Bought a 600. Best way to increase low end torque?

[CJEliassen]

Now that the maturity level of this thread has hit an all time low, does anyone have any more useful comments? I appreciate the honest and intelligent responses that most of you have given.

 

[DPelletier]

Now that the maturity level of this thread has hit an all time low.

Well, you're right about that part. Anyway, I am sorry to have wasted your time and apologize for mis-reading your posts. I was sincerely trying to help and honestly believed that you may have had a problem with your truck. Your last post has clarified the issue for me. All 600's are dogs compared to '97 12V's



Signing off on this one,

Dave

 

[CChase]

All other posts aside, you don't mention if you have tried putting your foot into it (mash 'er to the floor). I came from an old mechanical 6. 9L Ford to this new truck and the feel and positioning of the accelerator pedal is totally different in fly-by-wire vs. my old mechanical setup...

 

[Big_Daddy_T]

On an engine dyno. At cummins. The manufacturere of our engines. The 600 makes more low end torque. Let me clarify. I havent driven any of your trucks. LOL. I hope I spoke clearly enough not to make anyone defensive. If I have. Kiss my grits.

 

[CJEliassen]

Big Daddy. You believe everything you read?

 

[Camp]

I think it would be helpful to have a heads up comparison. I have to agree with the crowd here that, there may be a problem with your truck. My experience deals with driving MY 600 and also my roommates '02. He runs a DD true torque module and I run an Edge EZ. His truck feels like it makes much better low end torque when I drive it but, when we have our 4x's behind them on trailers, I can out pull him. The power comes on smoother in my 600 so, it feels like there is less but, there isn't. I believe the reason for that is all the emissions crap on the truck so, it monitors the engine emissons much closer and will not allow it to smoke.

 

[CJEliassen]

I am not saying my old 97 had more power, just that the torque came on quicker. My 600 surely has more power and more torque, but there is a huge turbo lag, and its "sweet spot" is in a higher RPM band than my 12V.

 

[turboost]

I have found that unless I go 3/4 to full throttle the turbo doesn't feel like it is spooling up. Maybe thats the difference you are feeling? My Dmax would spool up on 1/4 throttle. On my 600 its either all or nothin' when accelerating. I think we need a VVT.

 

[Gypsyman]

I am not saying my old 97 had more power, just that the torque came on quicker. My 600 surely has more power and more torque, but there is a huge turbo lag, and its "sweet spot" is in a higher RPM band than my 12V.

You hit it right on the head. My 97 felt like it was twisting the truck right off idle but had nothing for top end. They definately feel like totally different animals. Due to fueling being in direct relationship to boost (thanks to the EPA) these new trucks FEEL alot softer on the bottom end.



Just my . 02



-Richard

 

[Camp]

Rumor has it that the guy in Italy, I can't remember his name, that is doing 2nd gen ECM's is about to start doing it for 3rd gen stuff. I may be way behind the game with that info and he may already be on it but, the reports I have read say that his work would take care of the sluggish start we feel in the 600's.

 

[CJEliassen]

Gypsyman,



I think thats probably it. I will say one thing for sure. Even when I bury my foot to the floor, I have never even scene one single puff of black smoke. Its cleaner burning than my VW TDI.

 

[thejeepdude]

Rumor has it that the guy in Italy, I can't remember his name, that is doing 2nd gen ECM's is about to start doing it for 3rd gen stuff. I may be way behind the game with that info and he may already be on it but, the reports I have read say that his work would take care of the sluggish start we feel in the 600's.

That person is Marco, and I'm not holding my breath for the 3rd gens, but you're right, whenever he does get a working 3G ECM finished, I will be among the first in line. I figure by about the time he gets the bugs all worked out, the warranty on my '05 should be almost up and I'll be looking for my first power bomb. The bottom line is, these motors are everything the previous motors were and MORE, it's just the EPA has a noose around their nads.

 

[turboost]

I never see anymore than just a little haze but I do have a heck of a black bumper.



Who is this guy from Italy? What is the name of his company/chips?



BTW with the addition of my Quad tow module the bottom end is helped and spools faster. I think the retard on the cam from the factory really slows the spool on these things. With a smaller compressor housing these things should spool faster than all other generations.

 

[Big_Daddy_T]

Do a search on marcos mad ecm.



As for believing everything I read. There is a little consumer protection law called truth in advertising. I believe nothing I read and half of what I see, but I trust these engine manufacturers torque curves are accurate on an engine dyno.

 

[DavidTD]

I'll add something if I can.



The new CR cummins does have more torque and is flat. The 24v's are near that, and the 12v's are not. The 12v's peak early in torque and fall.



The new CR makes peak HP at around 2900 rpm. Up from the 24v's where 2700 seems to be the sweet spot and 2500 for the 12v.



Gearing for the new generations provide a 3. 73 for the first time. If you are used to a 4:10, it might feel weak, a 3. 54 and it might feel strong.



The mapping for the fueling curve on the CR will not supply a lot of fuel without boost. On the 12v, the AFC did the same thing but not as well. This is where black smoke comes , BUT low end response might feel better.



To answer your question, make sure your truck is running correctly first. If so and you are still not happy, I suggest a Ramifier from TS Performance.



Good Luck.