1000 FT LB of Torque

[Raspy]

For a long time Ford has been playing the high spec game to increase sales. Just a bit more power, torque, towing ability, etc, than the competition so that they can claim to be number 1. And it works. Ram and Cummins are having none of that anymore and are totally stepping up to thwart any gripes people have about power, torque interiors, features, etc. One by one they have covered every base.

Of course 1000 ft lbs is ridiculous, but so was 60 HP in a 1932 Ford V8 that could actually break it's tires loose if you popped the clutch. I've never seen a dirt bike with too much power either, and each successively more powerful one would do things the previous ones wouldn't.

My poor little Cummins only has 850 ft lbs, but towing up mountain grades in 6th while passing slow trucks is very satisfying. Like an old John Deere tractor. No screaming engine, but a satisfying locomotive roar at about 1800 RPM. Besides, I like to see the Ford guys squirm when they have to face that they may be "underpowered".

Meanwhile my other car is a 1983 Mercedes 300SD Diesel. After flooring it, I have to concentrate for a moment to detect any acceleration. Torque management is done exclusively with the right foot. Running down the highway at 3500 RPM is disturbing in a diesel, but the Mercedes is made to do it. Besides, if you run off the road in Nevada, you're likely to only scare a coyote and a jack rabbit or two as you mow down some sagebrush and pick up some Nevada pinstriping.

It turns out the Ram is my favorite all around vehicle. The only real annoyance is/was the torque management and how to deal with it. Some creative tuning has made a difference. There's a tricky balance between engine programming and transmission programming. There is so much horsepower and so much likelihood of making smoke, and so much chance to break something in the drivetrain, that the whole system is really dumbed down. But once it all gets situated and leans into the load, either the load will move forward or the Earth will turn backward instead.

BTW, the new 6.7s are not the same engine. Nodular cast iron block, larger wrist pins, hydraulic lifters, beefed up crankshaft, larger main caps and bolts, different turbo and, get this, 60 lbs lighter! The exhaust aftertreatment system is apparently about 8' long! The G56 stick was only rated for, I think, 650 ft lbs and they installed a clutch barely able to handle the torque, as a sort of fuse to protect it. It would be sweet if they had a new stick to handle the torque, but I guess they've moved on to a new era.

 

[tjkubota93]

I see someone gets my point! I love it! This is America and if someone builds it and the customer wants or needs it, by all means go for it, let the haters say what they want. I still think Prius owners are pusscakes though!

Idk about pusscakes, I would say un-intelligent or priorities out of order.

They pay a ton of money, say $30k for a car to maybe save $5 or $10k in gas. Then they trade it in and take a beating or pay through the nose for new batteries for the hybrid part.

It would make more sense to buy a different gas saving (non hybrid) econo box.

As for 1000 ft lbs, that kind of thing sells trucks. Nobody wants less hp than last year! That thing is probably so torque managed you rarely get all the power. I bet if someone programs that out, that motor will shoot planetary gear sets from here to the moon out of the transmission. If not that, u joints or ring and pinions.

 

[Tomtint]

For a long time Ford has been playing the high spec game to increase sales. Just a bit more power, torque, towing ability, etc, than the competition so that they can claim to be number 1. And it works. Ram and Cummins are having none of that anymore and are totally stepping up to thwart any gripes people have about power, torque interiors, features, etc. One by one they have covered every base.

Of course 1000 ft lbs is ridiculous, but so was 60 HP in a 1932 Ford V8 that could actually break it's tires loose if you popped the clutch. I've never seen a dirt bike with too much power either, and each successively more powerful one would do things the previous ones wouldn't.

My poor little Cummins only has 850 ft lbs, but towing up mountain grades in 6th while passing slow trucks is very satisfying. Like an old John Deere tractor. No screaming engine, but a satisfying locomotive roar at about 1800 RPM. Besides, I like to see the Ford guys squirm when they have to face that they may be "underpowered".

Meanwhile my other car is a 1983 Mercedes 300SD Diesel. After flooring it, I have to concentrate for a moment to detect any acceleration. Torque management is done exclusively with the right foot. Running down the highway at 3500 RPM is disturbing in a diesel, but the Mercedes is made to do it. Besides, if you run off the road in Nevada, you're likely to only scare a coyote and a jack rabbit or two as you mow down some sagebrush and pick up some Nevada pinstriping.

It turns out the Ram is my favorite all around vehicle. The only real annoyance is/was the torque management and how to deal with it. Some creative tuning has made a difference. There's a tricky balance between engine programming and transmission programming. There is so much horsepower and so much likelihood of making smoke, and so much chance to break something in the drivetrain, that the whole system is really dumbed down. But once it all gets situated and leans into the load, either the load will move forward or the Earth will turn backward instead.

