V-10 -vs- Diesel
OL COUNTRY 72
Chet Botkins
Don't know how much foot pounds of torque a V-10 produces. But I bet it
isn't that much! <G>
Chet
'00 F350SD
OL COUNTRY 72 <olcou...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20000630162616...@ng-fh1.aol.com...
> Which has more pulling power??
Alfred
Right on. V-10 pulls 425 ft/lbs at 3250(ish) RPMS
Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie
<Alfr...@prodigy.net> wrote:
> Right on. V-10 pulls 425 ft/lbs at 3250(ish) RPMS
What year? (changes in the 2000 model year increased power)
--
Ralph Lindberg personal email n7...@amsat.org
RV and Camping FAQ http://kendaco.telebyte.com/rlindber/rv
If Windows is the answer I would really like to know what the question is
Ralph Lindberg & Ellen Winnie
> Which has more pulling power??
Maybe a more important question is, what are you planning to do with
this engine? Tow and drive a lot of miles, just run errands and only a
drive few miles? Do you mind the noise of a diesel?
They are both excellent engines, the cost difference is not small
however. If you are only driving a few miles each year, the increased
millage and engine life may not be worth the additional upfront costs of
the diesel. If you are planning to drive a lot, say 20,000 miles (or
more) per year (and you don't mind the noise and smell) a diesel maybe
the right choice.
Roger/Debbie Bess
engine to do alot of heavy towing with.. It can pull as much as the
V10, does not loose power at high altitudes, gets higher mpg while
pulling, and will usually last longer. There is an additional cost of
purchase and general maintainence is more costly as well (oil changes
etc).
Don & Terri Mutsch
The 2000 model year Superduty manual shows the 7.3L Power Stroke
diesel generating 235 hp. It's torque curve peeks at 500 ft lbs of
torque at 2000 rpm's. (not 625) Maybe the diesel Chet is referring
to isn't a 7.3L Power Stroke. The V10 produces 310 hp and 425 ft lbs
of torque at 3000 rpm's.
To upgrade beyond the stangard 5.4L V8 the V10 is a $600 option. The
diesel the a $4600 option. These are list prices.
Don
On Fri, 30 Jun 2000 20:40:27 -0400, "Chet Botkins"
<cbot...@visuallink.com> wrote:
>I got 625 ft. pound of torque at 2000 rpm on my diesel.
>Don't know how much foot pounds of torque a V-10 produces. But I bet it
>isn't that much! <G>
>Chet
>'00 F350SD
>OL COUNTRY 72 <olcou...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:20000630162616...@ng-fh1.aol.com...
Simpleton
Torque is the force applied to a shaft, or twist on a shaft. "Work" is
defined as mass x distance. Horsepower is work. If you are moving
something (i.e. trucking) you want work. I work in heavy industry, which
uses big motors to do big jobs--pumps, conveyors, generators, blowers,
etc--and each application is is defined by horsepower, not torque.
The only people who talk torque v. horsepower on the planet are those who
own deisel pickups.
Bob Beattie
"Chet Botkins" <cbot...@visuallink.com> wrote in message
news:slqfeq...@corp.supernews.com...
Gary Glaenzer
work is mass times distance
horsepower is work divided by time spent doing that work
I think..........
Simpleton <blin...@nightowl.net> wrote in message
news:QS185.6$7N5.1...@news1.i1.net...
Simpleton
<nitro496 nospam @hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:q9e1ms4qpru8l7gpr...@4ax.com...
> Hope this helps to settle some arguments, and I hope I get it right.
> Torque x rpm over 5252 = horse power.
If the torque/horsepower equation was that simple, then the torque and
horsepower curves of any given vehicle would be the same(only on a different
scale)--and they are not.
> So if you need you power at higher rpm a petrol engine is usualy
> chosen.
> If it is power at low rpm a diesel. If you can afford it a diesel
> with more gears will always out work a petrol engine.
