What is "normal" for pulling a TT?
From : moparman
Q: on thu 22 jun 2006 151716 -0400 glennb glennbur@bellsouth...net wrote with your 4l60e transmission always tow in 3rd gear. od in that transmission is weak. also the frontal area of the new trailer will cause you to use more fuel so to get the best mpg slow down. glenn this is good advise but it is not because the 4l60 has a weak od by design as it does not it is because it has a od ratio of .7 which is pretty tall vs .75 for 4l80 and it is usally coupled with a 3.42 or sometimes a 3.73 which makes a a really tall final ratio in od that is placing a lot of strain on tranny even keeping speed it requiwith a ooad. if you are fourtune enough to have a 4.10 axle ratio with stock tires then you can safely use od sometime during easier pulls but otherwise stay out of it towing. when you do the math the engine has to make to make about 43% more torque and tranny clutch have to hold it too in od to deliver same output torque before interanl lasses are figured in with a .70 od. at first thought you think it should be 30% but it is not because if you are in drive and you have a 100 ft lbs in and out not counting internal losses0 when you shift into od the engine has to input 143 ftlbs of torque to make the same 100 ft lbs on output shaft. 143 x .7 equal 100 so you can se how much you can load tranny especaily with taller gears. ----------------- the snoman www.thesnoman.com this is exactly the reason i have a dodge ram heavy duty 3500 dually long bed with a 600 cummins turbo diesel. i donut have to write a paragraph justifying my piece o crap toy truck to do a real trucks job. under power/over weight/over speed with get your ass killed. that is all. -- moparman---remove clothes to reply! --scud coordinates 32.61204 north 96.92993 west-- .
Replies:
From : snoman
on thu 22 jun 2006 222310 gmt moparman scott.hendryx.clothes@sbcglobal.net wrote this is exactly the reason i have a dodge ram heavy duty 3500 dually long bed with a 600 cummins turbo diesel. i donut have to write a paragraph justifying my piece o crap toy truck to do a real trucks job. under power/over weight/over speed with get your ass killed. it is all in the gearing of the engine to the load. with a 4.56 behind a good gas motor you can move some killer load effectively. it simply needs a differnet final drive ratio to match a gas engine power curve to load which detriot does not provide in most models to make diesel look better. back in the later 70s i drove a c70 triaxle chevy dump truck for a while with a 427 and a 20 speed 5 x 4 and it had no problems moving 30 tons gvw around were it was legal at weight wise and another 5 ton with a specail permit or about a 25 ton payload when hauling blacktop for big paving contracts. you modern cummins or dmax p/u would bust its nuts moving trying that weight which i could move through any terrain that could support the truck including soft grond that really sucks the power down at 30 tons. i alos drove a c60 with a 366 and a 10 speed 5x2 and hauld a float with a backhoe or a dozer on it from time to time and that little gas motor did a credible job and never had trouble starting a load out. durring that same time frame i knew a farmer that used to haul his grain from his silo to mill or a cincinati port 80 miles away with a 75 chevy dually std cab with a 454 4.10 gears and a sm465 granny gear tranny. his gcvw was around 30k and it did a fine job with it and did it for many years too. yes there are oil burner p/u can pull but so can a gasser if properly geared. a lot of the diesel advantage is exagerated by the fact that most gas trucks today are poorly geared for their tow ratings. if you had say a 8.1 checy dualie with say a 4.56 and a 6 speed ally with double od it would pull anything that a stock dmax or cummins would an with less fuss most of the time too and be a lot more fun to drive too. i recently went with a friend who owns a 05 dmax cc and we drove a o6 cc with a new dmax and one with a 8.1 and the 8.1 would run circles around the dmax and was gone while the dmax was still trying to build boost. he was very impressed over the responce difference compared to his dmax and is considering getting one while there is still time. ----------------- the snoman www.thesnoman.com .
From : christopher thompson
ok this is fair comparing a 1 ton p/u to a triaxle dump truck. heck if were comparing stuff like that then lets compare a festiva to a peterbuilt. ive given up with this guy... he just refuses to get passed his mental block. i wave to him every time i pass him at a gas station i agree most of the time.... you know i aviod most of the arguements here. but............ but........... but........... but........... a triaxle dump truck compaired to a 1 ton.... i mean get real!!!!! ok im done. anyways hows it goin tom -- -chris 05 ctd 06 liberty crd real trucks dont need spark plugs .
