Originally Posted by dspencer

Sorry one more thought. If only ford owners or enthusiast were allowed here then why not exclude anyone but an owner? Also to concider; Isn't the the ford vs the competition in the general section of this forum? But I will leave; I'm sure things will make more sense in your world when all are ford owners.

Originally Posted by Marine Ironman

Gents,

But torque ... impulse-momentum ... etc. I can tell you about that. Delta P for the PSD is greater, my friend. While work is applying the force through a distance, applying work over time is part of the understanding here. Over time ... because the PSD has a larger area under it's entire torque curve .... over time ... the PSD applies more net torque. The overall impulse of the engine is greater, and the change in momentum, both angular on the drive shaft, and to the truck body as a whole is greater. The PSD will impart the largest change in momentum to the truck, causing it to out-accelerate the competitors.

Now, what baffles Dodge-guys is how their great Cummins (it is a great engine) can have 40 more ft-lbs of torque and not win these things. The answer:

• The PSD has more area under it's torque curve

This fact means a certain condition is true: The total amount of potential work that the engine can make is greater. The "pool" from which it can draw is a deeper and bigger pool. He with the biggest cookie jar holds the most cookies.

Over time, the PSD reaches into all portions of that curve. The net torque over TIME is greater coming out of the PSD. Think of it this way. If you measured the torque number out of the engines, once per second, for the duration of their operation .... the AVERAGE torque output of the Ford will be greater. That is a higher average over time. Torque x time = angular impulse. That angular impulse. The moment of inertia of the shaft does not change, and so it's angular velocity changes. Angular velocity = angular displacement x time. Over the same amount of time, more angular displacment occurs ... the angular displacement = angular displacment of the rear wheels factored by the rear differential divider. More angular displacement of the rear wheels = more road traveled.

• This is the physical explanation as to why a Ford/PSD is X amount of feet further down the road than the Dodge or Chevy in the tow test

My degree is ABET accredited. I passed the EIT exam, as a majority of USNA graduates do (a litmus test to the quality of the degrees earned there). Since then I have received a certification as a Systems Engineer from two major aerospace companies. I have published work in professional engineering journals. I have taught graduate engineering courses, including 5 years teaching at a university.

I own a Cummins. I own a PSD.

Last point: you will not see tow tests of a manual against an auto because the manual will lose. The dodge 4-speed auto, yes, gives it a disadvantage to the ford 5-speed auto ... hence ... the Ford/PSD out-tows the dodge in that test.

.

Originally Posted by Logical Heritic

They did this on the pickup truck test that has been linked 10,000 times. You can test a stick. Heres how they did it. They had 3 different drivers run the truck. They have been testing high end cars with sticks for years I didnt hear anyone complain until the PSD lost a head to head race.

Testing sticks is bogus. Autos are better. I must admit. This is the first time in my life I have heard anything like this. Sticks deliver more rpms to the ground. In non turbo apps the sticks will get down the track faster. Autos waste energy. Always have. Go look at the mpg sticker on a car or truck window. The stick gets better mpg because it wastes less energy. Autos have their place but to say they are better than a stick or that a tow off is invalid is ludicrous.
How many shifts are required to reach 30 mph. One. If they cant do that right. Take em out back and shoot em.

Originally Posted by SuperDutyHaulin

You are right that they test high end cars with manuals, HOWEVER, when that is done there is a baseline that is established. FIRST OF ALL THEY SHOW THE SPECS!!!! OF ALL CARS INVOLOVED. Second, they establish a rules I.E--- rev to 2000 rpms, drop the clutch, shifting will be done at 5500 Rpm, they have the same tires put on, they are given numerous passes and the passes are averaged, to name a few.......the artical you linked failed at all of these. Again, bogus...

Originally Posted by ga302p

If you have to have a degree in mechanical engineering to have a valuable opinion on this site, I guess about 99.9% of us better stop posting. One of my friends does not even have a high school education, and he designed a piece of machinery that greatly outperformed the equipment built by the "mechanical engineers." He is quite wealthy now. You do not have to have a degree in Mechanical engineering to have a valid opinion.

Originally Posted by Choctaw Bob

Logical Heritic: Where you are basing all your statements on your real life experiences as you remember them, Marine Ironman and MW95F250 are basing their statements on known engineerine facts.
As Engineers they are trained to examine all the available data and render an opinion. That is why the opinion of engineers differs only in small details where the opinion of people like you differs drastically depending on life experience.

A long time ago it was decided that the seat of the pants feel of different people was not an accurate method to measure the work energy of anything. It was determined that one ft. lb. of torque would be defined as the ability to lift 1 pound of weight, 1 foot. Once defined, it was easy to construct a device that would measure torque. Torque is the central component in the formula for horsepower.

Your name indicates that you like to oppose the norm. You should reconsider. You will find that scientific laws were determined many years ago by people like Newton and Einstein and da Vinci. In formulating your own norms, you will find yourself in error continually as you are now.

You have some good ideas but because your ideas are formulated from seat of the pants obversations, your conclusions are so far off base that I can't understand them.
I am not a Professional Engineer, but I have an Engineering education and background. I have also owned a Garage where we worked on everything that came in from cars to farm tractors. I have some of your real world experience bit I relate that experience to scientific norms.
I will give you a friend's opinion. I believe you are very bright. If you will quit being the "Heritic" and work with the laws of science, you will get much more accomplished and confuse old men like me a lot less.

Originally Posted by Choctaw Bob

(The fastest 0-60 times are in cars that rev so high that they can hit 60 in first gear. Without the shift you can run 0-60 in low 3 seconds time.) No..this is not nearly always true. You assume that there is sufficient torque multiplication to get you off the line and sufficient horsepower /breathing to pull that high of gearing.

(First gear will always give you the fastest acceleration. Every subsequent gear accelerates you slower.) Not true in my truck. 3rd gear gives the most rapid acceleration because there is sufficient load to maximize turbo boost and sufficient traction to hook it up.

You can't make these broad statements and expect them to apply. They simply don't work.