Direct injection, carbon buildup, catch cans, EGR & PCV valves

Fightnfire said:
I just think it's a little odd that the 10ish year old Ecoboost can tow so much more, reliably, with the same MPG. I highly doubt RAM lowered the towing capacity of their new truck because "most people don't max the towing." They're testing had to have shown somewhere that the 3.0 SST couldn't maintain the same workload or duty cycle as the Hemi or other competitors.
Click to expand...

Well the hurricane might not be rated to tow as much as the others, but it will certainly tow the same load (up to 11k) easier/quicker especially the HO. Just depends on what you're looking for in a truck. If you're only towing 9000-ish pounds, are you going to pick a Ford over the Ram because it's max tow is higher? Or do you pick the Ram because whatever it can tow, it will do it easier/quicker than the Ford knowing you're always going to be 2000 pounds less than the max anyway (which 99% of 1500 owners stay under)?

I'm not getting rid of my hemi any time soon so hp/torque isn't everything to me. This v8 was one of the main attractions for me, a solid old school v8 with an iron block. It was used for years in the 2500 so there is no question it can handle the duty cycle.

No doubt these hurricanes will trigger fanboy wars on both sides (for/against ram) for years to come.
 
Fightnfire said:
I just think it's a little odd that the 10ish year old Ecoboost can tow so much more, reliably, with the same MPG. I highly doubt RAM lowered the towing capacity of their new truck because "most people don't max the towing." They're testing had to have shown somewhere that the 3.0 SST couldn't maintain the same workload or duty cycle as the Hemi or other competitors.

To write off the reduction as "you shouldn't tow that much with a half ton" is a little silly.

I tow a 29' Travel Trailer that weighs around ( I cant remember if it's 6500 or 6800 dry) with an overall length of 34ish feet. It tows fine and I've never felt that I've needed more truck. By the time I get passengers and some gear in my truck it weighs about the same as the trailer. Having the standard (long) bed helps. I've hit nasty side winds in eastern Washington and I could feel it a lot, but my buddy with a similar trailer in his F250 in front of me said the same thing.
Click to expand...
I never really liked towing with my 2011 ecoboost. It always felt like I was working it too hard and it sucked more fuel than my 6.0 2500 Chevy did towing.
 
zonedout said:
Well the hurricane might not be rated to tow as much as the others, but it will certainly tow the same load (up to 11k) easier/quicker especially the HO. Just depends on what you're looking for in a truck. If you're only towing 9000-ish pounds, are you going to pick a Ford over the Ram because it's max tow is higher? Or do you pick the Ram because whatever it can tow, it will do it easier/quicker than the Ford knowing you're always going to be 2000 pounds less than the max anyway (which 99% of 1500 owners stay under)?
Click to expand...

That's a bold statement, so I bolded it :ROFLMAO:

Time will tell on that, paper power isn't the only thing that matters with towing "easier/quicker." The recent mid-size Ike TFL video showed that clearly.

I brought up the eco boost because Ford has been doing the 6cyl turbo thing much longer than the other truck guys. I just think losing 10-20% of the previous gens tow capacity is a story not being talked about, I find it interesting and sicussion worthy. Unfortunately, it also playes right into the reliability concerns of the turbo haters. I'm not one and would have no issue owning a mid size or full size turbo.... I would pefer the 3.0 duramax though lol.
 
Fightnfire said:
That's a bold statement, so I bolded it :ROFLMAO:

Time will tell on that, paper power isn't the only thing that matters with towing "easier/quicker." The recent mid-size Ike TFL video showed that clearly.
Click to expand...

0 to 60 mph tells the story. Those things move.
 
zonedout said:
4.7 seconds for the HO in an unofficial test by redline reviews, 5.2 for the SO. It's certain.
Click to expand...
I was talking about towing performance specifically, I also don't necessarily believe the 5.2 in the SO. The 6.2 in the GM is 5.4 according to some sources Motor Trend, Car & Driver etc. but in the videos I've seen 6.0 is more realisitc. My best was 6.2, I only did it a few times out of curiosity 4A or 4H is a must for that low and I didn't want to damage anything.
 
Fightnfire said:
I was talking about towing performance specifically, I also don't necessarily believe the 5.2 in the SO. The 6.2 in the GM is 5.4 according to some sources Motor Trend, Car & Driver etc. but in the videos I've seen 6.0 is more realisitc. My best was 6.2, I only did it a few times out of curiosity 4A or 4H is a must for that low and I didn't want to damage anything.
Click to expand...