Then why do the vehicles in tractor pulls--where they pull sleds with a
sliding load--always use gas engines?
>
> A petrol engine will always out perform a diesel engine on the street
> or strip.
>
> For me, a 460, c6 on LP Gas.
>
> STU BOND
> Australia
ho...@nospamextremejeep.com
> Chet,
> Torque is the force applied to a shaft, or twist on a shaft. "Work" is
> defined as mass x distance. Horsepower is work. If you are moving
> something (i.e. trucking) you want work. I work in heavy industry, which
> uses big motors to do big jobs--pumps, conveyors, generators, blowers,
> etc--and each application is is defined by horsepower, not torque.
> The only people who talk torque v. horsepower on the planet are those who
> own deisel pickups.
No, the people that talk torque vs. horsepower are the people that
actually know what they're talking about.
Electrical machinery, such as pumps, blowers, etc are rated in APMS and HP
because torque is not important here. The loads are fairly static, not
dynamic (the speeds and loads don't vary so they don't have to compensate
to keep flow at a specific rate.)
Horsepower is "work over time", not simply "work". When you're talking
about towing, horsepower and torque determine different things. Torque is
twisting on a shaft, correct. This is what accelerates your truck.
Horsepower is what determines how quickly that torque is put to work, per
se. If horsepower was the main factor in engines and towing, how about
you put a Ford V10 into an 18-wheeler? I mean if that big ole Cat and
that Ford V10 are making 400hp they should be able to tow the same loads,
right? Wrong. That V10 doesn't put out NEARLY enough torque to get the
load moving. You're going to go nowhere fast. What's the difference?
That big ole Cat makes about 1100 lb/ft of torque at around 1200rpm, which
is enough torque to overcome the load and get it moving. The trucks won't
accelerate very fast because of the "low" horsepower. Horsepower is also
what maintains speed. Torque gets a load to a speed limited by
horsepower. An engine with more horsepower will be able to maintain a
higher speed under load but does NOT mean it can carry more of a load.
For example, hauling a load up a hill. Two trucks, same load, one has
more horsepower. On level ground they maintain 60mph (this is not MAX
speed, mind you) and then start up a grade. The truck with more
horsepower will be able to maintain a higher speed up the hill. The truck
with less horsepower will be able to haul the load up the hill but at a
slower speed. Why?
Horsepower is "work over time". Less horsepower means less work over the
same time. Make sense?
Your applications are probably different with different equipment, this
the different ratings and requirements, but when it comes to towing, it
seems you really don't know what you're talking about. ;)
--
--
Hogan Whittall
'47 CJ2A - 302, C5, 5.38's, yada, yada
'98 XJ Classic - BFG MTs, RS9ks
__________________________________________________________________
This is formal notice under California Assembly Bill 1629, enacted
9/26/98 that any UCE sent to my email address will be billed $50
per incident to the legally allowed maximum of $25,000.
__________________________________________________________________
Airbrush4u
And the diesel mileage does not change drastically whether you
are towing or empty. Not so for a gas engine.
Mike
"Truth is so obscure in these times and falsehood so established,
that unless we love the truth, we cannot know it." - Blaise Pascal
-----------------------------------------------------------
Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com.
Up to 100 minutes free!
http://www.keen.com
nitro496 nospam
Torque x rpm over 5252 = horse power.
So if you need you power at higher rpm a petrol engine is usualy
chosen.
If it is power at low rpm a diesel. If you can afford it a diesel
with more gears will always out work a petrol engine.
A petrol engine will always out perform a diesel engine on the street
or strip.
For me, a 460, c6 on LP Gas.
STU BOND
Australia
On Mon, 3 Jul 2000 10:17:55 -0500, "Gary Glaenzer" <glae...@csj.net>
wrote:
>torque is force x distance from a pivot point
>work is mass times distance
>horsepower is work divided by time spent doing that work
>
>I think..........
