No, It should be 250hp/525tq for 02-03 autos, and 275hp/550tq for 02-03 manuals. PMRs were 2001 through 2003 7.3's.

 

And to go a step farther in the electrical vs. mechanical comparison:

In electrical systems, the force is voltage and the flow is current. Combine the two for power, measured in watts.

In mechanical systems, the (rotational) force is torque and the flow is rpm. Combine the two for power, which is measured in horsepower.

 

no, im not mistaken. you look at the dyno curves of the motor with 700 lb/ft of torque, it will have closer to the max hp possible longer than the motor with only 350 lb/ft. we already went over this. . . .the 14L cummins and my motor are of identical design. . .one is just scaled down to 5.9 to fit into a pickup truck. we both have 500 hp (i actually have more cuz mine is at the wheels) but ill never tow what that big motor can tow. why? because the larger motor makes 1500 lb/ft of torque OR MORE. . . .which means he's got near-max hp off idle to redline. this means greater towing ability. everyone who says im mistaken thinks that the motor magically sits in its "peak hp" rpm. . .or that infinite gearing/rpm makes up for a lesser torque value. . . THAT is mistaken. while accelerating, the 350lb/ft motor might only be at that rpm <20% of the time, perhaps close to 40% at WOT acceleration. if you crack a downshift, you obviously are putting the motor closer to its peak. . . .i dont have to downshift because my 1000 lb/ft of torque makes my hp curve look like a giant mesa. . .giving me near-max hp throughout 1/2 my rpm range. believe me, i get it .

the 6.7 cummins has been an option in fords heaviest duty applications for years now. ive seen them with my own eyes, and the info is all over the net. im unaware of their future plans to use the motor, but theyve used it for years.

 

1500 ft lbs of TQ at 1500 RPM should give you roughly the same HP as 750 ft lbs of TQ at 3000 RPM's.

 

But it's still a Cummins... on a flatbed.


You are quite correct. Matter of fact, I will go a bit further.

When the V10 came out, and especially after it got it's "PI head" performance boost, the torque curve, compared to ever other gasser out there, especially GM or Mopar, was almost flat, for a gasser. The V10 puts out 80% of it's peak torque at only 1000RPM. Given any "normal" torque converter, 1000RPM is no where near where the RPMs go when you just floor it when towing. More like 1500-1700, which is more like 85-90% of the peak torque of the V10.

So yes, comparing "peak HP" or even "peak torque" can not be the sole reason to buy a certain engine. However, that's a double-edged sword. It works in one way, but in others, not so much.

When you compare the "low" HP figure of the V10 compared to the Dodge Hemi, it's pretty clear that the V10 will do much better under load.

The diesels do a bit better, in that the torque curve is basically flat. Once the turbo comes in (after the initial lag), that torque is THERE.

That could be true, except for the head bolt/gasket problems that had nothing to do with emissions.

 

Exactly. And any FORD engine will get me where I want to be

 

youre making my point for me. BOTH motors i cited have ~500 hp. i actually have close to 600 at the crank, whereas the 14L is rated around 500/1800. the 14l makes 500 hp almost anytime the turbo is lit. . .so throughout its entire rpm range it has near-max hp, thanks to its massive torque value. no way in hell am i pushin 500 wheel hp off idle. . . .yes, it has an impressive power curve, but no way no how do i have the power available for the amount of time the big motor has. in theory, i COULD make it for as long, but rpm is a limited variable that is not exclusive to my motor. the big motor can be made to spin faster also. . . .

 

I wouldn't totally excuse emissions equipment from that equation. A damaged EGR cooler can allow enough coolant to be pumped into the cylinder to cause the heads to lift.

 

responses red

 

Well put.

But I will still say that EGR coolers be damned, the 6.0 had head bolt stretch issues that had nothing to do with green-stuff ingestion. It wasn't caused by ingesting coolant, but it DID cause coolant ingestion.

But I could be wrong

 

I think you have HP and TQ mixed up.

If it could make 500 HP at 1000 RPM, it should be making close to 1000 hp at 2000 RPM.

 

I thought that's what I said? I know what wattage, voltage and ampd are.
Like hp to find the wattage you mutiply the amps by volts. Your amps will increase as load does. The harder you pull the higher the amps. Looking back at what I said it is messed up. I was trying to compare a 30amp 220 lamp with lower wattage and it being brighter. Volt is like rpms but in pulses and amps is like tq. Amps is what kills not volts.
I reckon I'll drop this from my explaintion as it doesn't work.

 

the 500 hp generated from such a motor is very modest. its 2.5x the size of the 5.9's, with < 2x the hp, BUT 3x the amount of torque. . . . the 14L ISM cummins is rated at 435hp at 600 rpm. 600 rpm!. it has a torque peak of just under 2,000 lb/ft at 1250 rpm, with factory redline of 2400-ish. its peak hp is a little over 500, so from 600 rpm to 2400 rpm it virtually has between 435 and ~500-525 hp. . . .thats almost its hp max from idle to redline. . .the modded rigs you see drivin around on the street have hp curves that look similar to mine, just with much bigger numbers. . .they still have insane amount of power off idle (well over 500 hp), but hp shoots up fast like you suggested in your previous post. most modded rigs range anywhere from 750-1500 hp, with a slight bump in redline for an even broader hp curve. the mission of the engine builders is not to provide a powerhouse of 1000+ hp (which is very easy to do), but a flat curve of 500 hp throughout its entire operating range. the fuel input dictates the torque curve. . . ."just spinning higher rpm" doesnt undoubtedly equate to more hp. the engine will make as much torque as its told to with fuel input values (the tune).

my point, in a nutshell, is the motor was designed to make 500 hp, not the 1000 hp "on paper" that it COULD make with such a torque rating. the guys modding their rigs are taking greater advantage of the huge displacement diesels copious amount of torque across the board. so yes, a modded truck will do just what you said. make 500 hp near idle, and 2-3x that up to a similar-to-stock redline.

 

No biggie, squiggy.

Funny thing is that James Watt came up with the term and accepted value of horsepower.

THANKS JAMES

 

Seriously?