Dont be a douche bag. It is America. Dont ghetto up the name that means a lot to some of us. Have a nice day.'Merica
Dont be a douche bag. It is America. Dont ghetto up the name that means a lot to some of us. Have a nice day.'Merica
The rod itself is made of metal alloy that has been "ground" (or otherwise prepared) into a fine powder. This powder is then molded into the shape of the part. The molded part is then heated in an oven to the sintering temperature-not quite to its melting point but high enough to bond the powder into one piece of metal. The part is then forged.
It is somewhat similar to injection molding of plastic-only with metal. Its a common manufacturing method and can yield some high quality parts with consistent properties through the "casting". Generally has a nearer neat shape than traditional casting-meaning that the part requires less post machining.
Why would GM allow the new engine to make that much torque if the current Allison isn't going to handle that power? Is there a possibility that the Allison will be updated for 2018 after the possible issues that may happen in stock power with the transmission for the '17 model?
Dont be a douche bag. It is America. Dont ghetto up the name that means a lot to some of us. Have a nice day.
Why would GM allow the new engine to make that much torque if the current Allison isn't going to handle that power? Is there a possibility that the Allison will be updated for 2018 after the possible issues that may happen in stock power with the transmission for the '17 model?
Thanks for the clarification. I always thought that the powdered metal was quite inferior and had no idea of the new processes and such that could potentially be as strong or stronger then traditional forgings.
I did some reading after my initial post, and it sounds like powdered rods are fairly common in today's engines, although the general consensus seems to be that they are weaker and still aren't being utilized in most performance engine builds. Hopefully these new ones prove to hold decent power when guys start adding the juice.
Appears to be a HP3 pump according to this. Also says they finally went to an electric lift pump instead of relying on the gear driven pump on the CP3/4.Pretty sure the pump is a Denso HP4...
more than likely you will only get that torque in certain gears and not all of them. it is all about torque management. all they have to do is allow the engine to peak to 910 ft lbs in one gear and they claim the rating
And only makes that 900 with the aisin trans, the 68rfe is 800 I believe, and g56 manual is 660.GM specifically said it was only torque limited in 1st gear.
Probably a jab at Ram, who does cheat the system and uses extreme torque limiting under a wide range of conditions...I think 2nd gear is the only gear that actually makes "900 ft lbs" on the 2015+ Cummins. The rest of the gears have various amounts of torque limiting.
more than likely you will only get that torque in certain gears and not all of them. it is all about torque management. all they have to do is allow the engine to peak to 910 ft lbs in one gear and they claim the rating
Saving 10 grand is all fine and good. But paying 50K and suddenly it's outdated would just really upset me.
I know that everyone would ask, "Hey is that one of those new 17s"?.......... And of course it wouldn't be.
So 50K for old and obsolete. Or 60K (maybe) for the newest latest greatest. Or what, maybe $100 a month more. I'll bet most people would gladly pay that a month just to have a stronger crank in there current Truck.
Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk