When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I wouldn't say that's true, 100% of the time. The peak torque values usually come from ram-air effect in the intake runners and/or the same effect in the exhaust. I wouldn't say they are "more efficient" at peak torque, they might HAPPEN to be, but it isn't a directly causal relationship.
Well I did say most engines are.
It is just an airpump, and while the ratio's aren't exactly linear the maximum torque indicates that it is making the most power for a given amount of air (and for a gas engine.. close to a fixed amount of fuel) so it is a causal relationship
Don't get this. If your hydroboost fails you have manual brakes, same as if a vacuum booster fails.
I manage to brake and steer almost everyday, sometimes even down hill with 17K of trailer behind me, so I'm not sure of your point here either.
Your 2008 is better, it has a higher capacity system.
On older trucks (like my 2000), at idle the oil flow capacity is close to being used up just with the brakes. Even without brakes at idle you can't turn that fast. Fortunately my truck is the 3 pedal variety so when parking so I can bump up the revs, use the brake and slip the clutch to I can turn quickly while I am stopped (or stopping) at the same time.
Surprises all the So Cal soccer mums walking their dogs when a straight piped 7.3 revs up to 2000 while parking
Is that like an on again off again thing at the office?
Was that question meant for me?
If so, that plays a part in it - the resonant frequency of the intake and exhaust runners, port velocity, cam overlap, timing and duration and about 50 other things all have an effect on where the "sweet spot" of an engines powerband is located.
umm. . . .no equal in the gas world? the 8.1 chevy is not only more poweful stock-for-stock vs the 6.8 v10. . .but it also has a much larger aftermarket base, and is an incredible performer with simple exhaust/cam swaps. both get horrible fuel mileage and neither would i ever own in somethin i drove on a regular basis (ESPECIALLY a truck).
as for the psd, lets say someone setup either above said gassers to "outpull a psd", it would be doing so at 1/2 the mpg that the diesel thirsty (relatively speaking) 7.3 was pullin. and, i will reiterate, i am a fan of the 7.3. very reliable money-maker.
Brother just like I said. The 6.8l has no equal in the gas world. Unless I messed something. The 8.1 was only ran from 01 to 06. Which then was replaced by the 6.0. Which has more power than it. The 8.1's best year was 01 for hp @340 then the rest of the yrs was 320-330 hp. Tq was 445.
The 6.8l ran for what 14 yrs or so? Its seen 365 hp and 450 ftlbs of tq. Just like I said no equal.no to mention it does it 1.3 liters less in displacement.
Wouldn't that be making whst I was saying right? If you bought a truck new with 285 tires w/ a 430 rearend then pulled those tires of and put 35s or 325 should be same sizes you just shorten the reargear in relation to the final drive. So now rearend has to spin faster to turn those tires in a linear travel time. "Mph". So now he lost milage. Its as if he fell back to 3:55 or so. I don't know the formula to figure that one out. Now when he went to 4:88 he put his relation back in spec. So in reality he recoverd 50% not gained 50% mpg. That's not programming that's old fashion gear mechanics. If he would have left tires stock then jumped his gears to 4:88 he wost lose mpg. The engine will have to turn more rpms to turn the tires at same speed. More fuel. I will go along w/ some fuel saving w/ the taller gears around the farm cause your putting more tq to ground w/ less rpms. But when your hitting hiway speeds it'll cost you more. You might actually see some improved milage in the hills cause here again your putting more tq to ground needing less rpm to make power. This is just what a diesel does. Nothing else. I don't if you seen the pictures I post of friend of mines 350 with the " willis pkg". He's has 8" lift. [I think that's what he said] with 325 toyo A/T. Door sticker says it has 3:73s. He's getting 14-15 mpg. I'm sure if he went with 4:30s he'd get better milage. But if he jumped to 4:88 I believe his milage is gonna suffer.
If we could just throw taller gears in and program the pcm to run the higher rpms but don't use anymore fuel that's how ford would be building these trucks. I can see the ford commerical big powerstroke power w/ 50% better mpg than duramax and cummins. Wooo they would sell fast.
Even with stock tires the highest I ever recorded was 11.8 mpg unloaded but the average was 9.5 . I guess I should have said 50% more after lift and tires and 25% over stock.
In all honesty, the V10 is hindered a bit with low torque at off idle speeds and it seems like it's "under geared" while driving at say 55mph. At that speed you can hear the engine working hard most of the time with the 3.73 ratio. After the 35" tires, my mileage went deep into the crapper and the engine always seems to be under heavy load no matter what the situation. Best mpg after lift and tires was 8.0-8.5mpg. While towing my 10k TT, it dropped to 5mpg and under. I did correct for an 9% speedometer correction during this time too as most people forget to do if their speedometer isn't corrected for larger tires. At 55 mph, the tach read 1350 rpm.... Not high enough for economy in a large displacement ohc engine. I managed to find some BSFC charts for a bifuel V10 powered generator and compared it to several engine dynomometer sheets I found on google. The best balance of torque, horsepower and economy according to my estimates was between 2000 and 2300 rpm. I'm not saying this is where all of them peak, but where the best balance is. I then used that figure along with my tire size, OD gear ratio and mph to calculate the best gear ratio for my truck. 4.88 was the best selection. I used 65mph and 55mph as my target mph.