From : tom lawrence
ok this is fair comparing a 1 ton p/u to a triaxle dump truck. heck if were comparing stuff like that then lets compare a festiva to a peterbuilt. ive given up with this guy... he just refuses to get passed his mental block. i wave to him every time i pass him at a gas station .
From : christopher thompson
on thu 22 jun 2006 222310 gmt moparman scott.hendryx.clothes@sbcglobal.net wrote this is exactly the reason i have a dodge ram heavy duty 3500 dually long bed with a 600 cummins turbo diesel. i donut have to write a paragraph justifying my piece o crap toy truck to do a real trucks job. under power/over weight/over speed with get your ass killed. it is all in the gearing of the engine to the load. with a 4.56 behind a good gas motor you can move some killer load effectively. it simply needs a differnet final drive ratio to match a gas engine power curve to load which detriot does not provide in most models to make diesel look better. back in the later 70s i drove a c70 triaxle chevy dump truck for a while with a 427 and a 20 speed 5 x 4 and it had no problems moving 30 tons gvw around were it was legal at weight wise and another 5 ton with a specail permit or about a 25 ton payload when hauling blacktop for big paving contracts. you modern cummins or dmax p/u would bust its nuts moving trying that weight which i could move through any terrain that could support the truck including soft grond that really sucks the power down at 30 tons. ok this is fair comparing a 1 ton p/u to a triaxle dump truck. heck if were comparing stuff like that then lets compare a festiva to a peterbuilt. i alos drove a c60 with a 366 and a 10 speed 5x2 and hauld a float with a backhoe or a dozer on it from time to time and that little gas motor did a credible job and never had trouble starting a load out. durring that same time frame i knew a farmer that used to haul his grain from his silo to mill or a cincinati port 80 miles away with a 75 chevy dually std cab with a 454 4.10 gears and a sm465 granny gear tranny. his gcvw was around 30k and it did a fine job with it and did it for many years too. yes there are oil burner p/u can pull but so can a gasser if properly geared. a lot of the diesel advantage is exagerated by the fact that most gas trucks today are poorly geared for their tow ratings. if you had say a 8.1 checy dualie with say a 4.56 and a 6 speed ally with double od it would pull anything that a stock dmax or cummins would an with less fuss most of the time too and be a lot more fun to drive too. i recently went with a friend who owns a 05 dmax cc and we drove a o6 cc with a new dmax and one with a 8.1 and the 8.1 would run circles around the dmax and was gone while the dmax was still trying to build boost. he was very impressed over the responce difference compared to his dmax and is considering getting one while there is still time. let me know how he likes the fuel bill when he figures that part out. ----------------- the snoman www.thesnoman.com -- -chris 05 ctd 06 liberty crd real trucks dont need spark plugs .
From : clare at snyder on ca
on sat 24 jun 2006 170918 gmt max dodge max340@verizon.net wrote i am comparing a engine that is properly geared to the load not the vehicle. if you want a gas engine to pull equivalent to a deisel you will need a big six not an eight. it will almost certainly need to be boosted and it will need to have the valve timing and intake/exhaust geometry optimized for producing torque at lower rpms. a 292 chevy six handily outpulled most 327s and 348s in the sixties. a 409 would toast it. a 300 inch ford six outpulled any 302 v8 and most 351s.a 460 would toast it. a deisels advantage is higher average cyl pressures than a gas engine which has higher instantaneous cyl pressures and better thermal efficiency which translates to using less gas. a properly geared gas engine can do a good job of towing a tt if properly set up for the job. a deisel also set up properly for the job will do a better job in many ways on less fuel. when towing generally you want lots of grunt at low rpms you dont want to be winding em up and shifting shifting shifting to put the horsepower to the road. 671 anybody a 200 hp deisel that makes max power at 2400 rpm would be producing over 430 foot lbs of torque and generally would produce that from about 1000 rpm 80 hp or even lower. the todays gasoline 200hp engine would generally produce max power at 4800 rpm where it would produce 215 ft lbs of torque. at 2800 rpm it may produce 250 ft lbs and 133 hp while at 1000 rpm it would possibly put out 200 ft lbs and 38 hp. some of the older gas engines like the international 392 v8 put out 196 hp at 3600 rpm just under 290 ft lb and a peak torque of 316 ft lbs at 2200132 hp. at 1000 rpm and roughly 280 ft lbs it would develop 53 hp. so the big old international 8 would need to be geared twice as deep as the deisel to pull away and the currrent 200 hp engine would need to be roughly 3 times as deep. -- posted via a free usenet account from http//www.tera.com .
