the point I was making is that you are going to have a massive torque for 1000 HP, or 600 or whatever system you want to use. Your torque has to be big, to create a good HP (not talking about 14K rpm on a inline 4 to create something like 400HP at 150FtLbs of torque. ).
your not going to get the bigger HP numbers without the respectable TQ #s at a higher RPM.
say you have 2 7,5l engines. The 1st makes 750TQ at 3000RPM and has a power band of 3000-7000 RPM. The second engine makes 725TQ at 3000RPM, and has a power band of 3000-7000 RPM. engine 1 makes 1000HP and engine 2 makes 966HP. The torques are still at 750 and 725 respectively. The torques win the race man.

 

Allison transmissions are not as good as fords.

Theres an entire company here that won't buy any more because of the repairs when being run heavy.

 

I was asking your for your point. I based my powerband loosely on all the talk of a 1000 ftlb at one rpm. In both examples you left out 1 of the numbers. Hp in the 1st and rpm in the second. My point is tractors don't do highway speeds can do large sums of work for 50 hp. 20 mph is rather fast for a tractor I think. Put shorter tires on it and you'll gain alittle speed. It won't take much gearing to get it to highway speeds. But why? That's not what it was disgned for.
These numbers have real world place. Tractors w/ 540 ptos make 486 ftlbs tq w/ 50 hp. The pto. Has nothing to do with going highway speeds.
Its just stupid to ignore the role tq has in a machine's ability to do work.

 

Huh? Dude I know how hp is made. I don't disagree that tq makes hp. I disagree w/ tq wins races. 1 example is a motorcycle to a mustang. Another example is 5.4l sd to 6.0l sd. All I'm saying is tq doesn't win the race. You take mathmatics + gear mechanics and find you a sharp driver that doesn't make many mistakes. I guarantee if you build yourself a drag car based on tq and don't focus on rpms and gearing you end up the joke of the night.

 

The goal would be to have the right gearing to keep the engine operating in the peak HP range of the engine.

This will give you the most power to the ground.

In every day applications, you want the engine operating closer to the peak TQ band, to achieve better economy.

 

Is the 6.0l not acheiving the same goal? Its geared to put the max power to ground.

 

35 years ago - things were a lot simpler, and it was relatively "easy" to build a good engine.

Diesels overcame a lot of issues of the 70's/80's era engines. They rev'd much slower, were built with a lot more material which overcame a lot of the manufacturing tolerance issues and promoted much slower wear. They didn't have any electronics or emissions systems which hampered gas engines, and their basic mechanical indirect injection was just as simple, but more more reliable than a carburettor.

They were also slow.


Now-a-days an engines reliability isn't as dependent on things like machining tolerances, or even how thick a block is - every manufacturer has that down - but its often how well they can handle newer emissions technologies and bolt on systems. Most basic engine designs are pretty robust.

My motorbikes gas engine revs to 10,000 rpms every day, has done 69,000 miles without so much as a valve adjustment - and should do 250,000 miles before it will need any form of real mechanical work.
I am sure there are a number of 6.0l diesel owners out there that wished their truck got to 100,000 miles before any real mechanical work.

Put that in perspective, back in the 70's and 80's you had a highly stressed 1.2l Motorbike engine that makes 165hp and revs to 10,000rpms, and a Large capacity diesel engine that gets used in medium duty trucks - which one would you guess would require more maintenance?

Diesel engines for the most part are going through a different era.
They used to be the slow, reliable and more economical than a gas engine.
Now they are faster than a gas engine, still more economical, but I would question their reliability.

Those changes are purely due to consumer demand (wanting more power) and emissions requirements.

 

Here Here! That was well said! Does anyone remember the 70's and 80's when a (arguably the best engine produced...and I am die hard ford) 350sb (or any gm SB) needed a cam and bearings every 50,000? Now they dont even want you too look under the hood for atleast 100,000 miles! Times are different, engines are more high strung, even the diesels! I think they (gas and diesel) are better now than ever before! Try makin 400 hp 800ft lbs of torque with an IDI!

 

YEs, I wasn't creating an attack statement,

Most racing vehicles I've been in have high stall TC's, and rear ends made for making time in the 1/4 mile. This is done with only 1 thing in mind, getting max power to the wheels.

A vehicle like that is not going to get good mileage like a daily driver vehicle.

Having said that, these new 2011 transmissions with double overdrive are sure changing the game a bit.

 

I didn't think you attacked. I actually thought we where agreeing

 

Easy to build for who?
I happened to own GMC Toro-Flow engine from 1970's as well as "famous" Oldsmobile 350 diesel from 1980's.
Those could only dream about reliability the 6 liter has. Didn't hear about them ever touching 100k.
How older 6.2 l diesel compares to 6 l ?

 

Those 6.2's and 6.5's were perfect for those that wanted a diesel but didnt need one.

 

The 7.3, and 5.9 cummins,

were lucky to be running without emission controls, and were much simpler.

Also the 6.5, but IMHO was a light engine.

I'd bet money, if you bought a brand new 6.4 / 6.7 and a 6.7 cummins, and stripped the emission stuff from day 1, and put in clean fuel, it would out-perform and outlive any earlier trucks.

 

I take the emission only as an excuse for not doing the job right.
The Mercedes 320cdi passed all the emissions in 2005 for 45 states and was pretty close to get CA approval for much tougher car requirements.
The engine can be carried by single person, yet pumps over 200 hp.

 

[quote=Snowseeker;10392216]Speaking of pulling weight, I'm all set for this year!



My Father-in-Law asked me one time if it was legal to tow 2 trailers. I told him that you see semi's do that all the time. My only concern is that with the boat being last, how can the driver see it? The reason I ask is a couple years ago, I got a service call to I-75 just south of Cincinnati, Oh where a guy was towing a 5th wheel camper with a boat hooked up behind the camper. The hitch broke on one side and was dragging. The driver never saw it until the police pulled him over. I will admit, the hitch was designed for probably about 50 pounds of tongue weight, and maybe 1000 pounds of towing weight, if that. This guy had a bigger boat. He said he usually just towed a little john boat. He had bought this one and was taking it to Florida. So, I had to make a hitch that would carry the load. He was very helpful telling me what to do. After I handed him my helmet and stinger and told him he could do it himself while I watched, he shut up.