DPFs, EGRs, DEF, etc...

[Snobdds]

The V-8 was tried in OTR trucks and has been retired for quite some time. Lower fuel economy, more moving parts and packaging under the hood are some of the reasons. In lines make more torque for their displacement and fuel they consume than V-8s in bigger trucks.
In line sixes and some fours probably make up the configuration in 99.5% of trucks bigger than a 5500 today.

In line gods are cheaper to make...that is why they are more popular...despite all the crazy theories you think make them more popular.

It's always about money.

A V8 diesel can also have a long stoke and big bore...it's not something only unique to inline gods.

 

[Snobdds]

Wouldn’t just buying something besides a 6.4 be considered adapting? Some products are junk and there’s no need to claim otherwise. My old and tired 6.5 was having overheating problems trying to pull my equipment. I could’ve made mods to increase the cooling or I could just hook on my other truck that doesn’t have that problem which is what I do.

One could make the case it's adapting or beyond ones ability to understand what they have and give up.

 

[Snobdds]

The perfect vehicle doesn't exist. If you think the 6.4L is the perfect engine then what I drive is immaterial.

Now don't go trying to wiggle your way out of this by saying I said the 6.4 is perfect. I have not. I did say it's probably the engine most capable of making the most power out of any common rail set up. Twin sequential turbos put a lot of air into a motor. Tuned and deleted 6.4's are nasty. It has the bottom end of a tank with a bed plate of a medium duty truck. It's the emissions that killed that thing and it did take out the valve train if the oil was left in too long.

 

[jyoutz]

In line gods are cheaper to make...that is why they are more popular...despite all the crazy theories you think make them more popular.

It's always about money.

A V8 diesel can also have a long stoke and big bore...it's not something only unique to inline gods.

I doubt that cost is the driving factor. Inline engines are the standard for industrial applications: log skidders, dozers, heavy marine, etc… None of these run V motors.

 

[Snobdds]

I doubt that cost is the driving factor. Inline engines are the standard for industrial applications: log skidders, dozers, heavy marine, etc… None of these run V motors.

No? You don't think one intake manifold, one exhaust manifold, one camshaft, no crossover piping (intake & exhaust) is a factor?

Interesting.

 

[jyoutz]

No? You don't think one intake manifold, one exhaust manifold, one camshaft, no crossover piping (intake & exhaust) is a factor?

Interesting.

Do you think if a v engine would improve performance on a D9 dozer, that Caterpillar wouldn’t do that? The engine cost has to be a small portion of the cost of that equipment.

 

[Snobdds]

Do you think if a v engine would improve performance on a D9 dozer, that Caterpillar wouldn’t do that? The engine cost has to be a small portion of the cost of that equipment.

I think this is called a straw man argument.

Neither you or I are in the know to why cat does what cat does.

I will just keep to the facts that inline gods are much simpler engines than v based engines. I can show and prove that.

 

[Hay Dude]

Zzzzzzzzz

 

[Hay Dude]

I think this is called a straw man argument.

Neither you or I are in the know to why cat does what cat does.

I will just keep to the facts that inline gods are much simpler engines than v based engines. I can show and prove that.

Yep and cheaper is more profitable to own & operate because there’s less moving parts, which increases reliability. You know nothing about operating a company that uses equipment to make a profit.

 

[Snobdds]

Yep and simple is cheaper to own & operate. Something you know nothing about.

Well in theory. We had an inline god at the ranch for awhile. Could not keep ball joints on it and the 68Re was a bag of marbles.

In reality, Inline gods have a hard time being simple and awesome when their chariot is a bag of trash.

 

[DK35vince]

Well in theory. We had an inline god at the ranch for awhile. Could not keep ball joints on it and the 68Re was a bag of marbles.

In reality, Inline gods have a hard time being simple and awesome when their chariot is a bag of trash.

Inline 6 diesel vs V8 diesel

So which is the best diesel in a 3/4 ton or 1 ton pickup, the 6.7L Cummins inline 6 in the Ram, the 6.6L Isuzu Duramax V8 in the Chevy/...

pickupinline6dieselvsothers.blogspot.com

 

[Snobdds]

Inline 6 diesel vs V8 diesel

So which is the best diesel in a 3/4 ton or 1 ton pickup, the 6.7L Cummins inline 6 in the Ram, the 6.6L Isuzu Duramax V8 in the Chevy/...

pickupinline6dieselvsothers.blogspot.com

any thoughts on your own? I can google too.

