Interesting Towing Test

[Peacock]

Not really impressed with the test criteria. Here's my tests.

1. Torque & Traction: Time to go from zero to 85 mph (about average passing speed on interstates) under max recommended load. Once on a flat, once on a steep grade (East side of the Bighorn Mountains is a good one, also going up I-80 over the Sierra's is another good one.)

2. Endurance & Cooling: At legal cruising speed (assuming the truck can achieve it under max recommended load) ascending any 10,000 pass in the U.S. Can't get to speed, or overheat, you're out of the running.

3. Braking: Distance from 85 mph to complete stop while under maximum recommended load.

4. Braking Endurance: Go back down those 10,000 foot passes and see what the brake maximum temperature gets to.

Make sure all tested vehicles have identical, brand new tires before doing the tests.

This is pretty much what a certain site does during their tests. They data log every little detail you can imagine.

 

[Sysop]

Not really impressed with the test criteria. Here's my tests.

1. Torque & Traction: Time to go from zero to 85 mph (about average passing speed on interstates) under max recommended load. Once on a flat, once on a steep grade (East side of the Bighorn Mountains is a good one, also going up I-80 over the Sierra's is another good one.)

2. Endurance & Cooling: At legal cruising speed (assuming the truck can achieve it under max recommended load) ascending any 10,000 pass in the U.S. Can't get to speed, or overheat, you're out of the running.

3. Braking: Distance from 85 mph to complete stop while under maximum recommended load.

4. Braking Endurance: Go back down those 10,000 foot passes and see what the brake maximum temperature gets to.

Make sure all tested vehicles have identical, brand new tires before doing the tests.

All good ideas. I think also a couple practice runs should be done to tune the trailer brakes to the various brake controllers used. Get it so the trailer brakes are at the same temps for each truck so you're getting the same braking out of the trailer on all the trucks on every pass, that leaves the trucks to be the variable. Tracking the ambient temperatures and wind would be useful data to include as well (since such things can't be controlled). Brakes can get much hotter overall, and can heat up faster when it is 100F ambient temps versus 80F ambient temps.

 

[fordmantpw]

Not really impressed with the test criteria. Here's my tests.

1. Torque & Traction: Time to go from zero to 85 mph (about average passing speed on interstates) under max recommended load. Once on a flat, once on a steep grade (East side of the Bighorn Mountains is a good one, also going up I-80 over the Sierra's is another good one.)

2. Endurance & Cooling: At legal cruising speed (assuming the truck can achieve it under max recommended load) ascending any 10,000 pass in the U.S. Can't get to speed, or overheat, you're out of the running.

3. Braking: Distance from 85 mph to complete stop while under maximum recommended load.

4. Braking Endurance: Go back down those 10,000 foot passes and see what the brake maximum temperature gets to.

Make sure all tested vehicles have identical, brand new tires before doing the tests.

Since most trailer tires are rated to 65MPH, probably best to keep things safe and stick to 65. I know I sure as heck don't tow at 85!

 

[sld]

Since most trailer tires are rated to 65MPH, probably best to keep things safe and stick to 65. I know I sure as heck don't tow at 85!

No kidding. I rarely exceed 65 mph when pulling any trailer.

 

[Sysop]

Not sure about any of you, but I'd feel better at 65 knowing 85 was within the tested abilities. Only trailers I tow at 65 or whatever their rated speed may be is when it's only loaded with a minor amount of weight. If the trailer is loaded up good, I stay well below, generally 50-60 in ideal conditions and slower if needed.

 

[jejeosborne]

None of this seems very mysterious to me. Adding turbo(s) to spark-ignited engines is not new - but it has not been done routinely because the cost versus the next displacement size engine is prohibitive.

Now that fuel economy is king again, they are being considered again. But - you can't overboost like you can with a compression ignition (diesel) engine.....makes detonation. Hence the "use high octane gas for max performance" on boosted S.I. engines.

My concern is longevity for any application that tows routinely - "there is no substitue for displacement" with S.I. engines that are built lightly compared to C.I. engines.

