Airbus 9e
Rochester, NY
Senior Member
Joined: 02/11/2005
View Profile
|
rjstractor wrote:Tr4Petty wrote:The Cummins is the only one of the three that is a true medium-duty truck engine. The same engine that's in the Dodge 2500/3500 is found in much larger commercial trucks such as Ford's own 650/750 series! Also found in motor homes, school buses, delivery trucks, etc.
This is true, the B series Cummins is used in medium duty applications. It's also true that this engine is an "entry-level" medium duty engine. The little B series works pretty hard under the hood of a real truck or bus. I used to drive B series powered school buses and while performance was decent, your foot was always to the floor and the motors were getting smoky and hard to start cold by the time they had around 100K on them.
It is also true that International's version of the Powerstroke, the older T444E and the newer VT365, are used in similar applications to the Cummins B-series. I have no experience with these engines in these applications, so I can't comment on their performance or durability.
I used to drive a 22 foot box truck with an International chassis and a Cummins....It was the best hill climbing truck I've ever driven....even with a weight of around 20,000
2004 Dodge Ram 2500 QuadCab 4X4 HEMI
2004 Cougar 285 EFS Fifth-wheel
....and a Dachshund named "Walley"
..."can't sleep.....clowns will eat me."....
|
MCrankyPants
Dayton OH USA
Senior Member
Joined: 04/17/2003
View Profile
 Offline
|
MCrankyPants wrote:Where did you go fishingrv??
I'd love to hear more input...especially on which years the Cummins wasn't "in your opinion" the best diesel engine on the market?
Enlighten us
2007 Teton Experience Sunrise pulled by 2003 Dodge 3500 Cummins HO 6-spd. 4x4
'61 VW Double-Cab
|
NavyDood
DFW
Senior Member
Joined: 09/25/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
rsh_757 wrote:Of course the ones in those pictures are way off, the D-Max actually looks the same as the 6.2 rod but the 6.0 and newer Ford rod has an off-set cap like the cummins to take the stress off of the bolts and put it on the cap itself.
Actually, if you do your research, the pic I posted is in fact correct. As for the offset cap on the Cummins and Powerstroke, they are designed this way because the journal size is to big for the bore. Angling the cap allows for the connecting rod's removal through the cylinder bore.
- 2004 2500 QC Short Bed, 4x4, 48re, Brite White, HOG 4" T-304 T-Back, Self made PSMBuick style intake, Isspro Pyro/Boost/Tranny Temp sittin on the dash
- 06 Pilgrim Legends 30RE2SLF-5 12,000lbs loaded
- B&W Hide-A-Ball w/5th wheel Companion
|
rsh_757
Auburn, WA
Senior Member
Joined: 04/05/2006
View Profile
|
NavyDood wrote:rsh_757 wrote:Of course the ones in those pictures are way off, the D-Max actually looks the same as the 6.2 rod but the 6.0 and newer Ford rod has an off-set cap like the cummins to take the stress off of the bolts and put it on the cap itself.
Actually, if you do your research, the pic I posted is in fact correct. As for the offset cap on the Cummins and Powerstroke, they are designed this way because the journal size is to big for the bore. Angling the cap allows for the connecting rod's removal through the cylinder bore.
My research? I just looked at a 6.0 torn down in April, your picture shows the powerstroke straight up (like from a 7.3), which puts tension on the fasteners .vs shear stress. No size difference between the 7.3 and 6.0 rod, just the cap angle. That picture is old school, period. Are you saying that that non-angled part doesnt fit through the cylinder bore. The width isn't changing at all, just the angle.
2008 Cougar 310SRX 5th Wheel
2005 Dodge Ram 2500 QC 4x4 CTD
2008 Nissan Armada LE
|
NavyDood
DFW
Senior Member
Joined: 09/25/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
Mine is the second picture with the rods laid out on the display stand, not the ones hanging on the peg board. The peg board pic is definitely pre 6.0.
|
|
|
Engineer9860
Eagle Scout dad
Senior Member
Joined: 08/10/2003
View Profile
|
ib516 wrote:Consider this. Every OTR truck (semi truck) that I've seen that works pulling heavy loads day in, day out, has had an inline 6 cylinder.... 