From : big al
so heres a technical question since buyers of diesel pickups choose them for low-end torque why do they have turbochargers instead of superchargers turbochargers are generally more efficient than a mechanically driven supercharger and are capable of much higher boost pressures. -- max try to actually answer his question. mechanical superchargers do work better at low rpm. turbo chargers are not capable of much higher boost pressures. thats a function of the size of the supercharger and how fast its driven. al .
From : ron recer
on thu 22 jun 2006 214935 -0400 christopher thompson kf4drr-nospam@alltel.net wrote ok this is fair comparing a 1 ton p/u to a triaxle dump truck. heck if were comparing stuff like that then lets compare a festiva to a peterbuilt. i am comparing a engine that is properly geared to the load not the vehicle. i am tired of people saying you need a diesel to move anything when all you need is proper gearing to do it and if you have it you can easily move a lot a weight with a gas motor. heck if gm offered a 4.56 with a 6.0 and new 6sp ally which you can get in a chevy on specail order starting in 06 it would surprize you what that engine would pull effectively. the ally has a 3.1 first gear vs 2.48 in 4l80 and a reverse more than twice as deep too which give the dmax a even bigger percived edge over a 6.0 with a 4.10 and a 4l80. they both make about the same horse power it is just that one is properly geared to load from factory and one is not. a 8.1 with a 4.56 and a 6 speed would be a incredable tow beast. and if you through in a mild 6 or 7 psi boost with a super about 1 third of dmaxs boost it would get a bit scary at times bebeing able to make about 700 ft lbs of torque from about 1500 rpm to past 4000 rpm rather than a bit more torque on a boosted deisel over a much narrower rpm range. not to mention that 700 ft lbs out of a 8.1 is not going to hurt tranny much it is rated at 650 ft lbs but 800 to 900 ft lbs out of a booste dmax will shorten trannies life. i can drag a truck out of a mud hole with old 30 hp jd tractor that a dmax truck would not be able to do in same conditons. it is all in the proper gearing for load and engine not the engines type. ----------------- the snoman yea but the dmax will get much better mileage and have a lot better ride than the 30 hp jd! you will also get to your destination before the end of the summer with the dmax. g ron .
From : norman d crow
on thu 22 jun 2006 214935 -0400 christopher thompson kf4drr-nospam@alltel.net wrote ok this is fair comparing a 1 ton p/u to a triaxle dump truck. heck if were comparing stuff like that then lets compare a festiva to a peterbuilt. i am comparing a engine that is properly geared to the load not the vehicle. i am tired of people saying you need a diesel to move anything when all you need is proper gearing to do it and if you have it you can easily move a lot a weight with a gas motor. heck if gm offered a 4.56 with a 6.0 and new 6sp ally which you can get in a chevy on specail order starting in 06 it would surprize you what that engine would pull effectively. the ally has a 3.1 first gear vs 2.48 in 4l80 and a reverse more than twice as deep too which give the dmax a even bigger percived edge over a 6.0 with a 4.10 and a 4l80. they both make about the same horse power it is just that one is properly geared to load from factory and one is not. a 8.1 with a 4.56 and a 6 speed would be a incredable tow beast. and if you through in a mild 6 or 7 psi boost with a super about 1 third of dmaxs boost it would get
From : rick onanian
max dodge wrote i am comparing a engine that is properly geared to the load not the vehicle. your comparison has no merit when the question is about a pickup pulling a load not about a tri-axle. it seems to me that the question is about power engine vs. load not truck design for ride and handling. in that case his comparison does apply. has anybody noticed how this thread is posted to i havent seen the op but i think its obviously a.......wait for it......troll! ive trimmed the froup list so this only goes to appropriate froups. so heres a technical question since buyers of diesel pickups choose them for low-end torque why do they have turbochargers instead of superchargers .
