| From | Message |
Mar
Dodge Dakota
9/05/2001
14:18:12
|
 Subject: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Does not exsist if you ask me. I dont belive some of the HP and torque numbers they claim there trucks have. I may be wrong but i was wondering if anyone has every dynoed one and can tell us if they are true or not. Because it just seems that 1 dodge hp is 4 of chevys. Because there trucks perform the same as a equally weighted dodge.
Marty.
|
sandman
Dodge Dakota
9/05/2001
17:37:53
|  RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Remeber that hp does little for you until you quit accellerateing. Torque is the unit of force that gets the truck moveing. Hp is a mathmetical equation used to demonstrate the amount of work that can be done. Compare torque and braodness of power band and the picture changes rather quickly. Hope this helped a little.
|
Mopar8
Dodge Dakota
9/05/2001
20:11:18
|  RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Chevy has done this for years, I can remember the 454 being rated at like 465hp and it was the slowest POS on the street, I think they do it convince idiots that their stuff is one step better than the competiton,But we know better!
|
Mar
Dodge Dakota
9/05/2001
22:15:51
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
No kidding. Thanks guys.
|
Chris
Dodge Dakota
9/05/2001
22:57:46
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Sandman, I agree with you when you say that torque is what gets you moving, but disagree when you say that horsepower doesn't do anything for you until you quit accelerating. Torque gets you moving and maintain speed, but once you are moving, horsepower is resposible for acceleration. A proof of this is the diesel engines used in the heavier duty pick-ups nowadays. They have a lot of torque and seem to start from a standstill in almost any gear, also, they go up steep grades much easier. What they can't do is win drag races. Not just because of weight, but because of lack of horsepower. You are right when you say that hp is derived from torque, but hp is work (force per unit of time) and the more work an engine produces, the faster it will accelerate. Both have their uses. For everyday driving and for towing, give-me torque, for drag racing, I'll take hp any day!
Just my 5 cents....
Truck on!
2001 QC 4x4 SLT+
4.7 auto LSD 3.55
|
kota on 20s
Dodge Dakota
9/05/2001
23:55:55
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
i am no math genious, but i think chris is right. just look at the honda S2000, it has VERRY low torque, but with a 9000 red line the HP jumps to 240. and does the 1/4 in high 13's-low 14's. that is not from torque.
Eric
|
Brad
Dodge Dakota
9/06/2001
17:12:59
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
That's right about the S2000. My friend has one and we have dragged from stop light to stop light. I can stay right with him through first gear on my truck. Once he hits second its all over though. Torque off the line, HP once you're moving. As for chevy's hp numbers, trucktrend did a dyno on a 5.3L and its seemed to be right in line. 285 rated and 221 at the wheels.
|
Mar
Dodge Dakota
9/06/2001
17:19:56
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Yah but I dont trust truck trend. They do what GM tells them to do.
|
sandman
Dodge Dakota
9/06/2001
20:52:53
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Guys I was trying to keep it super simple. I almost stuck equations in but thought na Keep it simple. The cummins dissel used in the dodge trucks holds some records at Bonnevile Salt Flats. One of the car magizines a few years back talked a couple people into hot rodding a dodge ram with Turbo Dissel. They installed the banks power package and increased boost pressure to 45psi and it dynoed 800hp at the real wheels. They had to duck tape all of the seams and gaps on the truck, put flat wheel covers on the rims and lowered it 2 inchs. After the test they towed trailers through the mountains. Remember that diesels have very narrow poer bands and are geared for towing normaly not raceing. The also played around with dissels in F1, Indy car and NASCAR. You might see a resurgence in comeing years in raceing.
|
Chris
Dodge Dakota
9/06/2001
21:47:58
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Not trying to beat the dead horse, but to get horsepower, you need rpms. The higher your engine rev, the higher the hp. Now a Diesel cannot rev high because by nature Diesel has a very slow burn rate. Diesel has a lot of torque because it is constant-pressure combustion, which unlike the gasoline's constant-volume combustion, it applys a force on the piston over a longer period of time. Now the reason why Diesels aren't used in the racing circle is because to get high hp from Diesel, you need extremely high torque numbers and to get that, you either need displacement (bigger engines) or very high pressure forced induction (turbo or supercharger or both). This is not a very efficient way to get hp because the increase in weight.
I guess I'll stop here....
Sorry guys, I got a little carried away!
Truck on!