Towing performance will match 0 to 60 as it does in every other half ton. There is nothing hard to understand here, these engines produce gobs of hp and crucially, torque, and they will tow like the numbers show they will.

We don't have to agree on exact 0 to 60 figures. What matters is the relative comparisons. These hurricanes will eat my hemi for lunch when it comes to acceleration unloaded or towing. The HO will also eat yours and the ecoboost (I don't know much about the powerboost it might be much closer/tied there). It is what is.

As for MPG and durability and how long they last when being flogged to death, well my money is on the old school v8's. It's why my truck isn't going anywhere as ~ 400 hp is more than enough to tow and have fun with.
 
zonedout said:
Towing performance will match 0 to 60 as it does in every other half ton. There is nothing hard to understand here, these engines produce gobs of hp and crucially, torque, and they will tow like the numbers show they will.
Click to expand...

My point is there is a lot more that goes into towing performance, especially 0-60 times (which I don't care about) than just engine HP & Torque. Transmission, ratio of gears, safety parameters that the engineers put in, rear axle, tire size, weight and on and on. It's not as simple as the numbers on paper.

The Colorado has 100 more ft lbs of torque but when towing it's pretty even with the new Ranger 30-60. Why? All of the things I listed above. They both dyno at their listed torque, so, there's more to the story. The Ecoboost is pretty incredible down low, we'll have to see how the new RAM SST handles the weight on an IKE or similar towing tests.
 
Fightnfire said:
My point is there is a lot more that goes into towing performance, especially 0-60 times (which I don't care about) than just engine HP & Torque. Transmission, ratio of gears, safety parameters that the engineers put in, rear axle, tire size, weight and on and on. It's not as simple as the numbers on paper.
Click to expand...

It really is. The drivetrain is a 3.92 rear end with the very deep first gear of the ZF. So gearing by itself is better already than the GM's, and IIRC also the Ford though I'd have to double check. Weight is already accounted for in the 0 to 60 unloaded vs other trucks.

Fightnfire said:
The Colorado has 100 more ft lbs of torque but when towing it's pretty even with the new Ranger 30-60. Why? All of the things I listed above.
Click to expand...

Mostly because the HP is quite close, and probably the ranger builds peak power lower down. The high torque in the colorado means it should hold gears better but acceleration runs still need HP. The hurricane is stronger in BOTH hp/torque. There is not a chance it performs worse than the 6.2 or the 3.5.

What are the 0 to 60's of the colorado vs ranger unloaded?
 
Fightnfire said:
My point is there is a lot more that goes into towing performance, especially 0-60 times (which I don't care about) than just engine HP & Torque. Transmission, ratio of gears, safety parameters that the engineers put in, rear axle, tire size, weight and on and on. It's not as simple as the numbers on paper.

The Colorado has 100 more ft lbs of torque but when towing it's pretty even with the new Ranger 30-60. Why? All of the things I listed above. They both dyno at their listed torque, so, there's more to the story. The Ecoboost is pretty incredible down low, we'll have to see how the new RAM SST handles the weight on an IKE or similar towing tests.
Click to expand...
I expect the turbocharged engine to do very well up the IKE just like all the others do. If you’ve ever towed up it with a naturally aspirated engine, you know that the elevation up there robs power like crazy. My 6.0 felt like a dog just pulling a tandem Uhaul with furniture up the IKE.
 
Ok, just for clarity sakes if you go back and read the posts I'm not arguing at all that turbos aren't good, even great, options for a truck even when towing.

This conversation started because I became aware that the new RAM tows one to over 2000 lb less than the previous version with the 3.0 SST and HO SST vs the old hemi. I found that curious and worth chatting about or wondering about. Getty adventures a YouTube channel who is a pretty well respected diesel mechanic speculated that it is most likely due to the duty cycle. Meaning if you're towing up a mountain and you're pushing the engine hard how long can it humm along at a high RPM before they begin to worry about the engine.

I find that interesting. I'm not bashing RAM, I'm not arguing it's worse than the Hemi, or Ford or anything else. I'm also not trying to get into an argument about what one "should" tow with a half ton ffs lol.

I simply find the reduction in towing by 10-20% interesting in today's market.
 
Fightnfire said:
I just think it's a little odd that the 10ish year old Ecoboost can tow so much more, reliably, with the same MPG. I highly doubt RAM lowered the towing capacity of their new truck because "most people don't max the towing." They're testing had to have shown somewhere that the 3.0 SST couldn't maintain the same workload or duty cycle as the Hemi or other competitors.