From : snoman
on thu 22 jun 2006 214935 -0400 christopher thompson kf4drr-nospam@alltel.net wrote ok this is fair comparing a 1 ton p/u to a triaxle dump truck. heck if were comparing stuff like that then lets compare a festiva to a peterbuilt. i am comparing a engine that is properly geared to the load not the vehicle. i am tired of people saying you need a diesel to move anything when all you need is proper gearing to do it and if you have it you can easily move a lot a weight with a gas motor. heck if gm offered a 4.56 with a 6.0 and new 6sp ally which you can get in a chevy on specail order starting in 06 it would surprize you what that engine would pull effectively. the ally has a 3.1 first gear vs 2.48 in 4l80 and a reverse more than twice as deep too which give the dmax a even bigger percived edge over a 6.0 with a 4.10 and a 4l80. they both make about the same horse power it is just that one is properly geared to load from factory and one is not. a 8.1 with a 4.56 and a 6 speed would be a incredable tow beast. and if you through in a mild 6 or 7 psi boost with a super about 1 third of dmaxs boost it would get a bit scary at times bebeing able to make about 700 ft lbs of torque from about 1500 rpm to past 4000 rpm rather than a bit more torque on a boosted deisel over a much narrower rpm range. not to mention that 700 ft lbs out of a 8.1 is not going to hurt tranny much it is rated at 650 ft lbs but 800 to 900 ft lbs out of a booste dmax will shorten trannies life. i can drag a truck out of a mud hole with old 30 hp jd tractor that a dmax truck would not be able to do in same conditons. it is all in the proper gearing for load and engine not the engines type. ----------------- the snoman www.thesnoman.com .
From : dave lee
ok this is fair comparing a 1 ton p/u to a triaxle dump truck. heck if were comparing stuff like that then lets compare a festiva to a peterbuilt. ive given up with this guy... he just refuses to get passed his mental block. i wave to him every time i pass him at a gas station i agree most of the time.... you know i aviod most of the arguements here. but............ but........... but........... but........... a triaxle dump truck compaired to a 1 ton.... i mean get real!!!!! ok im done. anyways hows it goin tom -- -chris 05 ctd 06 liberty crd real trucks dont need spark plugs i think his point was the engine a 460 did all that work because of transmission gearing etc. thats all. .
From : tom lawrence
same conditons. it is all in the proper gearing for load and engine not the engines type. absolutely... but what you continue to fail to recognize is that while your 8.1l gasser with a 4.56 gear tell ya what - since this is a dodge group lets keep it dodge-centric... 8.0l v10 with a 4.56 and an nv5600 - while that engine/tranny/gear combination will keep up with a cummins 5.9l a 3.73 gear and the same transmission... its going to get less than half the fuel economy doing so. its not just about doing the job - its about the cost-effectiveness of doing the job. and.... since were talking about pick-ups here - vehicles that very often pull double duty as both load haulers and daily drivers - its completely impractical to talk about a gasser with a 4.56 rear. youre looking at 8mpg tops given that my 8.0l with a 4.10 gets about 10mpg and those with a 3.54 get about 12mpg compared to 18mpg with a cummins. yanking 10000lbs. around youre lucky to get 5-6mpg from the gas combination whereas my cummins gets about 14mpg pulling that weight. now... which vehicle would you choose the one that gets 8mpg empty and 6mpg towing or the one that gets 18mpg empty and 14mpg towing this is not a difficult question... .
From : beekeep
now... which vehicle would you choose the one that gets 8mpg empty and 6mpg towing or the one that gets 18mpg empty and 14mpg towing this is not a difficult question... it is for me. somehow i cant seem to relate it to carrots. denny .
