V10 vs psd

[EXv10]

Originally Posted by Krewat Actually. the shear size of a locomotive's engine makes it totally unfeasible as a gasoline burner. You can't have a huge displacement engine like that burn gasoline. It won't run efficiently, no way no how. You'd need a whole slew of much smaller cylinders, and the number of moving parts goes through the roof. Diesel, on the other hand, burns slower. For a huge displacement cylinder, it can still be quite efficient. On the other end of the spectrum, smaller displacement, gas burners make sense. And has already been talked about, the Ford modulars are known to go 300K miles without major issues. I read somewhere the diesel in a locomotive turns a generator and that is what finally powers it.

[Smokin']

Originally Posted by HuntsDucks70

Tell that to all the 6leaker owners, Ford and Navistar, maybe they missed that lesson.

You can't scrounge up one example to prove your point without mentioning all of the gas engines over the years that proved to be catastrophic failures.

I was speaking generally, about all diesels vs. all gas engines.

[95_Dually]

Originally Posted by bill11012

I do this stuff all the time, and it just turned over 163K

Please post the milage when you blow it up.
I will do the same.

[Krewat]

Actually, it's about RPM range, and gearing. The more gearing, and the longer the RPM range, the more TORQUE TO THE GROUND you can apply.

I once did a long write-up comparing a 2-valve V10 (425ft/lbs and an RPM range up to 4500) to the 7.3 and 6.0 diesels, comparing road speeds, which gear it can sit in and what-not, and came up with the idea that the V10 can put down more torque-to-the-ground at usable road speeds, given a 4.30 rear for the V10 and a 3.73 for the diesels.

There ARE instances where the V10 can put more torque out the rear wheels than the diesel, given what tranny gear they can sit in.

As for the 3-valve V10, it was even more of a spread. I'll see if I can dig that up somewhere.

[Smokin']

Originally Posted by EXv10

I read somewhere the diesel in a locomotive turns a generator and that is what finally powers it.

That is true, but even though a locomotives diesel engine is technically a generator for electric power, they have to create thousands of horsepower to meet the power demand for a modern locomotive. It requires not just one, but many diesel engines to power a locomotive, and these engines are huge with massive displacement.

[Krewat]

Here it is:

http://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/49...ml#post3674937

[95_Dually]

Originally Posted by Smokin'

You can't scrounge up one example to prove your point without mentioning all of the gas engines over the years that proved to be catastrophic failures.

I was speaking generally, about all diesels vs. all gas engines.

I bet you might be implying the 2.3 from the 80's in the escorts. A head gasket failure around every corner. Two of my buddy's had the GT. Both were always in the shop.

Or was it the 1.9. I do not remember. They were always in the shop with motor problems.

[bill11012]

Originally Posted by 95_Dually

Please post the milage when you blow it up.
I will do the same.

haha, I will do that, but i hope it never happens.

[Krewat]

Originally Posted by EXv10

I read somewhere the diesel in a locomotive turns a generator and that is what finally powers it.

Yes, it's easier to control the electricity going to the drive motor than it is to change the speed of the diesel and gear/clutch it.

But again, the size of the cylinders do not lend themselves to burning gasoline in any way shape or form, efficiently.

[95_Dually]

Originally Posted by Krewat

Actually, it's about RPM range, and gearing. The more gearing, and the longer the RPM range, the more TORQUE TO THE GROUND you can apply.

I once did a long write-up comparing a 2-valve V10 (425ft/lbs and an RPM range up to 4500) to the 7.3 and 6.0 diesels, comparing road speeds, which gear it can sit in and what-not, and came up with the idea that the V10 can put down more torque-to-the-ground at usable road speeds, given a 4.30 rear for the V10 and a 3.73 for the diesels.

There ARE instances where the V10 can put more torque out the rear wheels than the diesel, given what tranny gear they can sit in.

As for the 3-valve V10, it was even more of a spread. I'll see if I can dig that up somewhere.

How will it do against the 7.3 with 4.10 gears?

[bill11012]

You want it geared to get the most tq down.
The best gear for a V10 is 4.30s and 3.73s for a PSD.

[EXv10]

Originally Posted by Krewat

Yes, it's easier to control the electricity going to the drive motor than it is to change the speed of the diesel and gear/clutch it.

But again, the size of the cylinders do not lend themselves to burning gasoline in any way shape or form, efficiently.

I understand that. I just thought I would throw that trivia in there. I imagine most people know nothing about the locomotive and it makes since that the diesel would be in order due to it's pulling power and simplicity (among other things). Would you say a diesel would automatically last longer in general than a gasser in the pick-up truck/Ex category? Let's say the under 500 HP category.

[Smokin']

Originally Posted by 95_Dually

I bet you might be implying the 2.3 from the 80's in the escorts. A head gasket failure around every corner. Two of my buddy's had the GT. Both were always in the shop.

Or was it the 1.9. I do not remember. They were always in the shop with motor problems.

I actually had a lot of different motors in mind when I typed that . Just proving a point...he can't nit pick this stuff just because he doesn't like the truth behind it.

Doesn't mean the diesel world hasn't contributed their share of bad motors. GM in the 80's anyone? In any case, it was a meaningless sidetrack. I was speaking GOOD gas motor vs GOOD diesel motor, a diesel can be expected to last twice as long.

[Smokin']

Originally Posted by Krewat

Yes, it's easier to control the electricity going to the drive motor than it is to change the speed of the diesel and gear/clutch it.

But again, the size of the cylinders do not lend themselves to burning gasoline in any way shape or form, efficiently.

I got a chance to peek into the engine compartment of a brand spakin new ES44AC GE locomotive about a month ago.

It was so freakin cool...and loud. Talk about complicated electronics, holy rats nest batman.

[95_Dually]

Originally Posted by bill11012

You want it geared to get the most tq down.
The best gear for a V10 is 4.30s and 3.73s for a PSD.

Actually I believe that ford is using 3.73 in the diesel for milage. The 4.10 will always provide more torque. That is why every V10 owner doesn't think it would be fair to compare a 4.30 diesel to a 4.30 gas. The 4.30 will make even more torque than the 4.10. All of this is at the rear wheels. Torque at the flywheel will not change.