BTW, the new 6.7s are not the same engine. Nodular cast iron block, larger wrist pins, hydraulic lifters, beefed up crankshaft, larger main caps and bolts, different turbo and, get this, 60 lbs lighter! The exhaust aftertreatment system is apparently about 8' long! The G56 stick was only rated for, I think, 650 ft lbs and they installed a clutch barely able to handle the torque, as a sort of fuse to protect it. It would be sweet if they had a new stick to handle the torque, but I guess they've moved on to a new era.

This is Dodge we are talking about here....What could possibly go wrong...lol

 

[QRTRHRS]

If you want it or need it and want it and can afford it then by all means go for it. IMHO, the auto industry is going to start running short on "well qualified buyers" in the next couple of years. Not just on high dollar pickup trucks but across the line up.

 

[paulfun9]

This is Dodge we are talking about here....What could possibly go wrong...lol

Most likely like my present and past ones A Heck Of A Lot Less than my previous Chevy or fords.

 

[Sawyer Rob]

Most likely like my present and past ones A Heck Of A Lot Less than my previous Chevy or fords.

I wish "I" could say that!!

SR

 

[Jstpssng]

Well, maybe Im one. I hire out dump truck work and equipment transport. The costs get passed on and frees me up for other tasks. I quickly learned hiring the right people for the right job saves money in the long run, but you gotta check more than just the price.

OVER LOADED Trailer--The Damage That FORCED me to SHUT DOWN my company!! 34, IBS On F35 - YouTube

if he went under for that kind of money then he really wasn't in business. Guys like him give professional drivers a bad name; if he didn't check the weight of his load first, he should have known he was overloaded when he started pulling it. (or sooner)

 

[FredH]

After having to rebuild my sons auto trans in his 2007 that He decided to put a tuner on , and reading through this thread , I have serious doubts if either a manual or auto trans could really deliver that to the ground . Possibly over a longer pull , but light to light ??

When I trade in my old semi's for a newer one , I look a 3 year old trucks . 1) I eliminate paying FET , 2) majority of the kinks and recalls have been worked out and taken care of . A couple of times I have replaced clutches , None because of the clutch , rather if the transmission comes out , then replace the clutch assembly . Both times I have replaced the clutch , I have spent the extra dollars and went with the highest torque assemblies they carry . Simply because , although the assembly is far over-rated than the engine , that is 1 less likely Break point . As noted above , I wonder what the weak link is .

I doubt even a custom 67RFE could handle it , and not sure about factory manual clutch assemblies . My neighbors older 2500 pulls Her 3 horse trailer just fine for her when her and her girlfriends head to the mountains . I guess I am at that stage in life were I look at things differently . Go with a Tradesman or a Laramie ?? Me , I will take the Tradesman and with the extra cash I saved , buy a boat load of other toys :thumbsup:

Fred H.

 

[Raspy]

After having to rebuild my sons auto trans in his 2007 that He decided to put a tuner on , and reading through this thread , I have serious doubts if either a manual or auto trans could really deliver that to the ground . Possibly over a longer pull , but light to light ??

I doubt even a custom 67RFE could handle it , and not sure about factory manual clutch assemblies . My neighbors older 2500 pulls Her 3 horse trailer just fine for her when her and her girlfriends head to the mountains . I guess I am at that stage in life were I look at things differently . Go with a Tradesman or a Laramie ?? Me , I will take the Tradesman and with the extra cash I saved , buy a boat load of other toys :thumbsup:

Fred H.

The stick is now gone. So there is no question anymore if the clutch can handle the power.

The HO engine is the one with the 1000 ft lb rating. That engine comes with the Aisin tranny and it can handle the torque. But............ any time you tune one, you have to be aware of it's affect on the tranny. You can't just hop up the engine and expect the tranny to be fine. The Aisin is not tunable. The problem isn't if the tranny can handle the full output, it's how it shifts while under power and how it responds to increases in torque outside the normal fueling map. With the stock torque management, the fuel is cut during the shift and the power ramps up slowly. If you tune, the tranny will slip during shifts and then you will have problems if you just hotrod it around.

The other way to deal with it is to tune the standard output Cummins, which uses the 68 RFE tranny. That tranny can be tuned and can be beefed up.

If all you want to do is race from light to light, and you will only settle for more power, you have challenge that involves the tranny and how to beef it up and tune it.

It amazes me how many guys buy these trucks as simple toys to race around town and then complain when it breaks. Or blame Ram for having a "weak" trans.

 

[ddbackhoe]

It amazes me how many guys buy these trucks as simple toys to race around town and then complain when it breaks. Or blame Ram for having a "weak" trans.

KInd of a shame the people selling tuners to roll coal arent putting warnings/disclaimers out that when you dial in a 6 bad things can and probably will happen. YouTube and internet chats certainly dont help the situation. The old Chevy 6.5 comes to mind. Everyone hated them because they ate injector pumps ($1000) but it was the control modules that failed the most ($200)