From : max dodge
i am comparing a engine that is properly geared to the load not the vehicle. your comparison has no merit when the question is about a pickup pulling a load not about a tri-axle. i am tired of people saying you need a diesel to move anything when all you need is proper gearing to do it and if you have it you can easily move a lot a weight with a gas motor. you can be tired all you like but the facts are not in your favor. while true that you can move anything with a briggs and stratton if the gearing is correct certain things make doing work easier. one of those is a diesel engine. a diesel has many benefits in doing work when compared to a gasoline engine. one of those is moving a heavy load at highway speeds without need for huge amounts of gearing and prohibitively large transmissions. heck if gm offered a 4.56 with a 6.0 and new 6sp ally which you can get in a chevy on specail order starting in 06 it would surprize you what that engine would pull effectively. no it would not surprise me. however it might surprise you how much more fuel you burn and how much slower a speed you go to do the work when compared with a diesel engine. the ally has a 3.1 first gear vs 2.48 in 4l80 and a reverse more than twice as deep too which give the dmax a even bigger percived edge over a 6.0 with a 4.10 and a 4l80. why are we discussing the dmax its a pos engine to begine with. in your resistance to modern innovation you ought to know a v8 isnt as efficient at pulling as an inline six like the cummins. they both make about the same horse power it is just that one is properly geared to load from factory and one is not. i am sure again after all these years that the engineers geared both trucks properly for highways speeds here in the u.s. i think it is a betrayal of sorts to note that the dmax needs more gearing than the gasoline motor; it speaks directly to the well known shortcomings of a v8 diesel with something other than low end torque as its strong suit. a 8.1 with a 4.56 and a 6 speed would be a incredable tow beast. and if you through in a mild 6 or 7 psi boost with a super about 1 third of dmaxs boost it would get a bit scary at times bebeing able to make about 700 ft lbs of torque from about 1500 rpm to past 4000 rpm rather than a bit more torque on a boosted deisel over a much narrower rpm range. not to mention that 700 ft lbs out of a 8.1 is not going to hurt tranny much it is rated at 650 ft lbs but 800 to 900 ft lbs out of a booste dmax will shorten trannies life. both of those engines in the modified form you describe would trash the transmission behind them without significant mods to the transmission. stop deluding yourself. i can drag a truck out of a mud hole with old 30 hp jd tractor that a dmax truck would not be able to do in same conditons. it is all in the proper gearing for load and engine not the engines type. right and wrong....... as in yes it is all in the gearing for load and engine type. but..... since jd tractors arent geared for 65mph pulling youll need to determine what would make the truck be able to pull the load at 65mph not 15mph on a country road. you are stuck on gearing without looking at the parameters of the job to be done. -- max there are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty soap ballot jury and ammo. please use in that order. -ed howdershelt author on thu 22 jun 2006 214935 -0400 christopher thompson kf4drr-nospam@alltel.net wrote ok this is fair comparing a 1 ton p/u to a triaxle dump truck. heck if were comparing stuff like that then lets compare a festiva to a peterbuilt. i am comparing a engine that is properly geared to the load not the vehicle. i am tired of people saying you need a diesel to move anything when all you need is proper gearing to do it and if you have it you can easily move a lot a weight with a gas motor. heck if gm offered a 4.56 with a 6.0 and new 6sp ally which you can get in a chevy on specail order starting in 06 it would surprize you what that engine would pull effectively. the ally has a 3.1 first gear vs 2.48 in 4l80 and a reverse more than twice as deep too which give the dmax a even bigger percived edge over a 6.0 with a 4.10 and a 4l80. they both make about the same horse power it is just that one is properly geared to load from factory and one is not. a 8.1 with a 4.56 and a 6 speed would be a incredable tow beast. and if you through in a mild 6 or 7 psi boost with a super about 1 third of dmaxs boost it would get a bit scary at times bebeing able to make about 700 ft lbs of torque from about 1500 rpm to past 4000 rpm rather than a bit more torque on a boosted deisel over a much narrower rpm range. not to mention that 700 ft lbs out of a 8.1 is not going to hurt tranny much it is rated at 650 ft lbs but 800 to 900 ft lbs out of a booste dmax will shorten trannies life. i can drag a truck out of a mud hole with
From : denny
tbone wrote not at all but with your extreme right bias anything less appears to you to be extreme left. hmm...kinda sounds like youre being a bit hypocritical in your own bias! oh ya you think youre a moderate! lol exactly what is bush going to do to clean up his multiple messes. i think that you had better read that agreement again and show me specifically where clinton authored it. he signed it tbone!! geez...you put the blame on bush for anything and everything because hes the guy at the top. well guess what during clintons years he was the guy at the top and he approved of fought for and signed the deal that created this mess. while he may have been the one to sign it it was a team that created it. and ill ask again what should he have done instead refused to give n. korea a single dime. they have proven time and again never to keep their word on any deal. they have proven time and again to use funds given them for purposes other than