>
>
>Simpleton <blin...@nightowl.net> wrote in message
>news:QS185.6$7N5.1...@news1.i1.net...
>> Chet,
>>
>> Torque is the force applied to a shaft, or twist on a shaft. "Work" is
>> defined as mass x distance. Horsepower is work. If you are moving
>> something (i.e. trucking) you want work. I work in heavy industry, which
>> uses big motors to do big jobs--pumps, conveyors, generators, blowers,
>> etc--and each application is is defined by horsepower, not torque.
>>
>> The only people who talk torque v. horsepower on the planet are those who
>> own deisel pickups.
>>
nitro496 nospam
wrote:
>If the torque/horsepower equation was that simple, then the torque and
>horsepower curves of any given vehicle would be the same(only on a different
>scale)--and they are not.
Well infact they are, the difference you see on a dyno sheet is the
machine interperating the amount of time it takes for the vehicle to
accelerate the mass of the dyno and then turning that in to a graph.
Torque is required to turn the thing and the amount of time it takes
to get the rollers to a set speed indicates the amount of horse power.
( Way to simple an explaination and I know I have left lots out)
In drag racing the ultimate test of a race cars horse power can be the
speed MPH at the top end of the track. The amount of time taken to get
down the track is an indication of the vehicles efficiency.
>Then why do the vehicles in tractor pulls--where they pull sleds with a
>sliding load--always use gas engines?
Not knowing much about Tractor Pulls, you will need to help me here, I
would think the builder has a weight consideration, and 3 Chevies will
always be lighter than 3 Cat engines. Also the engines may have a
wider torque band and usable power over a wider rpm range so they do
not need to slam down gears. But this is only a guess.
Why do some use turbine engines that have almost no torque, but will
spin to 20,000 rpm ???
STU BOND
UnderTaker
<ho...@NOSPAMextremejeep.com> wrote in message
news:Ha985.58$W75....@news.pacbell.net...
> Simpleton <blin...@nightowl.net> wrote:
> > Chet,
>
> > Torque is the force applied to a shaft, or twist on a shaft. "Work" is
> > defined as mass x distance. Horsepower is work. If you are moving
> > something (i.e. trucking) you want work. I work in heavy industry,
which
> > uses big motors to do big jobs--pumps, conveyors, generators, blowers,
> > etc--and each application is is defined by horsepower, not torque.
>
> > The only people who talk torque v. horsepower on the planet are those
who
> > own deisel pickups.
>
woodrow
question here it is: Quit fooling around with kids stuff and get a real
man's truck: Chevy all the way baby!!!
tnt835
will have the best chance of getting me the Darwin award? ROTFLMAO
Glen
Walter Palkowski
couple of years back who strapped a couple of "JATO packs" to his pickup
and slammed into a canyon wall at about 200 mph? Kinda like Wyle Coyote
with his ACME Jet skates?
ho...@nospamextremejeep.com
story...it was quite amusing. :)
--
Michael Warmath
a wimpy F16 motor that will probably have to be pulled off for maintenance
every damn night.
"tnt835" <tnt...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:3962B723...@earthlink.net...
Bill Baker
<wa...@txc.com> wrote:
>So I take it you're tryin' to outdo the Darwin award winner from a
>couple of years back who strapped a couple of "JATO packs" to his pickup
>and slammed into a canyon wall at about 200 mph? Kinda like Wyle Coyote
>with his ACME Jet skates?
Urban legend, whose classic version claims someone strapped JATO units
to an Impala and ended up a greasy spot on a rock wall. No one has
actually died trying this stunt. The UL seems to have sprung from Andy
Granitelli's biography, where he talks about a stunt act he used to do
where he strapped JATO packs to a circle track roadster. For the first
test, he lit off all the rockets at once on a lonely stretch of highway
in the Mojave Desert (IIRC). He barely managed to keep control of the
roadster and fried the hell out of his brother's brand new Impala
following behind. Subsequently, when running the stunt on dirt tracks,
he or his brother were careful not to light off more than two rockets
simultaneously.
