Will be interesting to see how the Titan stacks up to your predictions. I think it is going to prove many people who doubt the 1/2 ton diesels capabilities wrong.
I wish GM would release a 1/2 ton diesel!!
- Thread starter LBZ
- Start date
The power of a 3/4 ton with the ride of a 1/2 ton. Count me in. As it is, it's not the amount of towing capacity that's lacking in the 1/2 ton offerings, its the power. I never use close to all my 3/4 tons capacity when I'm towing. A half ton with 300hp and 500 ft lbs would be perfect for how I use my trucks!
I will be seriously considering the dodge half ton when it comes time to get another truck. I just priced out the tradesman version regular cab long bed 4x4 with the diesel at 37,000.
Only downside is I will be at max payload by the time I get my welder, bottles and tools loaded up.
I commute 60 miles highway to get to the job site so the doubled mpg from what I get now would be welcome. A similar equipped 3/4 ton chevy is over 10,000 more. I would rather stay in a chevy but unless they come out with the half ton diesel I won't have much choice.
Only downside is I will be at max payload by the time I get my welder, bottles and tools loaded up.
I commute 60 miles highway to get to the job site so the doubled mpg from what I get now would be welcome. A similar equipped 3/4 ton chevy is over 10,000 more. I would rather stay in a chevy but unless they come out with the half ton diesel I won't have much choice.
I honestly believe that they could cut out the 3/4 ton altogether and just have a half ton, a heavy half ton call it a 2000 not a 2500 and the 1 ton and then the 4500 etc. and still sell a lot of trucks.
There isn't enough of a difference between the 3/4 and 1 ton IMO to warrant making it still. Make a long box heavy half for those that need the room but not necessarily the payload and then for those that need the towing hauling of a heavy use truck they can jump to the full sized HD. If they were to price things accordingly, I think it would be their best way to go. The market and use of these trucks has changed IMO from 10 - 20 years ago. People want more options and the pricing of trucks has kind of got ridiculous. If you want a diesel but don't necessarily need the biggest and baddest there should be another option and I think a heavy half fills this gap nicely. They had it in the 70's and 80's. Time to bring it back IMO.
I think Dodge is on the right track but scrapping the Dakota and just offering a fuel efficient half ton. At least for the North American market.
There isn't enough of a difference between the 3/4 and 1 ton IMO to warrant making it still. Make a long box heavy half for those that need the room but not necessarily the payload and then for those that need the towing hauling of a heavy use truck they can jump to the full sized HD. If they were to price things accordingly, I think it would be their best way to go. The market and use of these trucks has changed IMO from 10 - 20 years ago. People want more options and the pricing of trucks has kind of got ridiculous. If you want a diesel but don't necessarily need the biggest and baddest there should be another option and I think a heavy half fills this gap nicely. They had it in the 70's and 80's. Time to bring it back IMO.
I think Dodge is on the right track but scrapping the Dakota and just offering a fuel efficient half ton. At least for the North American market.
Why would Cummins sacrifice time & money with respect to design, engineering & research to develop a V8 as opposed to traditional straight 6?
I can only speculate that perhaps a straight 6 configuration of equivalent power simply will not fit in engine compartment....
Maybe taking advantage of broader power band? Who knows....
I can only speculate that perhaps a straight 6 configuration of equivalent power simply will not fit in engine compartment....
Maybe taking advantage of broader power band? Who knows....
Interestingly, it only uses 4 head bolts per cylinder, a la 6.0/6.4 powerstroke.
Heads are aluminum, dual overhead cam, block is CGI.
Hopefully cummins has the head bolt thing better figured out than International/Navistar though.
I would assume/hope the timing chain is a life-time service item as well.
Heads are aluminum, dual overhead cam, block is CGI.
Hopefully cummins has the head bolt thing better figured out than International/Navistar though.
I would assume/hope the timing chain is a life-time service item as well.
To me a V configuration is the only logical choice. Vs make more horsepower per cube, than Straight sixs. And fuel economy aside, everyone of us knows if the truck is a dog and no fun to drive it won't sell well.... And on that hand, I haven't seen real world proof that Straight 6s get better fuel economy than V8 of same displacement.
Cummins has had the V config in their larger displacement engines forever but I'm guessing your right-it makes it more suitable for fitment in an automobile. As I said before Dodge originally was the test monkey for this engine so not sure if it was something they requested or if Cummins already had this in mind for a different application.