agreed upon. n. korea is almost totally dependent on outside sources for their energy. no way could they have created any nukes without the funds and other economic relief given to them brokered by the us. that is because the right blames them for everything and magically shifts time line to make it seem like it was the lefts fault. thats because clinton fed up badly with n. korea yet you refuse to blame clinton for any of the messes we now face that are a direct result of his bungled foriegn policies. i am looking at what is going on now. n. korea is now going full tilt developing not only the warheads but icbms to carry them here. yea good plan from bush. bush they started their nuke program while clinton was in office. clinton gave them the funds they used to do so. and you blame bush good grief. clinton did no wrong to you even though you say he did some things wrong you make an excuse for him. fine but for n. korea there is no excuse. the mess we have now is clintons fault as far as n. korea goes. yep and all under the plan that clinton signed and they stayed that way until bush turned another problem into the current major disaster. what n. korea totally ignored the agreement and began nuke development. you have no clue and attempt to rewrite history to excuse clinton and put the blame on bush. they did not stay that way under clinton. not one bit. and we didnt hold up to our end of the agreement either mainly due to funding and other crap like that. gee i wonder if the right controlled congress had something to do with that!!! what clinton signed a deal and funds poured into n. korea. now you say the problems are because of a right controlled congress geez. you make one stupid ass excuse for clintons bungled mess after another. he signed a very bad deal that he should never have done but you put the blame on republicans. good grief. and what exactly should he have done it is easy to make the accusations when you dont have a valid plan yourself. another excuse for clintons absurd plan ahh...no other plan so just give them lots of $s and make an agrement knowing theyve never once held up to any agreements. a lousy fed up plan is better than no plan hmm. id say not giving them a dime is a better plan. here we go shifting the time lines again. it was not a huge mess until bush stopped the imports of heavy oil and also didnt hold up to the agreement. bush stopped those because n. korea admitted to never having stopped their nuke research despite the agreements made with clinton. now who is attempting to shift the time line huh bush stopped them because n. korea broke the seals and stopped allowing international inspections. geez yet another excuse for clintons mess. the major mess didnt occur on clintons watch no matter how desperately you wish that it did. bull crap it didnt. n. korea never ever complied with the agreement from day 1 of its signing. at least he had some which is far more than can be said for who we have now. he didnt have anything other than to sell the usa out. yea sometimes but what you fail to mention is why exactly they hate us the way that they do. heres a hint greedy selfish people like you. ya giving our enemies billions as clinton did is a better way huh gee they attacked anyways despite your absurd logic. now youre attempting to once again live in a pre 9/11 world. no thanks. id rather not. actually it does work until you start lying to them and then just stab them in the back like our current administration has done. attempting to bribe enemies with us $s has never once worked. stolen huh lol!!!! how exactly did they earn that much money and dont how did the gov. earn it gee lets all work for the gov. and let the gov. decide how much we should be able to keep of our own money. see tbone the liberals mentality is that the gov. knows whats best for us. prefer to allow
From : mike simmons
on thu 22 jun 2006 214935 -0400 christopher thompson kf4drr-nospam@alltel.net wrote ok this is fair comparing a 1 ton p/u to a triaxle dump truck. heck if were comparing stuff like that then lets compare a festiva to a peterbuilt. i am comparing a engine that is properly geared to the load not the vehicle. i am tired of people saying you need a diesel to move anything when all you need is proper gearing to do it and if you have it you can easily move a lot a weight with a gas motor. heck if gm offered a 4.56 with a 6.0 and new 6sp ally which you can get in a chevy on specail order starting in 06 it would surprize you what that engine would pull effectively. the ally has a 3.1 first gear vs 2.48 in 4l80 and a reverse more than twice as deep too which give the dmax a even bigger percived edge over a 6.0 with a 4.10 and a 4l80. they both make about the same horse power it is just that one is properly geared to load from factory and one is not. a 8.1 with a 4.56 and a 6 speed would be a incredable tow beast. and if you through in a mild 6 or 7 psi boost with a super about 1 third of dmaxs boost it would get a bit scary at times bebeing able to make about 700 ft lbs of torque from about 1500 rpm to past 4000 rpm rather than a bit more torque on a boosted deisel over a much narrower rpm range. not to mention that 700 ft lbs out of a 8.1 is not going to hurt tranny much it is rated at 650 ft lbs but 800 to 900 ft lbs out of a booste dmax will shorten trannies life. i can drag a truck out of a mud hole with old 30 hp jd tractor that a dmax truck would not be able to do in same conditons. it is all in the proper gearing for load and engine not the engines type. ----------------- the snoman www.thesnoman.com granted a gas engine properly geared can pull a significant load but at what price in fuel economy..... engine longevity that is where the diesel is the engine of choice for heavy hauling applications... your anecdotal evidence notwithstanding. mike .