To write off the reduction as "you shouldn't tow that much with a half ton" is a little silly.

I tow a 29' Travel Trailer that weighs around ( I cant remember if it's 6500 or 6800 dry) with an overall length of 34ish feet. It tows fine and I've never felt that I've needed more truck. By the time I get passengers and some gear in my truck it weighs about the same as the trailer. Having the standard (long) bed helps. I've hit nasty side winds in eastern Washington and I could feel it a lot, but my buddy with a similar trailer in his F250 in front of me said the same thing.
Click to expand...
Everything is fine and dandy until the wind hits. Then it’s all about the driver.
 
Fightnfire said:
Ok, just for clarity sakes if you go back and read the posts I'm not arguing at all that turbos aren't good, even great, options for a truck even when towing.

This conversation started because I became aware that the new RAM tows one to over 2000 lb less than the previous version with the 3.0 SST and HO SST vs the old hemi. I found that curious and worth chatting about or wondering about. Getty adventures a YouTube channel who is a pretty well respected diesel mechanic speculated that it is most likely due to the duty cycle. Meaning if you're towing up a mountain and you're pushing the engine hard how long can it humm along at a high RPM before they begin to worry about the engine.

I find that interesting. I'm not bashing RAM, I'm not arguing it's worse than the Hemi, or Ford or anything else. I'm also not trying to get into an argument about what one "should" tow with a half ton ffs lol.

I simply find the reduction in towing by 10-20% interesting in today's market.
Click to expand...

I agree that it's interesting, and I also agree that duty cycle may play a role but I suspect it's more of a cooling issue (Tim, maybe a question for one of your engineering contacts?); the J2807 specifically tests for overheating at 100F ambient temps while towing up the davis dam, it can't test for something more hard to pin down, like how many miles/years is it supposed to last doing X pounds for Y days.

But if you "go back and read the posts", where you and I were disagreeing was whether a lot more hp/torque and much better 0-60 unloaded would or would not translate to better 0-60 loaded. To me the answer is quite obvious, it most definitely will translate. If you're faster unloaded then you're going to be faster loaded as well, unless the computer intervenes for a reason like cooling. We've seen trucks pull power for this before, but I've never seen this done yet to "extend engine life" or some other odd reason while towing. So while I might concede that "anything is possible", historically we know what has happened to other trucks and why things are done a certain way, and turbos get really hot really fast when towing hard. It's the most likely reason IMHO.

Speculating, but part of the reduction in the tow rating for the HO specifically may simply be because it's only available in the heaviest trims. It's possible that if they stuck the HO in their tradesman it would then boost Rams max tow rating higher than what it was set at now. The difference in weight between a trademan (about 1800 pounds payload) vs a limited (1000 to 1200) can be as much as 600 to 800 pounds depending on options, just in curb weight, so that might be deducted from max tow as well.
 
Fightnfire said:
Ok, just for clarity sakes if you go back and read the posts I'm not arguing at all that turbos aren't good, even great, options for a truck even when towing.

This conversation started because I became aware that the new RAM tows one to over 2000 lb less than the previous version with the 3.0 SST and HO SST vs the old hemi. I found that curious and worth chatting about or wondering about. Getty adventures a YouTube channel who is a pretty well respected diesel mechanic speculated that it is most likely due to the duty cycle. Meaning if you're towing up a mountain and you're pushing the engine hard how long can it humm along at a high RPM before they begin to worry about the engine.

I find that interesting. I'm not bashing RAM, I'm not arguing it's worse than the Hemi, or Ford or anything else. I'm also not trying to get into an argument about what one "should" tow with a half ton ffs lol.

I simply find the reduction in towing by 10-20% interesting in today's market.
Click to expand...
It would be interesting to find out why. No doubt turbo engines have an advantage, but making the smaller ones work extra hard by cramming more air through them has to have an adverse effect.
 
Duty cycle implies cooling as well, when working hard how long can the engine work while maintaining safe operating temperature. I agree it's most likely a cooling issue limiting.. it's interesting that they're worried enough about it to pull trailering capacity.
 
Fightnfire said:
Duty cycle implies cooling as well, when working hard how long can the engine work while maintaining safe operating temperature. I agree it's most likely a cooling issue limiting.. it's interesting that they're worried enough about it to pull trailering capacity.
Click to expand...
They might later on update the rating once these engines have been in the wild for a year or two.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top