The saying is actually "no replacement for displacement". Those who believe that are stuck in a time warp. It is called volumetric efficiency.
The ecoboost was built ground up and engineered for the additional stresses caused by the higher compression. It isn't built lightly.

As far as detonation is concerned, regular pump gas is fine. I will put in premium when towing heavy loads on hot days. Otherwise just 87 octane. Direct injection technology has removed detonation issues of the past.

 

[Peacock]

I'd say its built pretty lightly compared to most any V8 with similar power. It's got 1 less main bearing and 2 less rod bearings to handle the load. On top of that its got much higher cylinder pressure.

Not saying it won't hold up. But can anyone name a single small displacement FI gasser that is proven to hold up for long periods under high stress?

 

[aczlan]

Not saying it won't hold up. But can anyone name a single small displacement FI gasser that is proven to hold up for long periods under high stress?

Volvo B230FT (especially a post 1993 variant). 4 cyl, 2.3L turbocharged engine. Stock was ~160HP. Many have pushed over 400 for long periods of time. How to make b230ft push 400hp to the wheels? - Turbobricks Forums
Volvo 850, S70 or V70 in the T5 or R package. 5 cyl 2.3L turbocharged engine putting out 243HP stock - Volvo 850 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dad had the non-R version of the S70 (222HP) and it made it to 220k miles without any major issues (that weren't caused by a human).

Aaron Z

 

[Diamondpilot]

The thing that one must remember is that the EcoBoost requires premium fuel, which costs atleast $.20 more than 87 octane. The EcoBoost wil almost certainly have higher operating cost over the long haul and requires pricier fuel.

This is the same argument that some have about a diesel.

Also, the 5.3DI can run on E85 which gives it 380/416 hp/tq. Of course this comes with a fuel economy penalty.

It does not require premium. It's a option when towing but not required in our manual.

Chris

 

[case245]

if gm would use 3.73 or 4.10 the question would be who would place 2nd gm needs to test again with the 6.2L

 

[Peacock]

Volvo B230FT (especially a post 1993 variant). 4 cyl, 2.3L turbocharged engine. Stock was ~160HP. Many have pushed over 400 for long periods of time. How to make b230ft push 400hp to the wheels? - Turbobricks Forums
Volvo 850, S70 or V70 in the T5 or R package. 5 cyl 2.3L turbocharged engine putting out 243HP stock - Volvo 850 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Dad had the non-R version of the S70 (222HP) and it made it to 220k miles without any major issues (that weren't caused by a human).

Aaron Z

Are either of these in trucks? That are rated to tow heavy?

Lots of big power FI gassers out there. None that I can think of that are expected to hold up to heavy towing in a truck where they are at high load and cylinder temps for prolonged periods.

Again....I'm not saying that the EcoBoost won't hold up, but there's a reason why medium duty trucks and semis use big displacement low revving engines. They hold up!

 

[jejeosborne]

I'd say its built pretty lightly compared to most any V8 with similar power. It's got 1 less main bearing and 2 less rod bearings to handle the load. On top of that its got much higher cylinder pressure.

Not saying it won't hold up. But can anyone name a single small displacement FI gasser that is proven to hold up for long periods under high stress?

Of course it does. It is only a 6 cylinder vs 8. So with this logic, you don't like 6 cylinder diesels? They are experiencing much higher cylinder pressures and put down more power. Please give details on what you find is "pretty light". How many V8 stock engines have a forged Crankshaft?

 

[case245]

jejeosborne my 6.0l in my 1 ton has a forged crank

 

[jejeosborne]

Are either of these in trucks? That are rated to tow heavy?

Lots of big power FI gassers out there. None that I can think of that are expected to hold up to heavy towing in a truck where they are at high load and cylinder temps for prolonged periods.

Again....I'm not saying that the EcoBoost won't hold up, but there's a reason why medium duty trucks and semis use big displacement low revving engines. They hold up!

You bring up rpms, the ecoboost operates at much lower rpms than the V8 engines with similar power output it competes against. Should last longer then right?

