*I don't know that the problem with the word V...I...R...T...U...A...L...L...Y is? *

I was under the understanding that the brand new M5 was getting a V10? maybe not...but anyways...

I get anywhere from 10-12MPG pulling a 30 ft holiday trailer in tow haul. So MDS is not activating(this is at 110km/h)...I think from the sounds of things you would be lucky to get 9 out of the ecoboost...

I was just throwing some numbers out for comparison, but from what I am getting is that the TQ shift still arrives at a later RPM right? If it be 500 whatever, its still working harder IMO.

As far as cummins and it being a V6, were talking diesels here...totally different story. Not to mention its not a V6, it is a strait 6. I know even the big rigs are using inline 6s just a bigger displacement. That to me is viable.
If you told me that the Ford ecoboosts are an inline or a strait 6 I might consider the fact that they could do the work of a V8. But they are not, they are a V6 with just over half the displacement of say the 5.7 liter Hemi. I think the fords are a 3.7? In my mind its just does not work...Maybe its just new tech thats going to be the new motor, but right now I will stick with my V8s. As I said more reliable at this time.

Yes I am aware of the porsche, its one of the few. That car does not have the weight to pull either.


But if we want to continue this we should probably start our own thread, I think we are taking over the thread!

 

Gentlemen, Please continue d iscussion. I am learnng SO much from reading these posts. Evetybody is writing great answers. Please continue point-counterpoint. Thnx

 

I owned a 7.3 Ford turbo truck, everybody asks why I ever sold it. Answer: 1991 - PRE-POWERSTROKE - NO TURBO... LOL... Would pull a three story building with it's low end torque, but wouldn't get out of it's own way with like 170 HP out of it's 444 CI engine!!!

Big difference between an International Harvester 7.3L indirect injected, naturally aspirated engine and a Navistar 7.3L T444E Turbo engine...

 

Budman, all I can say is I have owned several Ram's and I liked everyone and were reliable. I think I may have had a couple recalls in many years, not bad. I will still argue Dodge provides value for your money and will give you alot more options for your money. I will be fair and not bash Ford, but compare pricing and options to Ford compared to the Ram. Plus, this whole Ford tranny issue seems to be a significant issue. GM trucks seem to be ok, at least they are not in the news as much is Ford. I still am baffled about this Ford truck thing and them being so great. I think they are way overpriced for lousy options for a truck that makes the news all the time, and the news seems not to be good. Like I posted prior, my $35,000 TRX4 blew Ford away and poor Ford could not match 1/2 the options. Ford could not give me a V-8, power seats, remote start, wheel audio controls, and I even have not started.

 

My last Ram was a 76 reg cab, then I went to GM's in 86,that's were I got my sign on handle, I bought a new 09 Laramie loaded to the teeth that shames any Ford or Gm,I am constantly being complimented on the trucks good looks, in the 2 and a half years it has been recalled to replace the exhaust manifold bolts and last month to replace the tie roads,I am very happy I chose to go back to Dodge also my other truck buddies are a little envious of my unit which makes me feel real proud of my ride.

 

A good frield has been a CJD salesman for several years. He attends many work related functions. Quite a while ago he mentioned to me Ram wanted to give customers a vehicle that provided a fair price, while keeping in mind comfort and options, he was right. I can't vouch for other dealerships, but his dealerships Rams do not stick around long. He has mentioned the Ram and Wrangler are his best seller. I get alot of compliments too, and notice when I drive around I see alot of Rams. I know sales of the Ram's nationally have been doing well.

 

At the OP's request...

First off, mea culpa meant i6....

The old M5 was a v10. The new one is a twin turbo 8... puts out more power than and tq than the old motor and gets better gas mileage... despite having lost 2 cylinders. Kinda like the ecoboost vs the old 5.4...

Gainsaying diesel motors is misguided. The underlying principles of an internal combustion engine remain the same regardless.

There are no inherent power or torque advantages to an inline motor as your post seems to imply. The reason they are used is that they are inherently balanced, cheaper to build, and box simple.

"Working harder" is a very commonly misused term. In this case you are implying that raising peak torque rpm will somehow cause more wear and tear on drive-train components. Whether TQ is at 5 rpm or 30,000 rpm it is the same amount of twist.

Ecoboost is a 3.6...

 

look at the displacement different tho...they went from a 5.0L V10 to 4.4 V8 That is definitely not as much as the difference between the 5.7 Hemi and the 3.6 Ecoboost. The ecoboosts displacement went down just more then 2 liters. In my mind thats way too much. If you told me ford went to a 4.2 V6 or something then its much more plausible in my mind.

You are correct in saying the principles are the same, but by burning diesel your compression ratios are somewhere around the 17:1 I do believe. Versus 10:1 in gas? That's where your getting your increased torque from a diesel motor. If you notice that the cummins is pushing over 800 now?