This isn't the only thing I have done to the truck to promote better mpg. I installed a test pipe in place of the converter as mine was melted. It has short style ebay headers that I had manipulated to make them closer to equal length primary tubes headers. The EGR system on this vehicle serves very little purpose as it seems to only cycle at loads under 30%, which is about never. I logged EGR switching with a tuner one day and found that out. I removed the system, turned off egr with a tuner and my part throttle pinging went away. I dont think I gained anything but my pinging is gone. I also have a 3" cat back pipe kit with a flowmaster muffler. The truck has an 87 octane custom tune from diablosport but needs to be updated due to the headers and gears. I use Autolite double platinum plugs (indexed).
As of today, I have run a total of four tanks of 87 octane fuel through it. With the 9% speedo/odo correction in place, I'm getting an average 12.95 mpg. Im not using the overhead display as its been inop for some time now.
You can actually see this happening with a scanner that has the ability to view % of engine load. Before, it would max out under very light conditions. Now its very low, especially while cruising at 55-65mph. After about 68mph, fuel economy starts falling at an incredible rate due mainly to wind resistance overcoming torque. Significant amounts of load are placed on the engine above that speed in just about any rig of this size.
I have made this my ongoing project. I have sold off all of my toys I'm no longer interested in and have made this my ultimate focus. I have some spare cash to dump into this thing as since it's been paid off for some time. Listed above is what I've done, I know its worked for me. What im looking at now is a Deil CNG kit that will work with the V10. This uses nearly all the same components used on the V10 powered CNG generators. I have been told by the manufacturer that this will work but is not EPA approved. This doesn't mean much as anyone can use it legally.
BTW: they didn't design this truck around the gas engine. It was nearly 100% designed around the PSD as they have pushed that engine since day one. 3.73 in a heavy truck with a gas engine is a huge miscalculation and was installed that way to save money in manufacturing, not to suit the customer.
Um, PSD all the way having driven both. Maybe for a dedicated plow vehicle or something that you offroad all the time get the V10 but for anything else it isn't even close. Nothing like having a huge trailer hooked up to the back of a PSD Super Duty and the truck literally not caring at all. Can't say the same with a gas engine.
Nothing like having a huge trailer hooked up to the back of a PSD Super Duty and the truck literally not caring at all. Can't say the same with a gas engine.
Broken mentality.
Claiming that a gas engine "cares" about a load and that it is working "harder" just because it needs more RPMs in some situations is not only wrong, but ignorant.
JL
Broken mentality.
Claiming that a gas engine "cares" about a load and that it is working "harder" just because it needs more RPMs in some situations is not only wrong, but ignorant.
JL
claiming a v 10 can do what a diesel can do is not only wrong, but ignorant
Lawd knows I tried to stay away.
This has to be one of the top 5 worst explaintions of why the v10 would win.
Sat. I hauled my JD 5300 w/ FEL and mx8 on my 32' GN up the backside of brently mountain. I don't know what grade it is but its a good one. Alittle short though I think somewhere around 5 miles. This combo grosses just shy of 22k and I stayed in the powerband all the way up. On my isspro pyro gauge from 1000-1200• Is yellow. I was in the yellow. If I had to make a honest guess of what temp was I'd guess somewhere between 1150-1175.
Your 6.0 may or maynot have defueled at 1200• But its the extended tempture over 1200 that'll start causeing problems. My truck won't defuel I don't know why maybe cause its an 04. You'll lose this battle if you think I'm gonna defuel. Then on top of this you can backout and lower egts.
On the crazy side a buddy of mine videoed his egts getting above 1200 and he put the pedal down instead of up and his egts lowered down into the high 1100s. I thought he was full of it and he showed us. I've came to releaze there's a lot more to this egts for me to learn.
Trucks have to be stock and this is the pass comming into San Diego off the I8
Broken mentality.
Claiming that a gas engine "cares" about a load and that it is working "harder" just because it needs more RPMs in some situations is not only wrong, but ignorant.
JL
So my personal experience with Triton gas engines and Powerstrokes that tells me that the Powertroke has a WAY easier time pulling the same load is ignorant? I guess I should stay away from empirical evidence next time and just go by what people post on the internets.
This Hennessey Takes the Expedition Tremor's Off-Roading Capability to the Next Level
Slideshow: The VelociRaptor Expedition gains a lift, upgraded suspension, Brembo brakes, and trail-ready equipment while retaining the stock 440-horsepower EcoBoost V6.
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Slideshow: Called the Fortress, the 850-horsepower pickup combines Raptor underpinnings with military-inspired features, survival equipment, and a starting price of $285,000.