Test Drive Ford Superduty

[franklyfrank]

Originally Posted by Moflash

Wow,we have some real armchair automotive geniuses in this forum. Lol

Which vehicle will accelerate faster? With a 6000lb trailer attached and without?

Given they are installed in exact configured vehicles.

A.400 horsepower with 430ft lbs of torque.

B. 400 horsepower with 925ft lbs of torque.

Sorry but it’s a no brainer! You guys crack me up!
I love this forum...........Safe travels

If only horse power mattered we all would have the same trans and rear end configuration.
Diesel engines have a longer stroke and put out more torque at a lower Rpm. Many Diesel semis have only 350 HP and move 80 K lbs. They also have 8 speed trans split 3 ways and rear ends split 2 ways to put the torque to the wheels to move the weight.
What a lot of nonsense regarding this issue.

[pteck]

Originally Posted by Moflash

Wow,we have some real armchair automotive geniuses in this forum. Lol

Which vehicle will accelerate faster? With a 6000lb trailer attached and without?

Given they are installed in exact configured vehicles.

A.400 horsepower with 430ft lbs of torque.

B. 400 horsepower with 925ft lbs of torque.

Sorry but it’s a no brainer! You guys crack me up!
I love this forum...........Safe travels

Easy question. And probably not the answer that you expect. Because of the elephant hiding under your hood that most diesel owners forget about.

Answer: A.

You’ve told us they make the same horsepower. THAT single notion of power (i.e. HP) tells us all there is to know about accelerating a load up a hill. Because that is the very definition of HP. Now the other part is weight… as in power to weight.

In order for a motor and drivetrain to support 925ft lbs, it’s gotta have huge structure and mass. Remember that elephant hiding under your hood? That needs to be transported up the hill too, along with that 6000lb trailer. It's why diesel variants of every platform weigh so much more than their gasoline brethren. Which is why the gasoline variants have the edge in payload. Not to mention all the dynamic benefits of not hauling that elephant, e.g. handling, braking, super high spring rates, etc…

[Moflash]

My hypothetical question actually states exactly the same configuration except horsepower and torque.

[jcl]

Originally Posted by Moflash

My hypothetical question actually states exactly the same configuration except horsepower and torque.

So in your hypothetical example, the two vehicles have the same drivelines, suspension, etc? There is a reason manufacturers don't build them that way. The vehicle with the higher torque requires a heavier and more robust powertrain to handle that torque. Without those heavier components, it may not last long enough to make it through your hypothetical race.

[gypsydad]

So what does all that crap about hp vs torque you folks are arguing have to do with Test Driving a Super Duty? I did drive both F250's and I can tell you the F250 with the 6.7D is a heavier truck. It feels heavier then the gasser without a load, and when you kick it, it gets up and moves pretty damn quick. Can it beat the gasser to 60mph? Not sure, but I know it performs well while towing my 28'. And the engine braking and torque are there when I need them. the whole towing experience changed with this rig. If your on the fence gas vs diesel with a larger TT, I say drive both and experience it for your selves.

[franklyfrank]

Originally Posted by pteck

Easy question. And probably not the answer that you expect. Because of the elephant hiding under your hood that most diesel owners forget about.

Answer: A.

You’ve told us they make the same horsepower. THAT single notion of power (i.e. HP) tells us all there is to know about accelerating a load up a hill. Because that is the very definition of HP. Now the other part is weight… as in power to weight.

In order for a motor and drivetrain to support 925ft lbs, it’s gotta have huge structure and mass. Remember that elephant hiding under your hood? That needs to be transported up the hill too, along with that 6000lb trailer. It's why diesel variants of every platform weigh so much more than their gasoline brethren. Which is why the gasoline variants have the edge in payload. Not to mention all the dynamic benefits of not hauling that elephant, e.g. handling, braking, super high spring rates, etc…

OK Einstein, than please enlighten us why semitrailers use diesel power exclusively.
Anywhere where the need is for power and durability diesel rules.
The difference in the weight of a diesel and gasoline engine is minimal in pick ups to worry about the payload. When it comes to power and durability diesel winns hands down.

[DKB_SATX]

Originally Posted by franklyfrank

OK Einstein, than please enlighten us why semitrailers use diesel power exclusively.
Anywhere where the need is for power and durability diesel rules.
The difference in the weight of a diesel and gasoline engine is minimal in pick ups to worry about the payload. When it comes to power and durability diesel winns hands down.

The difference in curb weight for a gasoline F250 to a diesel F250 is right at 800 lb across the board.

[pteck]

Originally Posted by franklyfrank

OK Einstein, than please enlighten us why semitrailers use diesel power exclusively.
Anywhere where the need is for power and durability diesel rules.
The difference in the weight of a diesel and gasoline engine is minimal in pick ups to worry about the payload. When it comes to power and durability diesel winns hands down.

It may surprise you that I do like diesels. In the right application, it really is the optimal solution. I think you can agree that with all things, there are potentially pros and cons.

