5.9 vs 5.7
#31
12-22-2007, 10:50 AM
RE: 5.9 vs 5.7
I have a 5.9 Durango and a '04 Ram Hemi. My take has always been the 5.9 feels much more agressive (torquey) than the hemi around town, etc. The hemi clearly has better breathing and can wind up faster and higher. Interesting discussion, both very good motors w/ different power bands in my book. Also, stock to stock, the 5.9 is giving up 100 HP too so not so sure how fair comparison is.
#32
12-22-2007, 11:34 AM
RE: 5.9 vs 5.7
I took the torque and reversed it left to right, now represented by Blue. It doesn't really change the fact that the 5.9 still would have less torque at any given RPM than the Hemi.
ORIGINAL: HankL
The 5.9 torque curve in that picture above is a printing mistake...
it is reversed left to right...this has been discussed many times in the past on dodge forums.
You can prove this to yourself by calculating the torque from the horsepower curve.
The 5.9 torque curve in that picture above is a printing mistake...
it is reversed left to right...this has been discussed many times in the past on dodge forums.
You can prove this to yourself by calculating the torque from the horsepower curve.
#33
12-22-2007, 11:52 AM
Grand Champion
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Warminster, PA
Posts: 5,704
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: 5.9 vs 5.7
I think the hemi is a much better motor due to the technology and development involved in making it.. the carts given by reed give you visual proof. Dont get me wrong i love the 5.9's i had a second gen myself but more power, more speed, and better gas mileage.... normally accounts for a better motor....
#34
12-22-2007, 03:49 PM
Champion
#35
12-23-2007, 04:52 PM
RE: 5.9 vs 5.7
ORIGINAL: reed
I took the torque and reversed it left to right, now represented by Blue. It doesn't really change the fact that the 5.9 still would have less torque at any given RPM than the Hemi.
I took the torque and reversed it left to right, now represented by Blue. It doesn't really change the fact that the 5.9 still would have less torque at any given RPM than the Hemi.
ORIGINAL: HankL
The 5.9 torque curve in that picture above is a printing mistake...
it is reversed left to right...this has been discussed many times in the past on dodge forums.
You can prove this to yourself by calculating the torque from the horsepower curve.
The 5.9 torque curve in that picture above is a printing mistake...
it is reversed left to right...this has been discussed many times in the past on dodge forums.
You can prove this to yourself by calculating the torque from the horsepower curve.
And also, like I said it has the pretty much the same HP up until about 4000 too.
The picture from the brochure is not accurate at all.
#36
12-23-2007, 05:20 PM
RE: 5.9 vs 5.7
ORIGINAL: JD1500
Dude, are you serious? I would of lvoed to be your salesman. The difference in motor, has absolutely no bearing on that. They are the same truck, with V8's, they will be identical in off road performance.
.......
I have had both, and like my hemi better, lower torque, but still plenty. Higher HP, and much better economy.
ORIGINAL: lastrights
a 5.9 would also go four wheeling places where a hemi could not, a hemi is built for more top end, where the 5.9 is the low end
a 5.9 would also go four wheeling places where a hemi could not, a hemi is built for more top end, where the 5.9 is the low end
.......
I have had both, and like my hemi better, lower torque, but still plenty. Higher HP, and much better economy.
#37
12-23-2007, 05:42 PM
Record Breaker
RE: 5.9 vs 5.7
I don't know a dam thing abought dodge engines, I own the hemi, but the old 360 with iron heads and block give much more potentail for modifications to increase h/p.
Stock vers stock the hemi is awiner hands down over the 360, But 345 vers 360, thier s never a replacement for displacement, if Dodge kept the displacement of the 360 with the hemi perks, this topic would never have started...
Stock vers stock the hemi is awiner hands down over the 360, But 345 vers 360, thier s never a replacement for displacement, if Dodge kept the displacement of the 360 with the hemi perks, this topic would never have started...
#38
12-24-2007, 10:01 AM
RE: 5.9 vs 5.7
I would be cautious about trusting
any of the stuff...but not cautious
about knowing about what evidence exists.
I don't trust the hypertech dynos,
cause I think they might derate the 'stock' and inflate the result with their chip.
The official Dodge dyno graph obviously had the printing mistake, but it is also 'too smooth' to be a real dyno graph...there is one that looks a bit more realistic in the 'Magnum Engines' book by Chrysler engineer Larry Shepard, and it shows more low end torque than the sales pamphlet.
The 5.7 Hemi graph and rated 345 hp has been much discussed because other automakers accused Chrysler of 'cheating' on the engine break-in proceedure and leaving off the power steering pump...even though 95% of vehicles with 5.7 Hemi engine have a power steering pump. Real hp of the 5.7 was probably more like 330 hp net if tested without tricks and the torque at 4200 rpm might have been a wee bit lower.
The efficiency of the transmission and torque converter also has an effect on how much torque reaches the pavement..or the drive drum of the rear-wheel dyno.
The 5-45 auto trans internals are quite different that the older 46RH/RE automatics
and there is no doubt that Chrysler has tried to limit torque from the 5.7 engine in order to make more transmissions last at least through the warranty period where failures costs them both money and bad ratings for reliability.
My gut feeling is that in the 1500-1900 rpm range the 5.9 and 5.7 are close in torque but the non-MDS 5.7 has a modest advantage in fuel economy.
any of the stuff...but not cautious
about knowing about what evidence exists.
I don't trust the hypertech dynos,
cause I think they might derate the 'stock' and inflate the result with their chip.
The official Dodge dyno graph obviously had the printing mistake, but it is also 'too smooth' to be a real dyno graph...there is one that looks a bit more realistic in the 'Magnum Engines' book by Chrysler engineer Larry Shepard, and it shows more low end torque than the sales pamphlet.
The 5.7 Hemi graph and rated 345 hp has been much discussed because other automakers accused Chrysler of 'cheating' on the engine break-in proceedure and leaving off the power steering pump...even though 95% of vehicles with 5.7 Hemi engine have a power steering pump. Real hp of the 5.7 was probably more like 330 hp net if tested without tricks and the torque at 4200 rpm might have been a wee bit lower.
The efficiency of the transmission and torque converter also has an effect on how much torque reaches the pavement..or the drive drum of the rear-wheel dyno.
The 5-45 auto trans internals are quite different that the older 46RH/RE automatics
and there is no doubt that Chrysler has tried to limit torque from the 5.7 engine in order to make more transmissions last at least through the warranty period where failures costs them both money and bad ratings for reliability.
My gut feeling is that in the 1500-1900 rpm range the 5.9 and 5.7 are close in torque but the non-MDS 5.7 has a modest advantage in fuel economy.
