Why are underbody temps an issue on an ambulance?


In the winter here you can always see where the cops have been because the heat under the car melts the ice. When they park alongside the road for a call.

 

I'm not sure exactly what the big issue is. I imagine it's due to all the idling these things do, and all the sensitive equipment in the back. Also if there is a failure such as a convertor melt-down, people could die. I don't imagine that most people have ever driven a 6.0 ambulance, but if you did, you'd notice that they don't push them with the greatest of ease. I'd imagine if a 6.0 had to work so hard to push them, a 6.8 for example would probably have to work even harder.

 

Posted by Argo;

Right on. This is my point. For someone who wants a big fast truck who hauls something every once in a while they should get gas engines. The people who want a legitimate heavy duty work truck should get a diesel, but it should be available in medium duty trim. That is assuming the driveline in a pickup could handle medium duty torque.


BS. Any gasoline powered truck can have just as much legitimacy as a heavy duty work truck provided everything else is equal. What determines a legitimate work truck goes far beyond the engine sitting under the hood. In many cases a gas powered truck can be a MUCH better heavy duty hauler for all around work uses.

Frame, suspension, gearing, axle capacities, transmissions, and tires are all
EVERY BIT as important in determining effectivness for hard work in any given set of circumstances. I can guarantee that a PSD powered SD F250 will never have the same work capacity as a Chassis Cab 350 powered with the V10. Bigger axle, bigger axle bearings, 6 tires as opposed to four, six wheels as opposed to four, thicker frame materials and straight frame rails, 11 friggen leaf springs as opposed to 5 - the diesel compensates for none of this. Add to that, you can get deeper gears (4.30 vs. 3.73 in this case) and the V10 comes with 37 extra hp right from the factory.

So tell me how the guy who opted for the diesel in his F250 pickup ended up with a more legitimate heavy duty work truck than the guy who bought the 350 chassis cab powered with the gasser? He did'int. If he wanted a more legitimate work truck he'd have foregone the diesel option in favor of paying the difference for the Chassis cab - but most don't buy diesels as work trucks anymore - they're people haulers.

You might make the case that the Chassis cab could have a diesel also. In this case - it still cannot carry anymore weight than the gasser will, tow ratings are similar and the gasser still comes with an advantage in deeper gears, costs 4000.00 less which can go toward a better aftermarket body than the diesel option will afford for the same price, still has 37 extra HP, and will always be a whole heck of alot better for starting in cold climate or for making frequent short trips in town all day long.

The point is everything has it's place. There is no one answer. No one magic component which makes a truck heavier duty than another per se. The diesel is an option which gives an advantage in certain circumstances over gasoline powerplants and that is why it is offered - end of story. Just like gears, transmissions, and chassis models are all different options which are made available for different uses.

To insinuate that an engine option alone is what determines a truck's legitimacy as being heavy duty is,...well....retarded.

I know this is Ford vs Comp - not gas vs. diesel forum - but pay careful attention (those of you who wish to bash me here) - I DID'INT START THIS.

Also, if someone is wanting medium duty characteristics or performance - go buy a medium duty truck - simple enough eh?

 

Keep in mind not just the relative lack of air circulation under an ambulance, paricularly when parked, but also the greater volatility of gasoline and that gas engines come with catalysts, further adding to the heat issue, and therefore the complication of using a gasoline engine in an ambulance chassis.

 

And let's keep it that way

 

All I Can Say Is "cat"

 

1) I certainly don't intend to (nor should anyone else) bash you for your statements, as you bring some valid points to the table.

2) However, I was discussing the engine and drivetrain only. As you stated, the chassis is the biggest determining factor in the vehicle's ability to pull/haul, etc.

3) I didn't intend to turn this into gas vrs. diesel. I was trying to draw a correlation to the usability of the engine, durability of the engine, and the state of tune of the engine.

4) I was posing the question of why the medium duty versions of these same engines are not having the problems that the light duty engines (which in theory, shouldn't be working as hard) are having, and some possible causes.

To anyone who thought I was turning this into a gas vrs. diesel argument, I extend my sincerest appologies, that was not my intent. And to sinister73, I say no harm, no foul.

 

Reasonable enough Argo, you are a gentleman. I can see where your coming from a little better now. I may have been a bit harsh ( I was) - especially with the retarded remark. It just seemed like a general insinuation to me - I'm sure we've both seen alot of that around here. Sorry for the confusion and thank you for validating my points as well.

 

This is my take on the whole thing. If you want a medium duty truck get one. If you don't want a medium duty truck don't get one. I like a diesel for the facts stated above, and just because a gasser has more HP and deep gears, it will never make up for the torque a diesel puts out in a higher gear with less HP.

HP and torque are not in anyway the full performance of a vehicle. i will take a diesel and a gas with the same hp and the diesel will do more work everytime.

i know people that have had serious problems with the 6.0 (engine change) that number is only 2, but i only know 10 peopel with the 6.0 motor. 80% RELIABILTY IN A DIESEL IS NOT GOOD i know nobody that has had to do that with the cummins or the duramax. that number only gets magnified on the net. i have not heard of anyone that has blown up the cummins or the dmax except those with EXTREME mods....not just a happy tune.

i see tunes as an all around good thing for duramax owners. my dad has a 70 hp tune in his truck and got 2.5 mpg better than the normal 15.5 before the tune. so he is up to 18 with a lot more hp than he had before.

tuners are only bad for motors such as the powerstroke because they weren't built with any durability in the begining. the new lbz 360 hp / 650 torque dmax will still use the same internals as the lb7 did in 01. so my dad felt that since the new motor could handle the extra hp then the old one could too. he figured the tranny was the weak spot and he said "i'll cross that road when i get there."

tuners have a lot of good point's and you can bet that i love being able to haul semi loads with a pickup truck.