2001 QC 4x4 SLT+
4.7 auto LSD 3.55
|
Chris
Dodge Dakota
9/06/2001
21:49:04
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Not trying to beat the dead horse, but to get horsepower, you need rpms. The higher your engine rev, the higher the hp. Now a Diesel cannot rev high because by nature Diesel has a very slow burn rate. Diesel has a lot of torque because it is constant-pressure combustion, which unlike the gasoline's constant-volume combustion, it applys a force on the piston over a longer period of time. Now the reason why Diesels aren't used in the racing circle is because to get high hp from Diesel, you need extremely high torque numbers and to get that, you either need displacement (bigger engines) or very high pressure forced induction (turbo or supercharger or both). This is not a very efficient way to get hp because the increase in weight.
I guess I'll stop here....
Sorry guys, I got a little carried away!
Truck on!
2001 QC 4x4 SLT+
4.7 auto LSD 3.55
|
Chris
Dodge Dakota
9/06/2001
21:50:47
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Sorry about the double posting...
|
Hersbird
Dodge Dakota
9/06/2001
22:34:42
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
The torque is the only thing that accelerates you peroid. The horsepower is only a mathmatical offshoot of torque. 250 ft-lbs of torque will accelerate a car equally at 2000 rpm as 250 ft-lbs at 4000 rpm but the 4000 rpm is making twice the horsepower. Now don't get me wrong you would rather be able to maintain the torque from 2000 to well over 4000 rpm as this way you don't have to shift the car and you can keep it in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, etc longer, thus multipling that 250 ft-lbs by the 3-1 ratio of 1st gear and the 4-1 in the rear. Maintaining the torque over a broad rpm band is good like the Dodges do but just slowly comming up to a quick spike and then dropping off looks good to say I'm making 10 more HP, but it's only for a split second in the real world. Think more of the motor with the most power has the largest area under the torque curve from launch RPM until shift point. You have to lay the real wheel horsepower curves on top of each other and pretend it's two peices of land, do you want the Dodge's ranch or the chevy's city lot?
|
Chris
Dodge Dakota
9/07/2001
00:07:42
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Hersbird, I rather have the Dodge ranch either, and yes, the 2k and 4k comparison is correct. However, if you don't believe my previous postings, just think about the Honda S2000 again for a second... 240hp and around 150lb-ft of torque. If what you are saying is correct, all else being equal, it would accelerate faster if it had 150hp and 240 lb-ft of torque. Sorry, but it is not happening. BTW, hp is a lot more than just a mathematical result.
Truck on....
|
Hersbird
Dodge Dakota
9/07/2001
20:46:24
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
OK so if you like the S2000's 240 HP put it in a Dakota with the Dakota's automatic. Both the 360 and the S2000 make about the same horsepower so would they both run the 1/4 the same if in the same application? No way, that v-tech Honda motor suck in the Dakota, it would never pull (the effect of having 250 ft-lbs) like the v-8 does, and that pull is acceleration. Even if you went the other way and put the 360 in the s2000 without adding weight to it it would be faster as well, traction would be a huge problem but it would be way cooler none the less. Having 240 ft-lbs and 150 HP is almost impossible as a peak. You would have to make peak power at 3000 rpm and yes that would suck as you would never be able to hold a gear very long to take advantage of the lower gear ratios, still while the low rpm high torque motor was in 1st it would accelerate faster then the low torque motor. The race would be lost later on while the high rpm motor was still making good torque (and thus horsepower) and still is in 1st gear where the other motor is now in 2nd and lost 1/3 of it's torque advantage through the higher gear ratio in 2nd. Some where there is a fine line you have to walk between giving up to much low end for the high end, and some manufactures figure just go for the peaky higher rpm torque curves which looks good by creating a high horspower figure that will sell cars. This was really apparent when the 5.2 Dodge and 5.9 Dodge both made 230 HP. How can you sell the 5.9 for a higher amount when it is making the exact same HP as the 5.2? The key was in the torque, drive two 93 Rams with the only difference being the 5.2 -vs- the 5.9. They both make 230HP but the 5.9 has more torque and torque rules!
|
Jeffster
Dodge Dakota
9/08/2001
01:35:47
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
TQ is good but the fastest production cars in the world are producing more HP than TQ. The Ferrari 3.8L has way less TQ than a 5.9 R/T but has huge revs and higher HP. Even if you took that Ferrari engine and put it in the bigger R/T the R/T would move faster.
