Texasmark
Elite Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2012
- Messages
- 3,703
- Location
- N. Texas
- Tractor
- Ford: '88 3910 Series II, '80 3600, '65 3000; '07 6530C Branson with FEL, 2020 LS MT225S. Case-IH 395 and 895 with cab. All Diesels
The calculation for HP in an internal combustion engine (for one) is messy. Simplified where we "deplorables" can understand it is: (engine torque....ft-lbs for one type unit) x rpms at the data point)/5252.
I don't have the numbers handy but the old flat head four stroke, 4 bangers were undersquare with small diameters and long strokes. With a fuel that would burn the full length of the stroke you could get a lot of torque out of them and as BD said, through out the rpm operating band.
The lowest torque peak diesel I had was in a MF 35 with the 3 cyl 4 stroke Perkins engine. Torque max was 1000 rpms and was relatively flat out from that also.
On being on the up side of the torque peak, again as BD mentioned, as you lug the tractor the rpms fall off but the torque rise balances out the power band back to the peak of the curve. That little Fergie would just not give up, kept tugging and tugging till it hit the peak and then you had better clutch it fast.
Again as BD said, once your rpms drop to the peak, then torque and rpms fall off and the HP craters.
I don't know about Jimmy 2 strokers but I know in 2 stroke outboards where you had to get your power before the exhaust ports were exposed, you had large cube engines running at low rpms, like the OMC family and you had the small displacement high rpm engines built by Carl Kiekhaefer, Mercury. Big bores had the torque and high rpms on small bores made up for it to get the HP. The cubes loved to lug and if the Mercs didn't get the rpms, you didn't get the power. Had both over 50+ years of boating.
I like diesels because they work efficiently and they have more combustion efficiency where the BTUs in the fuel produce work rather than heat. Fuel is safer and fuel systems require less attention.
(Ref: My opinion and aged at that)
I don't have the numbers handy but the old flat head four stroke, 4 bangers were undersquare with small diameters and long strokes. With a fuel that would burn the full length of the stroke you could get a lot of torque out of them and as BD said, through out the rpm operating band.
The lowest torque peak diesel I had was in a MF 35 with the 3 cyl 4 stroke Perkins engine. Torque max was 1000 rpms and was relatively flat out from that also.
On being on the up side of the torque peak, again as BD mentioned, as you lug the tractor the rpms fall off but the torque rise balances out the power band back to the peak of the curve. That little Fergie would just not give up, kept tugging and tugging till it hit the peak and then you had better clutch it fast.
Again as BD said, once your rpms drop to the peak, then torque and rpms fall off and the HP craters.
I don't know about Jimmy 2 strokers but I know in 2 stroke outboards where you had to get your power before the exhaust ports were exposed, you had large cube engines running at low rpms, like the OMC family and you had the small displacement high rpm engines built by Carl Kiekhaefer, Mercury. Big bores had the torque and high rpms on small bores made up for it to get the HP. The cubes loved to lug and if the Mercs didn't get the rpms, you didn't get the power. Had both over 50+ years of boating.
I like diesels because they work efficiently and they have more combustion efficiency where the BTUs in the fuel produce work rather than heat. Fuel is safer and fuel systems require less attention.
(Ref: My opinion and aged at that)