2 385 killbros behind a dmax will go zero to 25 in no time and i can actually stop them better than a 986 international we normally pull them with.... i don't see the problem here. i am just reaping the benefits of technology.

 

Well keep crossing all those roads as you get there then. Sooner or later you'll find you hav'ent got all the answers afterall.

You really believe that a diesel with higher gearing is capable of doing more work than a gas motor with lower (numerically higher) gearing can? A diesel is where it's at and that is that, right? As long as the HP is the same, than both engines are capable of performing the same amount of work. This is very basic stuff here. The gas engine will need more RPM to make equal HP since it makes less torque than the diesel does at lower RPM - this is why deeper gears are more beneficial to gas engines.

But the gearing has two seperate effects. First it helps the engine to rev higher at a slower traveling speed and this helps to put it closer to it's peak TQ/HP performance.
Second, the gearing multiplies that torque to the rear wheels. Transmissions multiply recieved engine torque as well. I can guarantee your power hungry Allison is not going to be sending as much torque from a Duramax to the rear axle as the ZF's granny low will with a 3valve V10 - especially when you consider how GM has programmed torque management from the engine while in first gear to prolong the transmission's service life. Then when the torque does get to the rear wheels, you only have a torque multiplication of 3.73:1. The V10/ZF's torque will be multiplied by a factor of 4.30:1.

Nope, the be all - end all, does not a diesel make...sorry - too many other factors also determine how well a truck will perform for heavy duty service work. We all know the advantages a diesel offers. I won't hash over them - or a gassers for that matter, but I will refute every single implication I see that a gas engine is simply not up to the task of being a good powerplant in a heavy duty truck. Granted it won't be the same KIND of heavy duty truck - as they both offer advantages for different uses, and outside of these specific uses, it's not possible to say which is an overall "better" engine for general work use.

You say tuners are only bad for motors like the PSD because they don't have as much durability built into them from the factory. I can imagine GM would conclude that tuners aren't very good for their own duramax either should your dad ruin his with one, expecting GM to pick up the tab. I know for a fact that Dodge does not want their Cummins equipt Rams muffed with using performance tuners. Lots of guys get lucky and their dealers happen to be mod friendly, but if a DC area rep even gets the slightest inclination that a truck has a tuner in it - problems or not, he will void the entire vehicle warranty and let you hire a lawyer to prove your tuner did'int affect your windshield wipers.

So far as durability goes, the VT365 is plenty durable in it's own application as produced by International. Ford's software can be blamed for the majority of their initial 6.0 complications, and even now.

Look at it like this - Ford still sells more diesels than do GM or Dodge. Take away every single problem 6.0 there has ever been, and you still have at least as many good and problem free engines as either GM or Dodge have manufactured in total.
Now deduct all the problem duramaxes and cummins from those totals.

From what I've seen, the 6.0 is in fact a pretty good engine. I hav'ent been around too many Duramaxes so I won't speak of what I don't know. You might want to try it yourself.....the 6.0 I mean .

 

The service manager at a local dealership is a close friend of mine. While having my 7.3 in for a fuel leak that I could not stop at the filter, he let me drive an 06 6.0 that he had jsut got. The only way to describe it was, I could not tell any difference between the 7.3 and the 6.0.

He was the one that steered me to the 01 7.3 as there were several newer used 6.0's on the lot and he told me that I would not be satisified as there had been a performance problem with them (cracked heads) and he did not want me to end up with one.

He did state that the problem was solved in late 03 and out of the several hundred that his dealership has sold, he has had two come back for warranty. Of the two, he was suspicious of one, but Ford covered it.

 

True. There were lots (and still are lots) of good truck mills out there that burn gasoline. I can't fault the 300 I-6 (gee, no suprise coming from me, huh?), 351 V8, 460 V8 (for a big block they were pretty good on fuel), or the 6.0LV-10 for performance in a truck. They all ran or run well and last a very long time with reasonable upkeep. The 4.2LV6, 4.6LV8 and 5.4LV8 and the old 302 V8 are great engines too, but in my opinion are better suited to car duty. In my opinion they feel soggy with a load on, not enough low end grunt for my taste (but then I like my I-6 because I can pull away from 10 mph at 850 rpm in 3rd gear without a struggle while hauling 2-3K behind me). They feel great in cars though (my friend with the bottomless pockets just mechanically finished a sick '49 Mercury with a 5.4L 3 valve Triton V8 and the Electronic Automatic Tranny, still needs some body work) and it runs like a(n) insert expletive of your choice here. Just the same is true of a high horsepower high RPM diesel such as can be found in the BMW 535D. Makes a great car engine, but would be a pretty lousy truck diesel, in my estimation. There are good truck diesels, good truck gassers, good car diesels (just very few in the USA right now) good car gassers, and there are those which fit neither category, and are just expletive. As I am sure we can all agree on, however, the last category seems to be shrinking rapidly, as even the lousy engines seem to be getting pretty good.