Nissan Titan Cummins

[handirifle]

Lt CHEG
Your points are all valid ones, it's basically "to each his own" and there's not a thing wrong with that. I did note that you did mention you do have the the horsepower available, "when you need it" and that was one of the main detractors, for me, for this engine.

I drive an '06 Tundra, that is rated for 290hp and 310lbs torque. My car before that (not counting the GMC lemon law return) was a 2001 Jeep Wrangler with 4.10 gears, a 4.0L I6 that was 190hp and 235 lbs torque. Torque does the work, and driving a Wrangler (the way they're meant to be driven) teaches one how to use it. I have not ever owned a "hot rod" unless you count my wifes 2005 Honda Accord, with a 3.0L V6 rated at 240hp. That thing hauls.

I do not drive like on egg shells but I try to keep my foot off the floor too. One reason I can get 18mpg highway. I also keep it at 70 or below (speed limit 65) but that's mostly to avoid paying for tickets.

The reason car companies make different models is we don't all like the same thing, big surprise huh?

The diesel in your truck is worth having, I was just commenting that this one's power numbers are a step backward. So they get it from 2.8L, in my opinion, that is a negative, since something is sacrificed to get the extra power. It's no secret, that if you power chip that engine of yours, the warranty is void. They are basically just power chipping theirs from the start, and betting on the outcome, IMHO.

My point is I have no desire to own a truck (my full time vehicle) that HAS to drive like my Jeep. If I choose to drive it that way, then good, but I want the choice. On the freeway, the Jeep was sorely lacking in passing power, and I can just about guarantee you this engine in a full size truck will too. Ever get stuck behind someone doing 50 on a long straight 2 lane hwy and only get short windows to pass? Don't do it in this truck. It not hot rodding, it safe passing.

As for the oil company/car company debate, I say let the oil companies go broke, oh wait, then NO ONE will sell us oil but the Saudi's.

I I figure they deserve their 4-6% profit just as much as anyone. Like you said, it's not all their doing but partly some greedy SOB that has NOTHING to do with bringing it to market, but rather just to make him money.

I think the current race to squeeze more and more hp from smaller engines is OK but they are pushing some limits too far.

I would own a truck with an engine like yours, but not the one in question.

 

[Bama67]

The Titan doesn't make that TQ until 3,400 rpms which is not any better than the others, (the HEMI makes that at 3,000 rpms). The difference is the others keep making power where-as the Titan drops the power like a bad habit. It can't even make it's max 317 HP until a high-revving 5,200 rpms! :laughing:
Even with the power coming on so late, the Titan rear-ends were failing left and right so hopefully they can put a real rear-end in that truck that can handle diesel torque.

What is this post supposed to prove? I probably wouldn't have started talking power numbers about the "lowly" Titan, as it is MUCH faster than Hemi Rams, even the lastest and greatest Ram Hemi can't hang with the 7 year old Titan in 0-60 and towing ability.

I haven't owned a Titan, but I did own a 2007 Nissan Armada, which is the same thing but heavier, and I could still smoke my buddies Hemi every time. He was not happy.

I know that wasn't what trucks are built for, but we are talking power here. That and I just had to get into the internet weiner-measuring contest. :laughing:

 

[Dmace]

What is this post supposed to prove? I probably wouldn't have started talking power numbers about the "lowly" Titan, as it is MUCH faster than Hemi Rams, even the lastest and greatest Ram Hemi can't hang with the 7 year old Titan in 0-60 and towing ability.

I haven't owned a Titan, but I did own a 2007 Nissan Armada, which is the same thing but heavier, and I could still smoke my buddies Hemi every time. He was not happy.

I know that wasn't what trucks are built for, but we are talking power here. That and I just had to get into the internet weiner-measuring contest. :laughing:

My post proves exactly where the power is made which was insinuated to be early but that was obviously wrong. My post shows actual facts whereas yours is completely meaningless. I have a 1990 Eagle Talon with only 250 hp that will destroy a truck racing but it sucks at towing. Put a trailer on that Armada and Hemi and see who wins.

If that Titan is so great at towing then why is it only rated at a max of 9,500lbs where all the other 1/2 tons are well over 10k lbs?

 

[magicheater]

There are oodles of 4cyl diesels outside the U.S. For some reason they are not allowed here. This is not a new concept, only "new" for the U.S. Many have wanted them for years. VW had them in the Golf and others I believe, maybe it was the emissions that killed them. If you have ever traveled outside the U.S. you can relate to what I am saying. It's about time!!

 

[Dargo]

I have a 1990 Eagle Talon with only 250 hp that will destroy a truck racing but it sucks at towing.

Impossible. There hasn't been an Eagle Talon on the streets since somewhere in the mid 90's! :laughing: The last one I saw was at Knob Creek machine gun shoot. Yup, it was a target.

 

[Bama67]

My post proves exactly where the power is made which was insinuated to be early but that was obviously wrong. My post shows actual facts whereas yours is completely meaningless. I have a 1990 Eagle Talon with only 250 hp that will destroy a truck racing but it sucks at towing. Put a trailer on that Armada and Hemi and see who wins.

If that Titan is so great at towing then why is it only rated at a max of 9,500lbs where all the other 1/2 tons are well over 10k lbs?

Everything I posted was probably meaningless, but your the one that started bashing Nissan, and talking up Hemi power and all that, which is basically what you do in every truck related thread. Which is fine, nothing wrong with having pride in your favorite truck, just don't make it out to look like the Dodge walks all over the Titan, which isn't the case. If the Dodge out tows the Nissan it ain't by much, and lets not forget, you are comparing a new truck to a design thats been out for EIGHT YEARS.

And don't think I am a Dodge hater. My current truck is a 2007 Dodge Ram.

