Soundguy
Old Timer
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
- Messages
- 51,575
- Location
- Central florida
- Tractor
- RK 55HC,ym1700, NH7610S, Ford 8N, 2N, NAA, 660, 850 x2, 541, 950, 941D, 951, 2000, 3000, 4000, 4600, 5000, 740, IH 'C' 'H', CUB, John Deere 'B', allis 'G', case VAC
.
What seems more relevant is the loss of power between the net engine output and the PTO output. The only info I have on hand for this comparison are the specs for the Massey GC2400/2600. Looking at the MF GC2400, the net engine power is 16.1 kW @2600 rpm. The PTO power is speced at 13.9 kW @ 2600 rpm (555 PTO rpm). So the power transmission loss from the engine output shaft to the PTO output shaft is 13.9/16.1 = 0.8634 or a loss of 13.66% (1-0.8634).
Therefore total transmission efficiency loss of this PTO driven setup is approximately 15.66% (13.66 + 2).
So if we look at a MF GC2400 running a 10KW PTO generator vs a 10KW standalone, the question becomes is the MF motor running at 2600 rpm 15.66% more fuel efficient than a standalone diesel running at 3600 rpm?
Well, the MF motor is clearly a "higher quality", higher cost motor running 1000 rpm slower. Does that make it 15% more fuel efficient? Unfortunately I don't have fuel consumption curves for any of these motors.
Can anyone add to this?
Edit: The MF numbers come from the '09 MF GC series Owner's Manual.
That's an incredibly high loss between net engine and pto... 13%.. etc.
looking at the spec sheet on my ford 5000 diesel 8spd, the net engin hp is 70, and pto is 67.2 that a loss of 2.8hp.. or 4%..
here's a link to the spec sheet in case anythinks I'm fudging the numbers..
http://www.springfieldbiz.com/oaktree/images/5000front.pdf
Looking at another unit I have, a ford 3000 diesel, it's net hp is 41.4, and pto is 39.2 for the 8spd trans.. that's a difference of 2.2 hp, or 5.3%
http://www.springfieldbiz.com/oaktree/images/3000front.pdf
I can live with 4% and 5.3%..
soundguy