From : christopher thompson
on thu 22 jun 2006 214935 -0400 christopher thompson kf4drr-nospam@alltel.net wrote ok this is fair comparing a 1 ton p/u to a triaxle dump truck. heck if were comparing stuff like that then lets compare a festiva to a peterbuilt. i am comparing a engine that is properly geared to the load not the vehicle. i am tired of people saying you need a diesel to move anything when all you need is proper gearing to do it and if you have it you can easily move a lot a weight with a gas motor. heck if gm offered a 4.56 with a 6.0 and new 6sp ally which you can get in a chevy on specail order starting in 06 it would surprize you what that engine would pull effectively. nope it would not. ive never said a gas engine wouldnt get the job done. ive said for many reasons fuel milage the main one the diesel engine is the better chioce. the ally has a 3.1 first gear vs 2.48 in 4l80 and a reverse more than twice as deep too which give the dmax a even bigger percived edge over a 6.0 with a 4.10 and a 4l80. they both make about the same horse power it is just that one is properly geared to load from factory and one is not. a 8.1 with a 4.56 and a 6 speed would be a incredable tow beast. and if you through in a mild 6 or 7 psi boost with a super about 1 third of dmaxs boost it would get a bit scary at times bebeing able to make about 700 ft lbs of torque from about 1500 rpm to past 4000 rpm rather than a bit more torque on a boosted deisel over a much narrower rpm range. not to mention that 700 ft lbs out of a 8.1 is not going to hurt tranny much it is rated at 650 ft lbs but 800 to 900 ft lbs out of a booste dmax will shorten trannies life. i can drag a truck out of a mud hole with old 30 hp jd tractor that a dmax truck would not be able to do in same conditons. as have i many times in the past few months around here with a 30 hp farm trac. surprising how many times these construction crews will get themselves stuck after a rain. it is all in the proper gearing for load and engine not the engines type. if all your concerned about is moving the load and not how much it will cost you to move the load then yes its all about the gearing and not the engine. ive driven gassers and diesels. my 99 v10 with 4.10s got around 10 - 11 mpg empty on the highway. i never figured it up towing. but i can tell you from the way the gas gauge moved it was roughly half that. now towing the same loads with 3.73s in the diesel im getting 14 - 15 mpg towing hmmm thats 5 mpg up with the load over empty with the old truck. and 19 mpg city empty with the diesel. cost of operation under the load is a huge factor. thats why all my vehicles are oil burners. ----------------- the snoman www.thesnoman.com -- -chris 05 ctd 06 liberty crd real trucks dont need spark plugs .
From : max dodge
so heres a technical question since buyers of diesel pickups choose them for low-end torque why do they have turbochargers instead of superchargers turbochargers are generally more efficient than a mechanically driven supercharger and are capable of much higher boost pressures. -- max there are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty soap ballot jury and ammo. please use in that order. -ed howdershelt author max dodge wrote i am comparing a engine that is properly geared to the load not the vehicle. your comparison has no merit when the question is about a pickup pulling a load not about a tri-axle. it seems to me that the question is about power engine vs. load not truck design for ride and handling. in that case his comparison does apply. has anybody noticed how this thread is posted to i havent seen the op but i think its obviously a.......wait for it......troll! ive trimmed the froup list so this only goes to appropriate froups. so heres a technical question since buyers of diesel pickups choose them for low-end torque why do they have turbochargers instead of superchargers .
From : denny
on sat 24 jun 2006 220843 gmt denny wddodge@woh.rr.com wrote now... which vehicle would you choose the one that gets 8mpg empty and 6mpg towing or the one that gets 18mpg empty and 14mpg towing this is not a difficult question... it is for me. somehow i cant seem to relate it to carrots. denny try not eating them so fast... use them for counting like humans do with fingers.. face it buggs without an opposing thumb youre screwed.. *g* mac i dunno. i seem to do ok with the ar and springfield. maybe im just getting lucky g denny .