But back on topic, I would love to see a small diesel in 1/2 ton. But I feel like the one in the Titan could use a little more power. The gas engine puts out torque numbers close to the oil burner and much more horsepower. I am afraid it would feel like a dog after getting used to the power of todays modern trucks.

 

[ModMech]

A few points:

1) 15 years ago, a "Big block" F/GM/Ch was enough power for any job @ 235HP and 265 Tq. IMO, it still is today, people just WANT more.

2) CAT is out of the on-road engine market, their engines cannot meet USEPA regulations for 2010 and beyond.

3) Diesels available in other markets are because of significantly higher FUEL PRICES in those markets. There is NO (very little) demand for small diesel vehicles in the US. It's all about Cost Per Mile and few people in the US know what it is, much less care about it. That is why demand is soft.

4) CAT's truck is not designed by CAT, if you do your homework, it is an International Truck with CAT badging. Navistar engines too.

5) Cummins has had these V-4 and V-6 products in their stable for a few years, just because we cannot drive it does not mean they are new.

 

[handirifle]

There are oodles of 4cyl diesels outside the U.S. For some reason they are not allowed here. This is not a new concept, only "new" for the U.S. Many have wanted them for years. VW had them in the Golf and others I believe, maybe it was the emissions that killed them. If you have ever traveled outside the U.S. you can relate to what I am saying. It's about time!!

popular Mechanics magazine answered this question, perfectly. Certain people in power (the greenies) on the USA consider diesel engines "dirty" and want them banned. We see it in CA in how they are destroying the small contractors with unrealistic upgrades to already marketed engines. MOST states and the feds have higher taxes on diesel fuel, thus retarding growth in the market for expansion. If they lowered the taxes enough to make it less than the high octane gas we might see some movement towards the advantages of higher power diesels.

I didn't think the power of the 70's or 80's engines were all that swift. When you are pulling a heavy load up a grade and it barely makes it, of course you want MORE. I think there can be a happy medium, but "accepting" less power isn't the answer, in my book.

 

[ModMech]

popular Mechanics magazine answered this question, perfectly. Certain people in power (the greenies) on the USA consider diesel engines "dirty" and want them banned. We see it in CA in how they are destroying the small contractors with unrealistic upgrades to already marketed engines. MOST states and the feds have higher taxes on diesel fuel, thus retarding growth in the market for expansion. If they lowered the taxes enough to make it less than the high octane gas we might see some movement towards the advantages of higher power diesels.

Lots of good points there but the RUT (road use tax) on diesel is in most cases within a few cents of that for gasoline, there is no real savings to be had here and MOST of the fuel is burned by the "big rigs" that also do most of the wear and tear on our roads, so from my seat the tax as it is, is fair.

If the "greeines" were also intelligent, assuming of course the goal of clean air and water is noble - which I believe it to be, they would realize that DIS-incentivizing the purchase of newer and cleaner engines is a step in the WRONG direction. What "we" *should be* doing is offering incentives to trade in OLD equipment on new equipment.

But, almost 50% of the diesel sold in the USA goes to "off-road" uses. This includes the biggest single users, the Rail Roads. Guess what is not regulated or very loosely regulated? Yup, RR emissions! If you *really* want to clean up the air, regulate RR and ship emissions!

I think of this EPA BS like this.....

We HAVE an air quality problem, mostly because we use fossil fuels for transportation. About 50% of the transportation fuel is is consumed by the RRs and ship traffic and the service life on this equipment is typically 25-35 years.

The EPA is trying to clean up 100% of the air quality problem by STRICTLY REGULATING a small portion of the contributors (light, medium and heavy vehicles) which DISincentivizes investment in newer and cleaner vehicles.

If I have three people dumping oil in my well, two that dump a quart each and one that dumps two quarts I would be foolish to spend all my efforts on one of the two "one quart dumpers", but that is what the EPA is doing.

Myopic policy at best, stupid and very harmful at worst.

 

[Dargo]

Lots of good points there but the RUT (road use tax) on diesel is in most cases within a few cents of that for gasoline, there is no real savings to be had here and MOST of the fuel is burned by the "big rigs" that also do most of the wear and tear on our roads, so from my seat the tax as it is, is fair.

If the "greeines" were also intelligent, assuming of course the goal of clean air and water is noble - which I believe it to be, they would realize that DIS-incentivizing the purchase of newer and cleaner engines is a step in the WRONG direction. What "we" *should be* doing is offering incentives to trade in OLD equipment on new equipment.

But, almost 50% of the diesel sold in the USA goes to "off-road" uses. This includes the biggest single users, the Rail Roads. Guess what is not regulated or very loosely regulated? Yup, RR emissions! If you *really* want to clean up the air, regulate RR and ship emissions!

I think of this EPA BS like this.....

We HAVE an air quality problem, mostly because we use fossil fuels for transportation. About 50% of the transportation fuel is is consumed by the RRs and ship traffic and the service life on this equipment is typically 25-35 years.

The EPA is trying to clean up 100% of the air quality problem by STRICTLY REGULATING a small portion of the contributors (light, medium and heavy vehicles) which DISincentivizes investment in newer and cleaner vehicles.

If I have three people dumping oil in my well, two that dump a quart each and one that dumps two quarts I would be foolish to spend all my efforts on one of the two "one quart dumpers", but that is what the EPA is doing.

Myopic policy at best, stupid and very harmful at worst.

You have a good point there that I never really thought of. I live about 3 miles from the Ohio River and a large train depot for loading and unloading cargo. I hear HUGE diesel engines echoing throughout the area all night long. It never really dawned on me how much fuel they use. I know they use less fuel than trucking the same goods, but they surely use a lot.