We on these boards often conflate concepts which has us talking past each other. In this case, it's not so much power and durability that makes diesels superior. It's actually economy and durability. Durability to your point is key to commercial operations. When applied passenger vehicles, it's arguable. Especially with so many issues and failures in ancillary and emissions components that are fitted to modern diesels. So I'd chalk durability to be a wash at best here.

Economy, no argument. Hands down more efficient from a fuel consumption/cost POV.

When looked at from a life-cycle cost perspective of procurement, running, maintenance, resale, again it's no longer so clear cut. With many fleet operations now making the case for gasoline based 3/4 and 1 ton vehicles, unless very heavily laden.

If you want to make the case for low end torque and low rpm tractability, okay, diesels are where it's at.

Just don't confuse that for power (i.e. HP), or the likes of Einstein might try to fact check you. As power for climbing performance up a hill is not a diesel only playground.

[pteck]

Originally Posted by Moflash

My hypothetical question actually states exactly the same configuration except horsepower and torque.

That's great. Just make up hypotheticals as you wish. In the real world, the answer is A.

[Moflash]

Originally Posted by pteck

That's great. Just make up hypotheticals as you wish. In the real world, the answer is A.

Lol

[DBinSD]

It is all in the gearing... I was a “diesel pulls better” person as well. The fact is, HP an Torque are independent yet related. Torque is the force for ACCELERATION and HP is SPEED.

Please read...

So, what does this mean to me when the rubber meets the road?

What’s the implication of this? Let’s say it takes 150 horsepower to go up a hill at 70 MPH. You have two rigs, one a diesel with 400 ft-lbs of torque at 2000 RPM. At 2000 RPM, it is generating 150 horsepower, and will go up the hill at 70 MPH. You have another gasoline-engined rig that generates 200 ft-lbs at 4000 RPM, which is also 150 horsepower. So, it can go up the hill at 70 MPH too, with half the torque of the diesel. So...

Myth 1: An engine with more torque “pulls” better.

What’s the difference in the previous example? Doesn’t torque make you go up the hill? The difference is in the gearing of the rigs. The diesel-rig probably has overall gearing like 2.28:1 (with a redline below 3000 RPM you need high gearing), and the gas-engined rig has overall gearing more like 4.56:1. Even though the torque of the engines are vastly different, after compensating for the gear ratios of the differential and transmission, the torque at the rear axle is the same. After correcting the gearing to operate within the operating RPMs of each engine, the lesser torque of the higher-speed engine is multiplied to be the same. So it isn’t engine torque that decides how fast you go up the hill, it is horsepower.

However, not all engines of the same peak horsepower are completely equal. For example, the horsepower curve may be flatter (as a percentage of RPM) on one engine than the other. While both may be exactly the same performance at peak horsepower, the engine with a flatter horsepower curve may give better performance because when you shift from gear to gear you have higher average horsepower. Generally, when people talk about an engine being “torquey” they really are thinking that it has a wide power band. An example of a peaky motor might be one with 300 horsepower at its peak RPM of 4000, but it only has 200 at 3500 and 4500 RPM. A “torquey” engine with the same maximum horsepower might have 250 horsepower at 3500 and 4500 RPM, and not drop down to 200 horsepower until at an even wider RPM band.

[franklyfrank]

Originally Posted by pteck

It may surprise you that I do like diesels. In the right application, it really is the optimal solution. I think you can agree that with all things, there are potentially pros and cons.

We on these boards often conflate concepts which has us talking past each other. In this case, it's not so much power and durability that makes diesels superior. It's actually economy and durability. Durability to your point is key to commercial operations. When applied passenger vehicles, it's arguable. Especially with so many issues and failures in ancillary and emissions components that are fitted to modern diesels. So I'd chalk durability to be a wash at best here.

Economy, no argument. Hands down more efficient from a fuel consumption/cost POV.

When looked at from a life-cycle cost perspective of procurement, running, maintenance, resale, again it's no longer so clear cut. With many fleet operations now making the case for gasoline based 3/4 and 1 ton vehicles, unless very heavily laden.

If you want to make the case for low end torque and low rpm tractability, okay, diesels are where it's at.

Just don't confuse that for power (i.e. HP), or the likes of Einstein might try to fact check you. As power for climbing performance up a hill is not a diesel only playground.

Power up the hill down the hill around the bend and on straight always is ruled by diesel .
In ships , locomotives, heavy construction, back up generators for half the town diesel rules. Long stroke high compression massive torque right out of the engine before it even hits the drive train. When the first diesel powered race cars hit the Indianapolis speed way it ruled the race until they stopped racing them.
I have more fun pulling hole shots with my 6.7 power stroke at traffic lights beating the punks every time.
Gasoline engines have their place and preferred use but they are not the same as diesels.
This entire thread is nonsensical.

[pteck]

Originally Posted by franklyfrank

Power up the hill down the hill around the bend and on straight always is ruled by diesel .
In ships , locomotives, heavy construction, back up generators for half the town diesel rules. Long stroke high compression massive torque right out of the engine before it even hits the drive train. When the first diesel powered race cars hit the Indianapolis speed way it ruled the race until they stopped racing them.
I have more fun pulling hole shots with my 6.7 power stroke at traffic lights beating the punks every time.
Gasoline engines have their place and preferred use but they are not the same as diesels.
This entire thread is nonsensical.