That said the LSV has been in development for 10 years to fill the gap between the 2.5 liter found in small trucks in Europe and 6.6 so my guess they have been anticipating this for awhile. Likely it will find it's way into C class motorhomes and delivery vans etc. eventually. Maybe even as a slightly smaller marine engine to fill the gap between the 4BT, old 5.9 and 8.3 liter straight 6. It would be a good competitor for Yanmar, Mercruiser Gas and the Duramax currently being used.
Time will tell if it works or not.
I doubt the timing chain will be lifetime service. My guess is 200 000 km tops. I just hope it's designed with valve reliefs so if you lose a chain or jump a gear tooth it doesn't plow your piston into the valves. That will be an expensive fix if not and that happens.
200,000km?!? You've got to be kidding me. There are car engines that can go longer than that before timing belt/chain service.
Uh what? An interference engine that is specifically designed to take into account timing failure? Like they "expect" the timing chain to fail????? If they (engine designers) expect it to fail, they set a required timing replacement at X miles before the thing has failed during testing. Thats the way EVERY OTHER on-road interference engine is designed, as far as I know...correct me if im wrong.
Thats like saying a car MFG "should put double tie rods and steering components on a car, in case one fails".
But what do I know, this doesnt have to do with electronics, so im a fking idiot and talking out of my ass.
Last edited:
V8's are easier to package and integrate into a smaller vehicle, and make it a lot easier for designers to meet desired frontal/offset-frontal crash performance.
Ok dumbass that's not what I meant. They don't design around the chain as potentially having a failure. That's retarded to even think that. There are OHC engines out there that by design are not interference and I am just curious if this one was designed this way or not. That's all I am saying.
For starter a DOHC V engine with the strain on the gear chain as high as this one is going to be doesn't even compare to a car running a BELT drive for timing. Also I meant 200 000 miles not km BTW. My mistake. Cars are even 160 000km plus.
Ben,
After speaking with a friend, he reiterated that with a 3.7" bore, head bolts won't be nearly as far apart. I am interested to see if they have crank failures similar to Duramax.
Have you ever heard of a diesel engine that is NOT an interference engine?
Uh there are plenty of DOHC cars out there that run CHAINS.
And "super high strain"...WTF? Why does this engine have any more strain on the timing components than any other DOHC engine? The thing doesnt even rev above 4000rpm!!!
You're gonna sit there and tell me that this Cummins has a higher-loaded timing/chain system than the 7,500rpm V8 in my audi S4 that not only drives the cams, but ALSO the oil pump, water pump, power steering pump and AC compressor? Audi states the timing components on that engine are "lifetime", despite the fact that its (the chains/timing components) driving every accessory (minus the alternator), 4 cams, and 40 valves! And you think this cummins has a "high strain" on its timing components. Gimmie a freakin break.
Ben
Your first comment is so dumb, I'm not even going to respond to it.
Nowhere did I use the word "Super" when talking about strain on the timing chain either.
At 30lbs of boost requiring larger springs than a gas job, much bigger heavier valvetrain components, and 32 valves, yes I am telling you it is more of a strain than you will find on a gas job. Especially your precious Audi.
There isn't one engine out there running a timing chain that doesn't have a suggested life expectancy, wear measurement procedure, and replacement guideline. Chains stretch. No avoiding it.
Nowhere did I use the word "Super" when talking about strain on the timing chain either.
At 30lbs of boost requiring larger springs than a gas job, much bigger heavier valvetrain components, and 32 valves, yes I am telling you it is more of a strain than you will find on a gas job. Especially your precious Audi.
There isn't one engine out there running a timing chain that doesn't have a suggested life expectancy, wear measurement procedure, and replacement guideline. Chains stretch. No avoiding it.
Prove it, like mathematics.
Go ask your audi dealer what the chain suggested life expectancy/replacement interval is on a chain-drive 4.2
WTF is you canadian peoples' problem? Or should I say, you and your little buddy simon. You two have a huge problem with me for LITERALLY NO REASON AT ALL.
Prove it, like mathematics.
Go ask your audi dealer what the chain suggested life expectancy/replacement interval is on a chain-drive 4.2
WTF is you canadian peoples' problem? Or should I say, you and your little buddy simon. You two have a huge problem with me for LITERALLY NO REASON AT ALL.
Um how about because your F*&#ing wrong and your huge head won't let you realize it?? Your arrogance is highly over-bearing and annoying. That's what our problem is with you.
Also I could give a shit about your Audi. We are talking about a high boost by gas standards diesel engine. Do you think maybe there is a reason the Dmax runs a gear on their cam and not a chain like a BBC? Or no probably they just do it just because.
Go take an engine mechanics trade school course and maybe you might pick up a thing or two.
Stick to soldering wires and making boards. It's what you do best!