Gas vs PSD
Posting Guru
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,313
Likes: 0
From: Sunny, Snowy, CO
Take something that has an IDENTICAL hp rating and run them on the same dyno, within 20 minutes of each other. The dyno is measuring hp, but you have to have TORQUE to keep rolling on the dyno without downshifting. The only way a V10 would compare to the Diesel is to pull the engine and dyno it at the crank with little resistance. Start jacking the pressure up instead of using a baseline resistance and the diesel will win every time.
Elder User
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 616
Likes: 0
From: Farms of Duplin County
They are light, so HP will work in the place of torque. The V10's weigh as much as the Powerstrokes do, and have lower torque ratings, relying on screaming engines and comparable HP numbers to do the same job. That's why they are slow as hell, and their mileage sucks.
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 742
From: Isanti, MN
The HP loss is due to a lower torque number coming off of the flywheel. Seriously. Torque will overcome the loss of HP through the xmsn. Don't believe it?
Take something that has an IDENTICAL hp rating and run them on the same dyno, within 20 minutes of each other. The dyno is measuring hp, but you have to have TORQUE to keep rolling on the dyno without downshifting. The only way a V10 would compare to the Diesel is to pull the engine and dyno it at the crank with little resistance. Start jacking the pressure up instead of using a baseline resistance and the diesel will win every time.
Take something that has an IDENTICAL hp rating and run them on the same dyno, within 20 minutes of each other. The dyno is measuring hp, but you have to have TORQUE to keep rolling on the dyno without downshifting. The only way a V10 would compare to the Diesel is to pull the engine and dyno it at the crank with little resistance. Start jacking the pressure up instead of using a baseline resistance and the diesel will win every time.
For example look at this:
2003 6.0L engine is rated at 325 HP. K&N recored around 240 HP stock on their dyno. Showing around a 26% driveline loss. Here's the proof:
http://www.knfilters.com/dynocharts/57-2546-1_dyno.pdf
A 2005 3V V10 rated at 362 HP. K&N recorded 260 HP at the rear wheel. This is around a 28% driveline loss. Here's the proof:
http://www.knfilters.com/dynocharts/57-2567_dyno.pdf
Engine output, be it torque or horsepower, has NOTHING to do with driveline loss!
Elder User
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 685
Likes: 0
From: Spokane, WA
I don't mean to sound argumentative or arrogant, but you have no idea what you're talking about. You seem to have no understanding of the relationship between horsepower and torque.
For example look at this:
2003 6.0L engine is rated at 325 HP. K&N recored around 240 HP stock on their dyno. Showing around a 26% driveline loss. Here's the proof:
http://www.knfilters.com/dynocharts/57-2546-1_dyno.pdf
A 2005 3V V10 rated at 362 HP. K&N recorded 260 HP at the rear wheel. This is around a 28% driveline loss. Here's the proof:
http://www.knfilters.com/dynocharts/57-2567_dyno.pdf
Engine output, be it torque or horsepower, has NOTHING to do with driveline loss!
For example look at this:
2003 6.0L engine is rated at 325 HP. K&N recored around 240 HP stock on their dyno. Showing around a 26% driveline loss. Here's the proof:
http://www.knfilters.com/dynocharts/57-2546-1_dyno.pdf
A 2005 3V V10 rated at 362 HP. K&N recorded 260 HP at the rear wheel. This is around a 28% driveline loss. Here's the proof:
http://www.knfilters.com/dynocharts/57-2567_dyno.pdf
Engine output, be it torque or horsepower, has NOTHING to do with driveline loss!
Postmaster
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,724
Likes: 4
From: Rogersville, TN
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 742
From: Isanti, MN
Hrmm...that is kind of weird. Good catch!
Logistics Pro
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,974
Likes: 18
From: Millersburg, OH
Here is my 5.4 with 11,100 lbs on it. Post #137 https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/9...-video-10.html The only thing that kept it from gaining even more speed was the fact that the road was so short . If your struggled with 800 lbs then there was something wrong with it.
Logistics Pro
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,974
Likes: 18
From: Millersburg, OH
Send me a PM with the link to the thread. I am leaving for Florida tomorrow and won't have internet until the 15th. If you don't hear from me for a while, it's not because I'm not joining, it's because I will be sitting on the beach watching girls and dodging oil slicks
FTE Stories
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
Top 6 Best Deals Available on New Fords & Lincolns Right Now
Brett Foote
This Hennessey Takes the Expedition Tremor's Off-Roading Capability to the Next Level
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Fords at 2026 Carlisle Ford Nationals
Joe Kucinski
3 Best / 3 Worst Parts of Modern Ford Ownership
Brett Foote
10 Amazing Upgrades That Solve Common Ford Truck Owner Headaches
Pouria Savadkouei
Every 2026 Ford Engine Explained
Brett Foote
10 Ugly Ford Trucks That We Still Kinda Love
Joe Kucinski
10 Things Every Truck Owner NEEDS (2026 Edition)
Michael S. Palmer
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Verdad Gallardo
Posting Guru
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,066
Likes: 4
From: Rogue River, Oregon
Back about 1964 they made 1,500 hp, but today they actually make 8,000 hp, but it cannot be actually measured because they wouldn't run long enough at WOT to get a measurement, plus there are no 8,000 hp dynos.
Posting Guru
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,313
Likes: 0
From: Sunny, Snowy, CO
I don't mean to sound argumentative or arrogant, but you have no idea what you're talking about. You seem to have no understanding of the relationship between horsepower and torque.
For example look at this:
2003 6.0L engine is rated at 325 HP. K&N recored around 240 HP stock on their dyno. Showing around a 26% driveline loss. Here's the proof:
http://www.knfilters.com/dynocharts/57-2546-1_dyno.pdf
A 2005 3V V10 rated at 362 HP. K&N recorded 260 HP at the rear wheel. This is around a 28% driveline loss. Here's the proof:
http://www.knfilters.com/dynocharts/57-2567_dyno.pdf
Engine output, be it torque or horsepower, has NOTHING to do with driveline loss!
For example look at this:
2003 6.0L engine is rated at 325 HP. K&N recored around 240 HP stock on their dyno. Showing around a 26% driveline loss. Here's the proof:
http://www.knfilters.com/dynocharts/57-2546-1_dyno.pdf
A 2005 3V V10 rated at 362 HP. K&N recorded 260 HP at the rear wheel. This is around a 28% driveline loss. Here's the proof:
http://www.knfilters.com/dynocharts/57-2567_dyno.pdf
Engine output, be it torque or horsepower, has NOTHING to do with driveline loss!
I threw out my "theory" as a tongue-in-cheek way of competing with the other stupid ones I've read throughout this thread. Whenever someone does that, you don the Captain Literal suit and start talking smack....
Posting Guru
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,313
Likes: 0
From: Sunny, Snowy, CO
That's why I didn't say anything higher than 1500hp...That's the biggest dyno we have in the Army. Since you said 8000+hp, where do you get those numbers from?
Posting Guru
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,313
Likes: 0
From: Sunny, Snowy, CO
Here is my 5.4 with 11,100 lbs on it. Post #137 https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/9...-video-10.html The only thing that kept it from gaining even more speed was the fact that the road was so short . If your struggled with 800 lbs then there was something wrong with it.
Super Moderator
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 25,479
Likes: 742
From: Isanti, MN
That dyno "reading" is obviously BS as the 6.0 keeps gaining torque well above its peak. Ford puts out their dyno numbers from the FLYWHEEL. so if a 6.4l PSD makes 385hp/650lb/ft of torque, it's going to kick the hell out of a V10 that makes a lot less torque, both in power, AND mileage. It's a stupid argument.
I threw out my "theory" as a tongue-in-cheek way of competing with the other stupid ones I've read throughout this thread, and whenever someone does that, along comes Captain Literal to call them names. Grow the **** up.
I threw out my "theory" as a tongue-in-cheek way of competing with the other stupid ones I've read throughout this thread, and whenever someone does that, along comes Captain Literal to call them names. Grow the **** up.
The funny thing is that I could post overwhelming proof to you, which I think I have a few times earlier in this thread, and it simply wouldn't matter to you.
I'm glad you like your truck. I think that's something most of us can say about ourselves here on FTE. Most of us don't need to succumb to the "my truck is the ONLY truck on the road" mentality to justify their purchase. Furthermore, most of us don't need to overstate our truck's power output by 35 HP in an attempt to prove a point, thinking nobody would notice your 385 HP claim.
So if I'm Captain Literal, you're the type of poster who can't be wrong and obviously owns the best truck in the world and who thinks anyone who believes otherwise is a fool. Which makes it worthless debating anything with you.
Have a nice day, maybe someone else will indulge your blind PSD devotion, at least until you buy something else.
Postmaster
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,171
Likes: 12
From: SE Texas
JL