Question, 2010 power

[obie1]

So my question is why do the 2011 Ford have a rated output of 400 hp/800 ft-lb and the 2011 Chevrolet has the similar. Doesn't the Chevy have AM 11. 5 also? I am not aware of the Ford manufacturer.



Don't know why our Dodges are less especially on the torque. The 480 rear max is an issue if the competition is advertising their numbers. Other wise there is a 320 ft-lb loss in the drive-train (Chevy)

 

[rscurtis]

The Ford uses a 10-1/2" Visteon axle in the SD. It is physically much smaller than the AAM used in the Dodge and the Chevy/GMC.

I would question that 480 ft/lb figure, it takes more torque than that just to crush the collapsible spacer when replacing the pinion bearings.

 

[HBarlow]

I am also skeptical of that figure but one of our members posted above that he got it from someone at AAM, builder of the Dodge rear axle.

So far I haven't had any luck confirming or disproving that figure.

 

[AH64ID]

The Ford uses a 10-1/2" Visteon axle in the SD. It is physically much smaller than the AAM used in the Dodge and the Chevy/GMC.
I would question that 480 ft/lb figure, it takes more torque than that just to crush the collapsible spacer when replacing the pinion bearings.

That number is engine tq at the flywheel, not tq wrench tq. . You have a lot of tq multiplication with the trans, tq converter (auto), and R&P. On a 6speed in 1st the 480 becomes 2702 to the pinion and 10,079 to the wheels. . That where the limit comes to play.

So my question is why do the 2011 Ford have a rated output of 400 hp/800 ft-lb and the 2011 Chevrolet has the similar. Doesn't the Chevy have AM 11. 5 also? I am not aware of the Ford manufacturer.

Don't know why our Dodges are less especially on the torque. The 480 rear max is an issue if the competition is advertising their numbers. Other wise there is a 320 ft-lb loss in the drive-train (Chevy)

Chevy has the same rear axle, and thus the same flywheel limit until speed in increased, and gearing is reduced. I don't know what Ford has, but I guarantee they have tq management as well, its just too hard to control 800 ft/lbs of unrestricted tq at 5mph in 1st gear, that's 11275 ft/lbs to the wheels without the tq converter multiplication.

To those of you that have a hard time believing why tq management is used, or that it exists I am guessing you have never driven a HPCR with modified tq management, the change is very noticeable, and its quite obvious how much stock is limited.

 

[blmyachtsales]

After 4000 miles I am dead convinced this thing is managing it's power. I do not need the cummins rep to tell me. You can feel the engine respond les *** the load increases (hope that makes sense), not because of the load but in response to it (power increases less with the same amount of throttle input the heavier the load is). Guess it is good for saving the DMFW since I can still smeall clutch after pulling 10K up a long freeway hill at les than ideal rpm (again I tow with the 245's not the 35's).



My question is, does the Mini max or smarty allow you to remove whatever is limmiting the truck?



I am happy with my 10 but still like the 06 better.

 

[RVTRKN]

I'm lost with that statement, "less than ideal RPM", you control that, with the G56. I've pulled at 22K GCVW up the south bound GrapeVine in so. Cal. at 55MPH in forth gear at 2700 RPM with the G56.

 

[Wiredawg]

The Smart does do torque/power mgt. There are 10 present levels (5 with and 5 without timing). You can also do custom settings.



Wiredawg

 

[blmyachtsales]

RVTRKN, how many miles do you have on your rig, any mods? I realize I can control rpm, I was playing around to see what the computer would allow. What I consider "less than ideal" is lugging at low rpm which puts more stress on the clutch. I was at 1400 in I think 5th and the truck would not allow any more power though I had the pedal to the floor. It was certainly managing the power output relative to the strain on the drive train/clutch/whatever. My older stick would have walked away at that rpm with 17K. I don't drive that way normally, just an observation.



Thanks for clarifying wiredawg, bet it makes a huge differance in feel and also ends the life of the clutch! south bend time

 

[RVTRKN]

I think it has 27K miles and no Mods, I'm not sure because I don't drive it much anymore. However I get to haul my boat back to Parker AZ for the winter, so next weekend I get to feel the power again.



As to your question lugging at 1400 RPM, I need more info, was it an incline what was your GCVW or GVW, why would you want to lug it beside the answer you gave. Never lug your/any Diesel due to increase in EGT, they need to breath to keep the exhaust cool. The DPF is our real problem, how would you like it if someone stuck a potato in your exhaust and then told it to perform like a 5. 9 with 325/600 HP/tq.