I read his book twenty years ago, so my recollection may not be exact.
It has pictures of the him piloting the roadster, though, rockets
blazing.
Gary Glaenzer
http://www.geocities.com/Baja/Canyon/7665/ROCKIT.HTML
takes some time to read it all, but definitely worth it
//////////////////////////////
Bill Baker <w...@well.com> wrote in message
news:070720001109359163%w...@well.com...
Bill Baker
<glae...@csj.net> wrote:
>check it out:
>
>http://www.geocities.com/Baja/Canyon/7665/ROCKIT.HTML
>
>takes some time to read it all, but definitely worth it
Incredibly long...and totally lacking proof that his story predates
Granitelli's. Granitelli built his car in the 50's, as I recall, and
his near-death JATO story extrapolates to the UL version with just a
touch of retelling exaggeration. Besides, a vignette lifted from a
mass-market, published autobio. seems a lot more likely to spawn a UL.
Walter Palkowski
Even if he didn't do it first, the guy writes a great story. I read
it during my lunch hour at work and had a hard time stifling my
laughter.
Walt
Bill Baker wrote:
>
> In article <r1p95.120$B92...@newsfeed.slurp.net>, Gary Glaenzer
> <glae...@csj.net> wrote:
>
> >check it out:
> >
> >http://www.geocities.com/Baja/Canyon/7665/ROCKIT.HTML
> >
> >takes some time to read it all, but definitely worth it
>
BigD
"prove" that greater horsepower (gas) is better than greater torque
(diesel.)
ELECTRIC MOTORS produce their maximum torque at 0 RPM. Electric
motors "power band" of torque would show the maximum at 0, decreasing
to minimum at the "free run" speed of the motor. A diesel engine comes
close
to the performance curve of an electric motor, save for the ability to
deliver
power under the engines idle speed!
When you want lots of power away from an electrical outlet, you use a diesel
engine. The gas engines will pull the load (kind of...) but you have to rev
the
hell out of them to do it.
When gas and diesel trucks are unloaded, the gas truck has a faster 0-60
and quarter mile times. I did not get my "oil burner" to race rice boys and
gas trucks. I got it to carry an RV and tow watercraft.
I have not heard *one single PSD owner* using their truck to haul a load
that wishes
they got the gas instead. My first truck was gas. I kept it 18 months and
got
a 2000 350 PSD. Ill never go back! Diesels are for work. Gas trucks fine,
they can do it too. But when we hit that 7% grade outside Yosemite, while
your
gas truck is in 2nd gear near redline doing 45 floored, I am gonna pass you
by
in 3rd going 70 at 3100 RPM...
"Simpleton" <blin...@nightowl.net> wrote in message
news:QS185.6$7N5.1...@news1.i1.net...
> Chet,
>
> Torque is the force applied to a shaft, or twist on a shaft. "Work" is
> defined as mass x distance. Horsepower is work. If you are moving
> something (i.e. trucking) you want work. I work in heavy industry, which
> uses big motors to do big jobs--pumps, conveyors, generators, blowers,
> etc--and each application is is defined by horsepower, not torque.
>
> The only people who talk torque v. horsepower on the planet are those who
> own deisel pickups.
>
Bill Baker
<mybogu...@myhouse.com> wrote:
>Gas trucks fine,
>they can do it too. But when we hit that 7% grade outside Yosemite, while
>your
>gas truck is in 2nd gear near redline doing 45 floored, I am gonna pass you
>by
>in 3rd going 70 at 3100 RPM...
Utter crap. The torque specs of the V-10 and PSD aren't *that*
different. The kind of torque advantage you're describing is, like,
twice the actual one the PSD has over the gas Triton. You're talking
as if the PSD was a locomotive diesel, which it ain't.