From : mac davis
on sat 24 jun 2006 193051 gmt tom lawrence tnloaswpraemnmcien5g@earthlink.net wrote and.... since were talking about pick-ups here - vehicles that very often pull double duty as both load haulers and daily drivers - its completely impractical to talk about a gasser with a 4.56 rear. youre looking at 8mpg tops given that my 8.0l with a 4.10 gets about 10mpg and those with a 3.54 get about 12mpg compared to 18mpg with a cummins. yanking 10000lbs. around youre lucky to get 5-6mpg from the gas combination whereas my cummins gets about 14mpg pulling that weight. now... which vehicle would you choose the one that gets 8mpg empty and 6mpg towing or the one that gets 18mpg empty and 14mpg towing this is not a difficult question... i think you also have to factor in engine life and wear... a gasser is designed to make power at higher rpm than a diesel... gearing wont change that... add gears with more grunt to either and youre operating at higher rpm ranges and asking for more/faster wear... when my buddy and i are towing our trailers together he gets 12 mpg towing an 12000 pound 5th wheel with his f-250 doing about 1700 rpm while were getting 8 mpg towing a 6000 pound tt at 2800 rpm.... we both have 3.5 approx gears... i could almost keep up with him on hills with a 410 gear set but at what rpm and mpg imo not worth the cost of regearing.. mac https//home.comcast.net/mac.davis https//home.comcast.net/mac.davis/woodstuff.htm .
From : mac davis
on sat 24 jun 2006 220843 gmt denny wddodge@woh.rr.com wrote now... which vehicle would you choose the one that gets 8mpg empty and 6mpg towing or the one that gets 18mpg empty and 14mpg towing this is not a difficult question... it is for me. somehow i cant seem to relate it to carrots. denny try not eating them so fast... use them for counting like humans do with fingers.. face it buggs without an opposing thumb youre screwed.. *g* mac https//home.comcast.net/mac.davis https//home.comcast.net/mac.davis/woodstuff.htm .
From : mac davis
on sat 24 jun 2006 232027 gmt honeybs@radix.net beekeep wrote ill take the one that runs on empty. beekeep that would be the one with the k&l right mac https//home.comcast.net/mac.davis https//home.comcast.net/mac.davis/woodstuff.htm .
From : max dodge
try to actually answer his question. without getting inot a long drawn out technical paper i did answer his question. there are of course many variables in the field. mechanical superchargers do work better at low rpm. work better true turbos have a lag time dependant on size of turbo and engine to which its mated. however this lag is not dependant on rpm as much as the two aforementioned variables. it is also notable that the lag time on a properly designed setup is minimal. thus since the turbo is capable of higher boost numbers the lag time is acceptable in a trade off for more boost. turbo chargers are not capable of much higher boost pressures. thats a function of the size of the supercharger and how fast its driven. in general your statement is incorrect. a turbo will spin at much higher rpm relative to engine rpm than a supercharger will. true superchargers can be set to a boost level with pulley/gear ratios but this also limits what a supercharger will be capable of. it may either boost too little at upper rpms or not enough at low rpms. a turbo on the other hand can be sized to boost according to engine load rather than rpm using a wastegate to regulate boost pressures. this is because one key factor is the expansion of the exhaust gasses. this expansion becomes as a percentage larger when more fuel is injected even if rpm does not increase proportionally. thus the turbo adapts to load while the supercharger will not. http//www.superchargersonline.com/content.aspid=19 more details can be found here. note that the above link is a supercharger sales outlet so the info could be biased towards the superchargers yet they play it straight. http//www.ststurbo.com/turbovssupercharger nifty graph shows exactly why the turbo is more popular more usable hp. this is because of the higher percentage of efficiency from a turbo. -- max there are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty soap ballot jury and ammo. please use in that order. -ed howdershelt author so heres a technical question since buyers of diesel pickups choose them for low-end torque why do they have turbochargers instead of superchargers turbochargers are generally more efficient than a mechanically driven supercharger and are capable of much higher boost pressures. -- max try to actually answer his question. mechanical superchargers do work better at low rpm. turbo chargers are not capable of much higher boost pressures. thats a function of the size of the supercharger and how fast its driven. al .
From : mac davis
on sun 25 jun 2006 185019 gmt denny wddodge@woh.rr.com wrote face it buggs without an opposing thumb youre screwed.. *g* mac i dunno. i seem to do ok with the ar and springfield. maybe im just getting lucky g denny probably.. my dad used to say that luck was caused by hard work... mac https//home.comcast.net/mac.davis https//home.comcast.net/mac.davis/woodstuff.htm .