Inline 6 vs V-8 Diesels

Inline 6 vs V-8 diesels - does one engine configuration reign supreme? Explore the inherent differences between inline 6 and V-8 diesel engines, including the advantages and disadvantages of each configuration.

www.dieselhub.com

 

[truckdiagnostics]

Interesting debate. Lets use the 71 series Detroit as an example. You could get that in an inline or v configuration basically the same parts. You went to a v8 71 as opposed to an inline 6 71 for horsepower. At the time you could not get the horsepower out of an in line 6 with out it getting to big and heavy. Ever seen a KT series Cummins! So in the automotive applications they went to a v8 configuration for a while. They needed to be able to get the horsepower in a small envelope. Under the hood of say a pick up truck. Hence the 7.3 power stroke or IH's 444e. The early 5.9 Cummins in the dodges we pretty under powered when you compared to a 7.3 power stroke. Jump forward to today. With the fuel and air delivery control they can make the horsepower out of an inline that you used to need a v8 and with everything they have to hang off an engine these days the v8 doesn't have the real-estate an inline has, not easily anyway. Hence the the 6.4. You take the stuff off crank it up and the horsepower to weight if kinda nice.

My two cents

 

[4570Man]

Interesting debate. Lets use the 71 series Detroit as an example. You could get that in an inline or v configuration basically the same parts. You went to a v8 71 as opposed to an inline 6 71 for horsepower. At the time you could not get the horsepower out of an in line 6 with out it getting to big and heavy. Ever seen a KT series Cummins! So in the automotive applications they went to a v8 configuration for a while. They needed to be able to get the horsepower in a small envelope. Under the hood of say a pick up truck. Hence the 7.3 power stroke or IH's 444e. The early 5.9 Cummins in the dodges we pretty under powered when you compared to a 7.3 power stroke. Jump forward to today. With the fuel and air delivery control they can make the horsepower out of an inline that you used to need a v8 and with everything they have to hang off an engine these days the v8 doesn't have the real-estate an inline has, not easily anyway. Hence the the 6.4. You take the stuff off crank it up and the horsepower to weight if kinda nice.

My two cents

The 5.9 and the 7.3 were always fairly comparable across the same timeframe especially considering the displacement difference.

 

[Hay Dude]

The 5.9 and the 7.3 were always fairly comparable across the same timeframe especially considering the displacement difference.

Except in HP/Litre, and use in heavy applications.
In those 2 categories, Cummins is superior.
Look at the connecting rods some day and decide which one is stronger.
Power-wise, I’d say they were comparable as engines, but the Cummins had more HP/TQ per litre.

Never saw a Powerstroke in a farm tractor. Says a LOT

 

[charles todd]

Why I bought our LS P7010C over other tractors of similar spec. Mechanical direct injection, turbo, muffler... Last of the Interim Tier 4 engines. Hope it is the last tractor I need.

P7010C Engine Detail

CT

 

[kellerw]

a way to avoid all this: used equipment. Even if you have to buy a book to maintain it, the power and frankly usefulness of older equipment keeps you grounded. Overall cost is also a fraction of new equipment.

 

[MHarryE]

My Tier 3 L5740 was with me for 4 years, replaced by my Tier 4 L6060 which is now leaving after 5 years. Neither had any engine problems except for fuel filters plugging before the scheduled replacement time (yes, we don't get the best fuel in our area). The L6060 did impress me with how much better performance was for only 3 HP advertised difference. I credit that to direct injection. Another farming season past and the only engine powered machine on my farm with an engine issue continues to be the Cummins on my '92 combine. My other 5 are all Tier 4. But I am just one small user.

 

[Pangean]

Interesting how this thread devolved into the relative merits of the 3 main diesel platforms (powerfully argued by the adherents of each of those 3 great religions). To respond to the OP topic, I too am fully supportive of environmental protection policies. However, these particular (no pun intended) policies are somewhat hypocritical and a clear example of unintended consequences. The inefficiencies offset much, if not all, of the benefits. When the DFP failed in my ‘08 Dodge, I opted to delete and re-chip rather than replace the DPF—basically on the advice of the tech that it would extend the life of the engine and turbo unit. He said the Cummins should get 500,000 Km’s before major work, but that with the DPF units they were seeing that cut down to closer to 300,000 or even less. He mentioned a possible improvement in fuel economy. As it turned out, economy went from 650-700 km per tank (consistent from the time it was new) to over 1000 km and even over 1100 when unladen/highway driving. How much particulates were released into the atmosphere extracting, refining, and transporting those extra 300-400 km worth of fuel for each tank?

 

[Fielding]

Found some confusion in this thread.

DPF - Diesel Particulate Filter, all diesels including tractors over 25.5HP

DEF - Diesel Exhaust Fluid, dilute Urea in water to be injected after the DPF into the SCR. DEF is not a part on the machine.

SCR - Selective Catalytic Reduction, The SCR is usually equipped on equipment over 75HP. Uses the Ammonia NH4 to react with NOx to create N2 and Water.

The current emissions units work very well, due to experiments at personal owners expense for over a decade now.

I think the biggest and only rub to have with emissions control is that US government owned equipment still is exempt.

Deleting would not have become an enforceable issue, but the rolling coal for attention crowd painted a giant crosshair on the themselves.

My 2010 cummins is H&S deleted and runs great still, 2011 cummins was sold at 460,000kms with original emissions and no issues, 2018 cummins with DPF and SCR is great, adding DEF is only a minor trash creating inconvenience. But they finally have a bulk nozzle at the cardlock.

Fumeless exhaust is not a bad thing.