Rich
The previous poster is not right by his literary disingenuous and false
remarks of saying that 2nd gear will red line at 45 mph. Specs are
specs. If the PSD say it produces 500 ft lbs of torque and 235HP, that
is what it is. And if it achieves it at a lower rpm then optimize for
that. If the the V-10 produces 430 Ft lbs torque and 300 HP (or however
much) that is what it is. If it achieves it at a higher rpm then
optimize for that as well. Just because it is an oil burner does not
make it more than the spec says it is even if Tim Allen grunts so. Same
goes for HP on the V-10. You can only produce so much testosterone you
know. Maybe you ought to save some for the real action :>)
Jon Chuchla wrote:
>
> you obviously own the gas triton. for those of us who own the PSD would
> know that the previous poster is right.
>
> Bill Baker <w...@well.com> wrote in message
> news:140820001130395365%w...@well.com...
Jon Chuchla
Bill Baker
<jchu...@home.com> wrote:
>you obviously own the gas triton. for those of us who own the PSD would
>know that the previous poster is right.
Again, utter crap. The power curves for both engines, either Ford's
own specs or dyno testing by independent sources, show a sizeable but
not huge difference in torque. Do you have any idea how steep a 7%
grade is? Jeez, it's an engine not a miracle machine. Pull your head
out....
Rich Linder
engine, but beyond that, the useable power difference is not really that
much. Sure the RPM will indicate differently to produce the same power and,
if you need to run in that high power band all day long, the diesel might be
the best choice, but... The extra horsepower of the gas engine will be
noticeable most of the time, the smoothness and silence will be noticeable
ALL the time, and the extra initial cost will be noticeable as soon as you
sign on the dotted line. The diesel might last longer between rebuilds, but
how much? The $4000+ cost of the diesel will re-build the V-10 a couple of
times at least, and that will probably outlast the rest of the truck for
most of us.
Of course, if you spend all your time running, the diesel is probably well
worth it just for the extra economy, even if you don't need the lugging
power. You won't get more than rated HP or torque from either engine.
They are not really that different in power. You will see slightly higher
rev's with the V-10, but at that RPM, you will have more HP. Very different
engines, optimized for very different applications. If you pull a big load
once in a while and don't drive over 30,000 mi. per year, the V-10 is
probably best for you. If you drive over 30,000 a year and/or pull big
loads most of the time, then the diesel is probably worth the extra cost and
vibration. If you only haul air in your bed and don't pull anything, and
that fits a lot of people, I suggest the V-8.
Rich Linder
99 F-250, V-10, Auto
Rich <rt...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:399A0279...@prodigy.net...
> Look fellas,
>
> The previous poster is not right by his literary disingenuous and false
> remarks of saying that 2nd gear will red line at 45 mph. Specs are
> specs. If the PSD say it produces 500 ft lbs of torque and 235HP, that
> is what it is. And if it achieves it at a lower rpm then optimize for
> that. If the the V-10 produces 430 Ft lbs torque and 300 HP (or however
> much) that is what it is. If it achieves it at a higher rpm then
> optimize for that as well. Just because it is an oil burner does not
> make it more than the spec says it is even if Tim Allen grunts so. Same
> goes for HP on the V-10. You can only produce so much testosterone you
> know. Maybe you ought to save some for the real action :>)
>
> Jon Chuchla wrote:
> >
Jon Chuchla
V8 diesel the other the V10 gas. the diesel had a 5sp manual, the gas an
automatic. the test was a 110yd stretch of dry dirt road. distance
measured with a walking wheel. the incline was 55 +/-3 degrees measured
with a laser protractor/level. i know this sounds like a hummer commercial
but both trucks made it. the gas revved much higher and seemed to be harder
to control the wheel speed(slippage). the diesel held it's footing much
better and kept it's RPMs lower. i felt much safer and comfortable and
confident in the diesel than the gas.
this hill is on the camp that both of these trucks serve. at the
bottom of the hill is a sewage lift station which we must take samples from
daily. also the trucks serve many purposes. they both have PTO driven
220/110V generators and air compressors for maintenance of the facility.
both trucks spend most of their life running at less than 30MPH and run at
idle for long periods of time. the diesel with it's low RPM will long
outlast the gas. simply put, the slower it spins the less times the parts
rub against each other and wear out. both trucks have hour meters installed
on them since they may run constantly for a 10 hour day but log less than 3
miles. the diesel works for us. the gas might be better for you. just
sharing my results with everybody.