What medium duty truck are you speaking of? Diesel? We are discussing light duty trucks in this thread. Hard to compare the two since they have different purposes.

As far as comparing it to other high output small displacement truck engines, I don't think there is one to compare it against. I don't know of any recent engine to go against the V8's other than the ecoboost. Do you know of any examples?

 

[jejeosborne]

jejeosborne my 6.0l in my 1 ton has a forged crank

Do they put that same engine in a half ton? I know the 5.3 liter gm and the 5.7 liter hemi are cast. Not sure about others. Looks like your 6.0 is not lightly built either.

 

[Peacock]

Of course it does. It is only a 6 cylinder vs 8. So with this logic, you don't like 6 cylinder diesels? They are experiencing much higher cylinder pressures and put down more power. Please give details on what you find is "pretty light". How many V8 stock engines have a forged Crankshaft?

My diesels are inline. 3, 4 and 6 cylinder.

I don't like V6 or V8 diesels. Equal stress shared by less parts. More parts. More to go wrong.

Forged cranks are quite common these days. Nodular iron has proven to be up to the task as well. It's the pistons, lighter aluminum block, and rods that need to really be strengthened. I'm sure they have been.

I don't have anything against this engine at all. I like technology. But I greatly prefer a simpler mechanical solution that is built to last while meeting the same goals.

 

[compact]

I have an F-150 eco screw 4x4 with 3:31 rear and 18 inch tires. It will pull our family of 5 with a weeks gear and 7K tractor / trailer combo up a 15% grade at 52MPH, and tows at 1500rpm, usually never above 2700 even on pretty good hills, gets 11MPG. 20-21MPG average the rest of the time. It will break the rear end loose towing if I give it a little too much gas at a stop so I can't see going to a higher rear end ratio. it's a low speed engine - closer to driving a '250 powerstroke than a 5.0 gas.

 

[Peacock]

You bring up rpms, the ecoboost operates at much lower rpms than the V8 engines with similar power output it competes against. Should last longer then right?

What medium duty truck are you speaking of? Diesel? We are discussing light duty trucks in this thread. Hard to compare the two since they have different purposes.

As far as comparing it to other high output small displacement truck engines, I don't think there is one to compare it against. I don't know of any recent engine to go against the V8's other than the ecoboost. Do you know of any examples?

It does operate at lower rpms for sure. That's a wonderful benefit of turbocharging and VVT. But I can guarantee you that low rpm and high cylinder pressures is harder on bearings than the same pressures at high rpm. Again, more bearings to spread the load over is better.

I'm speaking of medium duty trucks as a whole. Sure they could produce similar power in a small cube gasser or diesel, but it's easier and more reliable to do it with a 9L or bigger diesel. Older medium duty trucks used big gassers. But these engines had hardly lasted 100k or less before they were shot. Obviously times have changed and engines today will easily lasting longer, but physics remain. You gotta be able to shed the heat and spread the load.

 

[Peacock]

Do they put that same engine in a half ton? I know the 5.3 liter gm and the 5.7 liter hemi are cast. Not sure about others. Looks like your 6.0 is not lightly built either.

The 4.8, 5.3 and 6.0 are of identical design. Deep skirt block and six bolt mains. This includes the car engines in the 'Vette and others.

 

[jejeosborne]

My diesels are inline. 3, 4 and 6 cylinder.

I don't like V6 or V8 diesels. Equal stress shared by less parts. More parts. More to go wrong.

Forged cranks are quite common these days. Nodular iron has proven to be up to the task as well. It's the pistons, lighter aluminum block, and rods that need to really be strengthened. I'm sure they have been.

I don't have anything against this engine at all. I like technology. But I greatly prefer a simpler mechanical solution that is built to last while meeting the same goals.

What light duty truck engines have forged cranks? I know they are common with performance/HO engines but really didn't find them all that common in light trucks.

I agree with you that I prefer simpler solutions but I needed the towing capacity and the 6.2 liter was going to be too expensive to feed when not towing. If gas were still $2.00/gallon I would have bought the 6.2 liter.