Diesel Engines
Thread Starter
|
Elder User
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 760
Likes: 0
From: Billings, MT
Diesel Engines
So my 2002 Ford Commercial Vehicles catalogue came in today. I'm not sure why it showed up on my doorstep when the 2003 models are coming out, but oh well.
Anyhow, of Ford's bigger rigs, the Navistar 7.3L Powerstroke, the Cummins 5.9L, and the Caterpillar 7.2L are all options. So I'm perusing the stats on each engine, and I'm shocked to find that the largest engine, the PSD, was the weakest. The stats for the Cummins were just slightly better, and the Cat was dominating, making 300 horses and 806 lb. ft. of torque.
So I'm wondering what the 5.9 and especially the 7.2 have that the 7.3 does not, that gives them so much more power per cube than the venerable 7.3?
Also, unless weight is an issue, why can't we get our hands on a 7.2 in say an F-350? You could tow anything in the world with that kind of torque.
The Law
1989 F-250 HD 4x4
460, C6, BW 13-56
Almost Stock
Anyhow, of Ford's bigger rigs, the Navistar 7.3L Powerstroke, the Cummins 5.9L, and the Caterpillar 7.2L are all options. So I'm perusing the stats on each engine, and I'm shocked to find that the largest engine, the PSD, was the weakest. The stats for the Cummins were just slightly better, and the Cat was dominating, making 300 horses and 806 lb. ft. of torque.
So I'm wondering what the 5.9 and especially the 7.2 have that the 7.3 does not, that gives them so much more power per cube than the venerable 7.3?
Also, unless weight is an issue, why can't we get our hands on a 7.2 in say an F-350? You could tow anything in the world with that kind of torque.
The Law
1989 F-250 HD 4x4
460, C6, BW 13-56
Almost Stock
