What Gives

[Spyke]

I was looking at the 05 Ford F650/750 and I can get the 5. 9L Cummins with 275HP and 660 Ft Torque. Why can't I get this kind of factory torque from DC. I would suffer a couple of HP loss for the gain in torque

 

[RankRam]

I would have to say the emissions are the limiting factor for us light duty rigs.



The drivetrain would need to be beefed up as well.



By the way I would also sacrifice some hp for torque too. Oo.

 

[Alan Reagan]

DC doesn't want to put the warranty on the drivetrain for that kind of torque. Going to the 48RE was a result of going up to the 550 and anticipated 610. I'm sure the 48RE can handle 660 ft/lbs and that will probably come out next year. It's going to be 50 ft/lb increments until somebody gives up. Duramax has had to go to a water cooled turbo. I don't think it's because it is more reliable. I think it's because of the heat being generated since they have stepped up to the 600 ft/lb range in torque. Now that the hot turbo hurdle is passed, they can probably go further. Cummins can program these engines for pretty much anything they want, within reason. I'm sure the next round might require a larger turbo or variable geometry turbo. I don't think you'll see a water cooled turbo any time soon. When DC starts building a heftier drive train, you'll see more powerful engines if the demand is out there. I think their are going to be diminishing returns on getting much higher in power. Fuel economy is going to end that trend.

 

[nickleinonen]

you also loose ±500 rpm in the operating range rpm... i believe it is [the industrial version of the isb] governed at ±2600rpm