd transaxle) made myself from ground up / 1970 Toyota FJ40 / 1973 K5 Blazer (2dr Tahoe, 1 ton axles front/rear, +255K miles when sold it)...
Sold the boat (looking for another): Trophy with twin 150's...
51 cylinders in household, what's yours?...
Today's corporate CAFE average MPG mandates has the OEM tailor the
ICE's and automatics toward empty MPG. Which favors high rev'ing ICE's
with close-ratio trannies to make up for that
I'm usualy one too just look up what I don't understand and not ask for an explaination automatically but, would you be willing to explain that? It sounds interesting.
2008 Keystone Sprinter 299BHSS
2003 Ram 3500 CC DRW 4x4
Today's corporate CAFE average MPG mandates has the OEM tailor the
ICE's and automatics toward empty MPG. Which favors high rev'ing ICE's
with close-ratio trannies to make up for that
I'm usualy one too just look up what I don't understand and not ask for an explaination automatically but, would you be willing to explain that? It sounds interesting.
Take any vehicle, whether car or truck or SUV or CUV
Their MPG would be best/greater when measured during a trip when empty
except for one 150lb driver
Vs that same 150lb driver PLUS loaded up with cargo/people/etc
Vs that same above, except towing something
If you have CAFE mandated 'corporate average MPG', which configurations
of all of your offerings would you chose to measure and report back
as your corporate average MPG?
I'd chose the curb weight (the lightest it can EVER be) and only one
150lb driver with NO cargo/people/etc. The 150Lb driver is the industry
standard for what constitutes a 'driver'. I haven't weighed that little
since my high school days...
Then the various components.
Optional AC draws power and reduces MPG both in added weight and power
4x4 is a ditto
Power windows, power seats, power doors, etc are all ditto's...they
won't be int he stripper model used for testing MPG to meet their
CAFE mandates
Automatic also a ditto when the TC isn't locked up. There is a 10% or
more slippage and is where automatics get their torque multiplication
Since slippage of 10% or more, that means lost power not delivered to
the pavement. Meaning lost MPG. Why I think manuals will be coming
back for that stripper model (aka...curb)
Smaller displacement ICE's get great MPG when empty, but needs to spin
higher to do real work (HP). Why the new automatics has more gears
and are close ratio to keep the ICE spinning at their best portion
of their HP/Torque curves
OK, I see what you are saying now. I think the terminology and acronyms had lost me. Taken to its current extreme would be why the ecoboost v-6 gets great gas millage empty but about the same as the rest of us gassers when towing a similar load.
Offline
