Cummins 600/610 torque is software limited?

[ACF]

I read somewhere that the Cummins 600/610 are limited to 560 some odd pounds by computer software when bolted to a 48RE because of the torque limitations on the transmission, is this true?

 

[cerberusiam]

I read somewhere that the Cummins 600/610 are limited to 560 some odd pounds by computer software when bolted to a 48RE because of the torque limitations on the transmission, is this true?

Nah!!!!! WHERE did you read that! :-laf :-laf





Sorry, my bad.





Yes, that is too true. IIRC, the 48RE is rated 530 ft/lbs of input TQ the stock trucks will only put down around 480 to 500 ft/lbs on the dyno. The fueling rates limit the amount of TQ the engine will generate. Incorrectly, its being called TQ management but it amounts to more of fuel control based on boost, rpm's, speed, etc. :{



Remove it and the Cummins likes to eat even built transmissions.

 

[MCrossley]

as stated above this is true the engine is load managed so if the a/c is on or fan etc the engine is allowed more output to compensate for such loads up to the rated 610... I listened to a tech session in this, funny as once in a great while my 05 will get confused and you can tell when it has miscompensated as you can easily break loose the rearend when you hammer it...

 

[bagd99dak]

so basically if you have the 48re the engine doesnt put out what it is advertised. kinda misleading on that. this is news to me. so basically they are false advertising with the 48re's. maybe they should say you have 550 with auto and 610 with 6 speed. i feel cheated in a way now!!!!. i want what i payed for and was told i was getting!!!

 

[p-Bar]

We can start a"class action" lawsuit and everyone will get 15. 00 and the attornys will get millions

 

[cerberusiam]

so basically if you have the 48re the engine doesnt put out what it is advertised. kinda misleading on that.

Thats not true, the engine is capable of and will generate the numbers advertised even with the 48RE. It just not possible with the stock program into the ECU to see it on a dyno because those are flywheel numbers. If you put in a correction factor and compensate for the drive train loss the numbers are pretty close.



As I said the fueling rates are based on rpm, boost, speed, etc. When these all align enough fuel is delivered to generate the numbers. It is almost impossible to measure because the way an acceleromator dyno works, a sloppy converter, and a program that won't allow lockup under full power until higher rpm's.



Cummins released the ratings numbers and DC quoted them. DC has never said anywhere you can measure that power at the wheels. Dyno numbers are so subjective I don't think you could prove anything with them. :-laf :-laf

 

[sag2]

Actually you are getting what you paid for. The fan, generator, A/C clutch all eat up horsepower. They torque manage the remaining couple of horsepower to about 562 total at the crank. The rest is lost through converter, trans, and rear axle. If none of the accessories are pulling a big load, then it torque manages to a safe 562. If they are pulling a bunch of power then there is no need to pull a bunch of fuel away to keep the trans safe. If you want to feel torque manage, drive an SRT8 with the 6. 1 and NAG1 trans. They have to really manage the power on shifts to save the trans and rear axle.

 

[BHolm]

Does this apply to the older 305/555 engines too? I am pretty sure GM did this as well to save the allicrap trannies. They like to deny it on the GM diesel site but I think on the same technicality Dodge would try to deny it. Under ideal conditions it might send that much torque through They have even been doing it on big rigs as the torque numbers have made it up to 2000 lb/ft, the manufacturers have to do something to save the drivelines.

 

[JasonCzerak]

Actually you are getting what you paid for. The fan, generator, A/C clutch all eat up horsepower. They torque manage the remaining couple of horsepower to about 562 total at the crank. The rest is lost through converter, trans, and rear axle. If none of the accessories are pulling a big load, then it torque manages to a safe 562. If they are pulling a bunch of power then there is no need to pull a bunch of fuel away to keep the trans safe. If you want to feel torque manage, drive an SRT8 with the 6. 1 and NAG1 trans. They have to really manage the power on shifts to save the trans and rear axle.

The SRT8's are detuned till about 6000 miles, then the ECU will allow full power on top of torque managment.

 

[cerberusiam]

Does this apply to the older 305/555 engines too?

Yep, even to more of an extent than the 600 series engines so I am told. AK Ram claims it is way worse especially when you try to power them up. Makes sense as the pre-05's did not have the electronic TV pressure control that would cause a downshift when the TQ rise got too high.

I am pretty sure GM did this as well to save the allicrap trannies.

Right again. The Ally 1000 and TorqueShift both implement true TQ management. They are a fully electronic controlled transmission that the ECU/PCM/?? will defuel, fuel up, downshift, unlock, slip, etc, to manage the power. The Allys in the motor homes behind the Cummins are the same way. Full electronic control or they woud not live long. The 48RE can only be controlled minimally thru TC lockup and TV pressure so it is really a fueling curve based on dynamic parameters.



We will see the same thing with the 68RFE and Aisin. Thats why the newer autos are power rated higher than manual in the new trucks. The power is now managed to save the drive train.

 

[bagd99dak]

kinda weird that all these companies cant build a transmission to handle the power. to bad i cant get an eaton fuller 8 speed in the ram, now that would just be awsome. although i couldnt be happier with my truck and 48re. i only haul about 7k at the most and it pulls hills and all with no downshifting or struggle. so i am more then happy with my truck. ill be putting my truck up on the dyno next weekend so ill see how much power im putting down at the wheels. hope i dont cry. lol

 

[KSHall]

How about this, if you change to a tighter converter will the PCM or what ever electronic do-dad let the engine fuel up more with this hidden load that it see's? The computer does not know that it has been changed so it will see the load and think it needs more fuel,,,,,,,, right? Heck, I don't know I'm just guessing!

 

[RKerner]

I have a buddy who used to be a powertrain guy at Ferd and he says the torque management is more geared to save the rear axle at startup in first gear with a load (max towing capacity). If you look at the 1st gear ratio and multiply the engine torque by it, you get some ridiculous number at the pinion of the diff. Allisons are worse as their 1st gear is really low. Add in the torque multiplication of the TC when it flashes and you can easily see why there is a need for TQM. At 1:1 in 3rd lockup, the rear axle will easily handle the full torque of the engine and OD reduces the torque even more.

 

[cerberusiam]

How about this, if you change to a tighter converter will the PCM or what ever electronic do-dad let the engine fuel up more with this hidden load that it see's? The computer does not know that it has been changed so it will see the load and think it needs more fuel,,,,,,,, right? Heck, I don't know I'm just guessing!

The PCM can't measure or assess load. All it can do is look at MAP, rpm, speed, and adjust the fueling map based on those parameters. If rpm's don't rise the boost doesn't rise and fueling is limited so the speed doesn't rise and the fueling rate slows down. A tighter converter is great as it makes better use of the available power but unless you modify the fuel curve it slows down the acceleration and the reaction time.

 

[KSHall]

I just thought that the truck would "sence" a bigger load and shoot more fuel to it to keep it where the do-dad thinks it should be. I think?

 

[JVolpe]

Ok if you want to feel the difference in stock "Torque Management" on stock configuration and what the Cummins can do with upgraded TC/Trans/Flexpate and Smarty to modify "Torque Management" restrictions then come on down and drive my truck. I can set it to minimal Smarty SW 1, TST and EZ off and you will still be very surprised and the dyno numbers will look more like advertised except on the ground instead of flywheel.

 

[KSHall]

So does the Smarty have a TQ management option?

 

[CumminsBu]

So does the Smarty have a TQ management option?

Yup three different down loads.



http://www.madselectronics.com/DownloadS04A.html