 

[blmyachtsales]

RVT I was only trying to figure out if the trucks computer was holding it back. Was not so much a question as it was a statemant. You won't catch me lugging it like that agian. The reason I was wondering in the first place was while entering a construction area merge I had a whodini suddenly switch into my lane as I was merging, jersey bariers on the side with no where to go. I floored it to get ahead (was already at about 1800rpm in 3rd) and the dam truck took off like a volkswagen beetle with a misfire. It was a safetey issue.



Agree 100% about the DPF, plan on loosing it soon.

 

[RVTRKN]

Its the computer controlling the soot output not the torque management, I bet if you were around 21-2200 RPM it would of taken off like a bat out of hell. I've had that very same problem ever since I had a reflash back in early 09. When I'm in the lower RPM range its like what you describe but as soon as I get over 2000 RPM I have power. I think its to prevent excessive smoke (soot) which we can't see due to the DPF. I have always regretted the reflash for that very reason, my tech agrees with me about the soot prevention programing.

 

[blmyachtsales]

Yes she goes like normal at about 2K, getting better as it breaks in which is to be expected.

 

[AH64ID]

Its the computer controlling the soot output not the torque management, I bet if you were around 21-2200 RPM it would of taken off like a bat out of hell. I've had that very same problem ever since I had a reflash back in early 09. When I'm in the lower RPM range its like what you describe but as soon as I get over 2000 RPM I have power. I think its to prevent excessive smoke (soot) which we can't see due to the DPF. I have always regretted the reflash for that very reason, my tech agrees with me about the soot prevention programing.

The 2K rpm number has been common across the HPCR range, its even evident on a dyno, my hp makes a noticeable jump at 2K rpms.



The engine makes more power above 2K rpms, and makes more power at higher speeds. . Its mainly for drive-train longevity and driveabilty.

 

[RVTRKN]

I could agree with that if the truck did that from the get go. It was reflashed in 09 and it has never been the same. Its gutless until you reach the 2K range, but whats worse is when its in regen as I shift through the gears, 2nd thru 4th are detuned and when you hit the 2K RPM range it launches itself to the point you have to let off the pedal but it justs keep on going and if you engage the clutch it over revs itself. I took it in thinking the throttle was sticking , even had the throttle sensor changed under warranty. When it went into regen, I took the truck to Frahm Dodge and they confirmed it with two techs in the front and me in the rear seat with the computer connected, they confirmed it was in the program.



Like I have been saying, it not torque management, it is soot management.

 

[AH64ID]

Like I have been saying, it not torque management, it is soot management.

But it does it on all the HPCR's. And soot wasn't an issue in 03. It may be more pronounced in the 6. 7's, but they all have tq management.

 

[robertyoke]

But it does it on all the HPCR's. And soot wasn't an issue in 03. It may be more pronounced in the 6. 7's, but they all have tq management.

thats not true, there has been emissions standards starting before even isb motors. they just keep getting more stringent, the isbe (cr motors) have small turbos, retarded timing and ecm's programmed to lessen the smoke (particulates).

 

[AH64ID]

thats not true, there has been emissions standards starting before even isb motors. they just keep getting more stringent, the isbe (cr motors) have small turbos, retarded timing and ecm's programmed to lessen the smoke (particulates).

Correct, it reduces the soot out the tailpipe, but the soot is still made it just goes into the oil now. The oil on 03-04's still stays very clean, relative to the 04. 5+ HPCR's.

 

[robertyoke]

Correct, it reduces the soot out the tailpipe, but the soot is still made it just goes into the oil now. The oil on 03-04's still stays very clean, relative to the 04. 5+ HPCR's.

true some does get in the oil, but the majority gets caught in the dpf and then re-burned into ash.

 

[AH64ID]

true some does get in the oil, but the majority gets caught in the dpf and then re-burned into ash.

DPF didn't come into play until 07. 5, and the 04. 5-07's had reduced soot out the pipe, and VERY dirty oil.

 

[rscurtis]

The limit on particulate emissions was the same from Jan. 1, 1994 until Dec 31, 2006. It is possible that the 305 engines polluted less than the standard, but as the NOX standards started to ramp down on Jan 1, 2004, the engines were tuned toward NOX reductions. This increased the PM emissions beyond the standards, which were then reduced with the CAT. That's why the 325 engines have the black oil.