My New 2019

[Ozymandias]

Doesn't work out.
Two engines, same displacement, same stroke - the I6 has more torque then the V8.

 

[AH64ID]

You are over complicating it. Let's slim it down to a single power stroke of the piston....all other things being equal, there will be more twisting force (torque) at the crank with a longer stroke vs. a shorter stroke....because there is more leverage applied to the crank.

If all other things are equal then the torque cannot change. For torque to increase something else has to change in relation to the engines output.

If torque goes up so does hp, it's not just a torque increase. That's my point, well one of them.

Can't argue with the math relationship of hp/tq/rpms.

Doesn't work out.
Two engines, same displacement, same stroke - the I6 has more torque then the V8.

Exactly. There are more variables than just stroke.

If you use the 4.88 stroke of the 6.7 Cummins the V8 would have a 3.65" bore making it have a stroke ratio of .75:1 vs the 6.7 Cummins having a .86:1.... proving there is more to it than stroke and stroke ratio. It's a combination of multiple factors.

 

[gsbrockman]

#ad

 

[brucejohnson]

There was a difference at one time...but, enginecycle just doesn't sound right...
http://www.differencebetween.net/technology/industrial/difference-between-engine-and-motor/

 

[Wiredawg]

And it doesn't help the confusion when oil companies call engine oil motor oil. And then there's the problem of motor speedway, motor sports, and worst one, motor vehicle.

In Texas, we exercise redneck right to use the terms interchangeably, understanding contextual clues.

Another dilemma solved on the TDR. Or is it?

Cheers, Ron

 

[kthaxton]

If all other things are equal then the torque cannot change. For torque to increase something else has to change in relation to the engines output.

I stand by my quoted reply. I did not say nothing else will change, nor did I say that there are no other contributing factors to an engines output, I have said nothing of the sort. I am saying that with all other things being equal (with the engine's configuration, not its output numbers), the one with a longer stroke will produce more torque because of the leverage of the longer crank throw. This create more twisting force. Obviously stroke can only go so far before it is counter productive, I assume this is known.

Of course other output numbers will change, because torque is a measured value and HP is a calculated value based on torque and RPM, not the other way around.

 

[Newsa]

Engine? Motor?

What do the British say?

 

[kthaxton]

Tea time?

 

[Cummins12V98]

Tea time?

Don't forget the Crumpets.

 

[kthaxton]

Bollocks!

 

[Wayne M.]

Motor?

View attachment 117239

I see they’ve dumbed the definition, like the rest of the dictionary and internet.

Proper definition.

 

[Wayne M.]

Doesn't work out.
Two engines, same displacement, same stroke - the I6 has more torque then the V8.

Prove it. Better yet, show me a in-line and a vee with the same stroke and displacement.

 

[AH64ID]

Tea time?

But beer is just so much better than tea


In the end it comes down to looking at only the leverage potential, or the entire operation of the engine.

You're talking about peak torque on the crank, and I am talking about the torque output at the flywheel.

 

[DavidC]

Motor?

Must have switched to a Tesla in midstream

 

[CurtisScrugham]

I've had my 19 for about 6 weeks now & love it. The 2020's are supposed to have a 50 gallon fuel tank - anyone looked into putting the 50g tank into a '19? I really want to do this if possible.....

 

[cwbyinjeep]

I've had my 19 for about 6 weeks now & love it. The 2020's are supposed to have a 50 gallon fuel tank - anyone looked into putting the 50g tank into a '19? I really want to do this if possible.....

Titan makes a 55gal direct replacement for 8’ bed trucks. I’ll be ordering mine shortly!

 

[RVTRKN]

The negative to the larger tanks, is the cost to fill em. My C&C had the 54 Gallon tank, and when it got to a 1/3 of a tank it was always over a $100.00. The positive in my case, is I can get into and out of Comifornia without getting robbed by the Communists.

 

[Wiredawg]

The negative to the larger tanks, is the cost to fill em. My C&C had the 54 Gallon tank, and when it got to a 1/3 of a tank it was always over a $100.00. The positive in my case, is I can get into and out of Comifornia without getting robbed by the Communists.

That's an interesting perspective of the negative of larger tanks is the cost of filling them up. When I top off, the highest for 84 gallons of 112 was over $350. I consider it the cost of ownership. But when you add the cost of the truck, the cost of the RV (my reason for having the truck), and the total package, it's not really bad. I have had that brief thought though when paying over $350 for a fillup. The positive of bigger tank is saving on the price of fuel We visited Yosemite and fuel station right at park was around $4.75/gal. Had plenty of fuel when we arrived and for visiting the park. A few days later went South solo visiting other tourist sites and found fuel around $3.35/gal. We see this all the time. We have fuel app that is golden. Same situation in San Francisco.

But, I know what you're saying you have a different perspective of how much you pay for fuel when GCW is 34K Lbs.

Cheers, Ron

 

[TFucili]

The numbers on the pump are bigger, but I just remind myself that at the end of the trip it's the same fuel burned.

 

[RVTRKN]

I’ll disagree a little on the fact of same fuel used, at the weight of fuel per gallon when bob tailing, is more weight to push.