As far as the inline goes, they are pretty much identical in power yes, but the weight differences are substantial im sure. I can't give you any numbers on that, but I know the inline has less parts, do to it being, well inline. So the weight is going to be less. How much again I can't tell you, There has got to be a reason for using them, most tractor trailers use them, cummins uses them, and some of the imports I believe still use them. Besides them being easier to manufacture they are still the more expensive motor then the V-series. With that weight difference and the same amount of power, it seems to me that the inline is at an advantage having to pull less weight. JMO

Higher rpm=More friction=More heat. What is the main killer in most motors? Not to mention the same theory above will apply to the turbos as well. All these things need cooling, and what drives all that equipment. Pumps, and what do the pumps need to operate, that motor to turn. Now some of these pumps could be electronically controlled now, but they still need that alternator which again is driven off the motor. For some of you guys with BIG sound systems (with no alternate power supplies) and stuff in your car, what happens to the motor as soon as you kick those things in? Does it "speed up" To say that the motor has to try and cool itself while generating the 390 HP or whatever the ecoboost makes, lots of wasted power there IMO. Now im not saying that theres going to be a noticeable difference in cooling, but there is going to be some right? I guess to prove my theory I should see what the hemi has and what that ecoboost has....

Now to sum up on that, even if the rpm difference is say 500rpm, its going 500 times more per minute. Which is still a lot, and creates that much more heat. As stated above you went from a 5.4 (I think thats what the fords were to start) to a 3.6. In my mind it tells me that your going to be creating more friction by just lowering that displacement while generating the same power, then to bump the rpms up? To me thats "working harder"

Again just friendly convo

 

Ummm...

Diesels make more torque for three reasons: a) longer stroke, b) higher energy density fuel and c) greater inherent efficiency.

a) Longer stroke means "wider" crankshaft which means much larger turning moments, which means greater torque.
b) Each gallon of fuel diesel weighs more than the same volume of gas of gas, and hence more potential energy, hence more torque output
c) Diesel engines burn a little more cleanly when properly tuned (sounds backwards I know but it is true), so produce more tq from any given amount of potential energy.

The cummins gets so much torque because it is getting bigger, more finely tuned and higher boost. The current update is mostly just more boost...

As to size, for greater efficiency you want the smallest possible engine that meets your needs. Ford found that they could do this by dropping to 3.6 litres.

I think it is important to point out here that you are making several fundamental mistakes with your 500 rpm scenario: You are assuming that engines run at peak torque. You are also missing that the ecoboost makes nearly the same torque across its entire operating range as its sister motors, it just makes more in some, particularly higher up. This means if the sister motor can make it up a hill at 2000 rpm the ecoboost will too... it just will be able to accelerate to pass easier. If you are arguing that more torque is what is hurting the tranny then you are arguing that the ecoboost is too good for this application. As you appear to be arguing that the tranny is turning faster, you appear to not quite be picturing how a drivetrain works correctly.

As to heat, as I explained above the ecoboost will not be turning faster. Add to this that the main cause of friction in an engine is the cylinder wall to the piston. The 5.7 hemi has more surface area per piston in contact with the wall as well as 33% more pistons. All else being equal it will produce more heat. Obviously all else is not equal. Turbos do create greater cooling requirements, however they work better as they heat up as increased egt equals higher exhaust flow rates.

As to cooling... what drives cooling is airflow, not pumps. Heat dissipation is an issue of radiator and fan design as well as aerodynamics. Obviously minimum levels of circulation are required. Once these are met massive amounts of additional cooling are available from better designed heat exchangers. As proof: pack your radiator with insulating material, and idle your car. You will overheat. Now install a bigger water pump. You will still overheat, you will just have the overheated coolant moving faster.

Inline motors cost substantially less than v motors. The only reason that a specific inline will cost more is due to it being of higher quality or durability than the v motor. At equal quality and capacity levels an inline will cost less.

 

I have really enjoyed reading this post thus far. Thank you to the OP for the question.

I am a new Ram owner as of today! I can tell you the compairing the big three no one was able to touch the Ram on price for as apples to apples as you can get between them.

Ford was a 55k for the same package as the Ram at 37k.

I have been a long time Ford man and after the last 3 F-250's and f-150's it is going to have to be something pretty special to get me to even consider them again. I drove the Ram last Saturday for the first time and was impressed. The GM 2500.... Not so much.... Ford, NO thanks. Simply sitting in the cab of the Ford was too much for me to handle. They are the same truck inside they have been for the last 6 years and it just makes me think of the thousands I flushed away keeping them on the road.

Sorry for the Rant!

All in all I agree with several posters here. The Ram has it right now for the bang for the buck! I can't wait to get some miles on the new truck and see how she does. Picking her up in an hour or so ;0)