Harald
>OK I just finished an experiment. took two 95 F350s up a hill...one was
the
>V8 diesel the other the V10 gas. the diesel had a 5sp manual, the gas an
>automatic.
Interesting "study". Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm fairly certain that
V10's were not available in F350's until the 1999 model year (before that
you could get a 460 ci V8). Also, the original post was referring to the
PSD, which is a much revised engine from the 1995 model. In addition,
different transmissions would greatly affect the results. Were these both
regular cab trucks? Both 4x4? What rear end ratio? Too many variables to
make the results useful.
--
--- Harald ---
Email to: HARALD at FOXINTERNET dot NET
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." -Ben Franklin
Rich Linder
1. In 1995, Ford F350's had very different engines (and most everything
else) than the current Super Duty line. They didn't even have a V-10
available, the Diesel was very different, too.
2. By testing with an automatic in one and a manual in the other, you have
such a different control of the engine RPM (with the automatic) it isn't a
fair comparison. Of course you would feel "safer" in the (manual) diesel,
it's probably the transmission as much as the engine. I prefer manuals too.
For the application you have, the diesel is the obvious choice. I don't
think that is the case for many (perhaps most) Super Duty applications. Of
course, the diesel sound and vibration is definite a "big truck" feature.
I kinda like it too.
Jon Chuchla <jchu...@home.com> wrote in message
news:GKnp5.18546$ZI2.1...@news1.rdc1.il.home.com...
Gary PCDC
A diesel has its benefits in a Super Duty, and also does not have it's
benefits. For me it did not have any benefits because I hardly pull
anything with my Super Duty, and when I do it is not a heavy load. I
have pulled a Full size Ford Crown Victoria on a transport 1200 miles
from Texas to Detroit, and a small John Deer loader on a transport a
few miles (Ball and hitch). I have a 5.4 V-8 speed 4.10 gears, and it
did a fine job in the hills trough Tennessee/Kentucky area. I was able
to keep up a fair speed going up hill and did not get slowed down below
50 mph. The RPM was a bit up there, but I was able to cruse at 70 mph
with no sway or feel that my engine was struggling. For the few times
that I was planning on pulling a trailer I opted for the V8 over the
V10 and diesel. Now I LOVE a diesel truck, and I would love to have
one, but at $4000.00 more I just did not see it worth it for what I use
my truck for. If I was going to haul cars all the time I would of
bought the diesel engine. I used to drive a flatbed F-700 Ford and
loved it. I love the sound of a turbo diesel, and love big rigs. But I
am not willing to spend $4000.00 to just say I have a diesel. Yeah the
V10 was only a couple of hundred more, but did not like the gas mileage
difference (might be a re-sale killer who knows, but I plan to keep
mine for a LONG time). I have had my F-250 SD V8 for over a year now,
and have only pulled a heavy load twice. I plan to get a boat, and I do
not need a Diesel to pull that small load. Everyone is going to have
an opinion about a gas vs. a diesel, but after watching "The History Of
The Truck" on The History channel I know why the BIG rigs have a diesel
engine over a gas. It just does a better job, and if the gas was so
great then the 2001 Ford F-9000 Areomax would not have a diesel engine.
Gary
1999 F-250 SD
1995 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor
--
"Life moves pretty fast. If you don't stop and look around once in
awhile, you could miss it."
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.