Caterpillar had the 3208, and 3408 (V-8), Mack still has the E-9s. Cummins has had V-8s in the past, VT903 is just one. The KT, KTA, KTTA series are some others . Detroit had the 8V-71, and 8V-92.
All of these are V-8 OTR truck engines.
They fell out of favor because of their restrictive weight. "Less weight = more freight"
Inline 6 OTR diesels weigh less, and this is the main reason they replaced the V-8s in OTR trucks.
BTW, most of these V-8 diesel engine designs carry on in marine, and switcher locomotive applications where weight is of little concern.
To the OP-
You can choose either the V-8 Duramax, or the IL6 Cummins. Either way they are both excellent engines, and neither can be given an overall advantage when it comes to performing the job that you could want them for. Ignore anything to the contrary.
Medium duty v. light duty is a moot arguement. Both will pull whatever you want them to pull with identical ease, and there are examples that can be found of both engines going to 500,000mi +.
2002 Chevy 2500HD 4x4 8.1/ZF6sp RC/LB
2001 Chevy 2500HD 4x4 6.0/4L80E EC/SB
1997 Chevy Blazer 4x4
1994 Chevy K-2500 4x4 C6P 5.7/4L80E
1979 Chevy K-30 4x4 4sp 4.10
1977 Chevy K-30 4x4 4sp 4.10 454
30 year student of the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress
|
eightballsidepocket
San Jose, California, USA
Senior Member
Joined: 09/20/2004
View Profile
Offline
|
Interestingly, the Cummins 5.9 weighs more than the V8 Powerstroke or Duramax of similar time period.
The big advantage of the V8 in diesel or gasoline form is being able to shorten the engine compartment length, not necessarily it's volume/size.
You can live with a shorter front end as a V8 of similar displacement to an inline 6 will have a much shorter block length.
I still remember my 300 cid ford six in my 1980 Ford 150 club wagon van. Ford had to push out the snout and also the engine cover in the front driver/passenger area to accommodate the block length. Don't get me wrong....I thought that 300 cid six was a great engine.
Still, an inline 6, is well documented by auto engineers as the most well balanced design configuration for a piston driven IC engine. It's just cursed with being longer than the comparable V8 layout/design.
Inline engines are a little tougher to package under a streamlined/aerodynamic hood. My old Datsun 260Z had a hood lump designed by Nissan to accommodate my inline OHC 6 valve cover.
Regards, Eightballsidepocket
2005 Dodge Ram 2500 SLT 4x2 Quad Cab, Cummins, 48RE Tranny, Lg Bed, Line-X Spray-on Bed Liner.
06 T25BS Komfort Trailblazer TT
"If you can't say it in person, it isn't worth saying while hiding behind an anonymous P.C.!"
|
Engineer9860
Eagle Scout dad
Senior Member
Joined: 08/10/2003
View Profile
|
eightballsidepocket wrote:Interestingly, the Cummins 5.9 weighs more than the V8 Powerstroke or Duramax of similar time period.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought the 7.3L PSD was the heaviest of all pick-up diesels. It shore is one big honkin' engine hanging on an engine stand. 
Obviously the Duramax's weight savings is aided by it's use of aluminum for some of it's major engine components. Might just be the reason Cummins (or is it cummings? ) is looking at aluminum for the heads on it's small V8 that they are developing for the under 8600GVWR applications.
2010 Dodge 1500/Cummins V8
|
rdrector
maryland
Full Member
Joined: 12/05/2006
View Profile
Offline
|
Might as well throw my opinion out here.
I have Dodge Cummins, not a bad truck but only bought it for the Cummins. Would've chose differently if it were a gasser.
In my dream I would like the Cummins matched with the Allison tranny , in the new Ford SuperDuty!
2006 KZ Frontier 2405
2007 Dodge Quad 4x4 CTD
|
rsh_757
Auburn, WA
Senior Member
Joined: 04/05/2006
View Profile
|
NavyDood wrote:Mine is the second picture with the rods laid out on the display stand, not the ones hanging on the peg board. The peg board pic is definitely pre 6.0.
Well dang man... wrong image.
|
|
|