It's hard to have a meaningful discussion when you have such fervent beliefs, that they belie logic. I've heard a lot of tall tales, but diesel (trucks) ruling the bends is a new one.

Fortunately, facts and evidence are stubborn things as well.

2018 F-250 gas vs diesel. 0-60
Gas - 6.7 seconds
Diesel - 6.9 seconds

Because weight! And over 200 ft to stop from 60mph. Road cornering of .73g. If you know anything about performance metrics for most vehicles, I would not brag about these numbers.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...-driver-page-4

But those aren't "loaded" tests...

Check out these other apples to apples loaded tests, gas vs. diesel.

Round 1:
Nissan Titan XD in diesel (310 hp / 555 tq) vs. Nissan Titan XD gas (390hp / 394tq) towing same 10,600lb trailer.
Gas is over 40 seconds faster to the top of the hill despite 161 less torque
http://www.airforums.com/forums/f463...ml#post2081251

Round 2:
GMC Canyon diesel (181hp/369tq) vs. Chevy Colorado gas (308hp/275tq) towing same 6,100lb trailer.
Gas wins again, over 50 seconds faster to the top
http://www.airforums.com/forums/f463...ml#post2082100

I'll look for some F250 loaded comparisons. Fortunately for the Powerstroke 6.7, it actually has more output hp and tq, than the gas 6.2. Albiet again, way more weight.

[Tsunami-v2]

Give a view at this review of the 2017 F250 Super Duty. Found it to be enlightening. I also have a Gen-Y and love it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0fI...&frags=pl%2Cwn

[tjdonahoe]

Originally Posted by Tsunami-v2

Give a view at this review of the 2017 F250 Super Duty. Found it to be enlightening. I also have a Gen-Y and love it.

Very good...now how long will it last?

[tjdonahoe]

Originally Posted by pteck

Easy question. And probably not the answer that you expect. Because of the elephant hiding under your hood that most diesel owners forget about.

Answer: A.

You’ve told us they make the same horsepower. THAT single notion of power (i.e. HP) tells us all there is to know about accelerating a load up a hill. Because that is the very definition of HP. Now the other part is weight… as in power to weight.

In order for a motor and drivetrain to support 925ft lbs, it’s gotta have huge structure and mass. Remember that elephant hiding under your hood? That needs to be transported up the hill too, along with that 6000lb trailer. It's why diesel variants of every platform weigh so much more than their gasoline brethren. Which is why the gasoline variants have the edge in payload. Not to mention all the dynamic benefits of not hauling that elephant, e.g. handling, braking, super high spring rates, etc…

.......you don’t see any big gas engines in the big trucks anymore....they are not as efficient as the diesel.....proven long time ago....my cat engine is 500 hp with 1850 lbs of torque....

[pteck]

Originally Posted by tjdonahoe

.......you don’t see any big gas engines in the big trucks anymore....they are not as efficient as the diesel.....proven long time ago....my cat engine is 500 hp with 1850 lbs of torque....

Ford 7.0L gasser. It's coming.

[Countryboy59]

Originally Posted by tjdonahoe

Very good...now how long will it last?

You don’t need a million mile engine in a pickup truck. Especially if you’re retired and drive only on vacation.

I like to check back on this thread every few days. Entertaining stuff.

[franklyfrank]

Originally Posted by pteck

It's hard to have a meaningful discussion when you have such fervent beliefs, that they belie logic. I've heard a lot of tall tales, but diesel (trucks) ruling the bends is a new one.

Fortunately, facts and evidence are stubborn things as well.

2018 F-250 gas vs diesel. 0-60
Gas - 6.7 seconds
Diesel - 6.9 seconds

Because weight! And over 200 ft to stop from 60mph. Road cornering of .73g. If you know anything about performance metrics for most vehicles, I would not brag about these numbers.

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...-driver-page-4

But those aren't "loaded" tests...

Check out these other apples to apples loaded tests, gas vs. diesel.

Round 1:
Nissan Titan XD in diesel (310 hp / 555 tq) vs. Nissan Titan XD gas (390hp / 394tq) towing same 10,600lb trailer.
Gas is over 40 seconds faster to the top of the hill despite 161 less torque
http://www.airforums.com/forums/f463...ml#post2081251

Round 2:
GMC Canyon diesel (181hp/369tq) vs. Chevy Colorado gas (308hp/275tq) towing same 6,100lb trailer.
Gas wins again, over 50 seconds faster to the top
http://www.airforums.com/forums/f463...ml#post2082100

I'll look for some F250 loaded comparisons. Fortunately for the Powerstroke 6.7, it actually has more output hp and tq, than the gas 6.2. Albiet again, way more weight.

Like I said a whole lot of nonsense to be read here when it comes to Gas and Diesel engines.
When they begin to rip out the Diesels from locomotives and replacing them with gasoline engines give me a call.

[Can of beans]

you mean like the gas turbine locomotives