The 360 is a truck engine plain and simple. It has high torque because it needs to move a lot of weight. Tourqe is what get tha weight moving and does the work. the HP is what makes it move faster. This is why all big V8 and desil trucks have so much TQ and race cars have so much HP. The 4.7 as an example is desgined more like a performance race enigine than a 5.9 work horse. Allthough it to still produces more TQ than HP but it's still a truck.
|
SuperDak
Dodge Dakota
9/08/2001
10:46:03
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
guy's, dont be doggin chvey unnecessicairly, remember they didnt shove a truck motor with a tourque curve that dies after 4500 into something and name it r/t. chevy backs up their stuff with power not show. if you'd have looked at the new LS1's and what it takes to make them go 12's you might not have bought a dodge... the jeffster is right, a 4.7 reg cab will stomp an identical r/t off the show room. what the heck is up with that??
dodge heads and intakes suck for making HP end of story. i happen to know, i drive 3
|
kota on 20s
Dodge Dakota
9/08/2001
11:17:24
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
the LS1 IS a good engine, but LOOK AT THE CARS ITS IN!! They are all ugly as he11!! i would rather drive a 14 sec truck than a 12 sec car that squeeks and rattles after 8k miles.
why are we compairing sports cars to trucks anyway? the origional post was talking about chevy trucks.
|
SuperDak
Dodge Dakota
9/08/2001
11:30:51
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
it's all about priorities dude, if you'd rather get spanked by a cheaper car that in your opinion "looks bad" thats your thing. and if you want to talk about chevy's trucks? my best friend has a 91 chevy blazer w/ 210 thousand on the original motor. lets not forget about the typhon's and syclones if you want to talk speed. chevy is still the best IMO and your entitled to your own... just remember that i'll tell you when your wrong.
|
Jeffster
Dodge Dakota
9/08/2001
19:12:54
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
I don't know about Chevy backing their stuff up. Other than the cyclone/typhoon I can't think of any Cheb truck or SUV that can touch my Dak allthough most have list HP's higher than mine. Don't throw out the name of some $100,000 limited production vehicle either.
|
Hersbird
Dodge Dakota
9/08/2001
21:41:18
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
SuperDak you are way off to say an indetical 4.7 will stop an R/T stock. That means a automatic RC -vs- and automatic RC. Many R/T's run 14.8's pure stock, some more like 14.5. So me one person to claim that on a 4.7 automatic. Sure some 5-speed 4.7's can do 14.8's but you said identical except the motor.
The Ferrari 3.6 does make good horsepower but it's no slacker on torque either (276 ft-lbs) I said it is better to make torqu at a high rpm but first you need to make it. Bottom line in an identical package the ferrari motor will never pull as hard as the R/T motor but it will pull much longer and that will make it whin the race. But here you are talking about a 400hp mega buck race motor to the simple 360, the S2000 makes for a better comparison as it is similar in HP but different in torque. If you want we could compare the Ferrari to the Viper ACR, it makes more torque then HP and eats EVERYTING, now just wait for the new one to come out, it will probably get blaimed by the enviromentalists for slowing the rotation of the earth with it's massive power. That car is going to be soild 11's in the 1/4 right off the showroom floor.
|
kota on 20s
Dodge Dakota
9/09/2001
02:31:34
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
get spanked by a cheaper car? you might have got ripped on your deal but i got mine with everything except auto tranny, rear slider and over head counsel for $18,100. last i heard the camaro (cheapest car with the LS1) was going for 22k+. i would rather loose a race to a LS1 that worry about all the cheap plastic nobs and crap falling off, and the car squeeking over every crack in the road.
as for the cyclone, not only do they not make them any more, but THEY COULD ONLY CARRY 500lbs!! WHAT A TRUCK!!
MY DAK AIN'T NO ROCK, AND IM PROUD OF IT!!
Eric
|
JP
Dodge Dakota
9/09/2001
10:56:16
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
I am really enjoying this thread. HP versus TQ are difficult concepts to understand the distinctions between. I notice that most people in these forums are measuring performance by speed achieved in a defined distance, such as a 1/4 mile. That is ok as far as it goes. I also get a thrill out of being pushed back into the seat or spanking a Caddy trying to box me in going up a long grade in traffic. I am also very interested in other criteria. Consider handling, fuel economy, cargo capacity, durability,etc.
These trucks are all compromises trying to satisfy a multitude of criteria. So far I am pleased with the way the Dakota fits the broader range of criteria too.
JP '01 CC, SLT+, 4.7, AWD, LSD
|
Duner
Dodge Dakota
9/09/2001
13:19:01
|  4.7 POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
The HP vs Torque argument has been around forever. The truth is that you need both if you have any weight at all. The peak hp and torque numbers don't always tell the whole story.
I made some changes to my 4.7 and got another set of dyno pulls. Now the numbers read 242.2 hp and 322.5 ft-lbs of torque at the rear wheels. The peak numbers only changed by 9 hp and 9 ft-lbs of torque. The big difference was after the peak. I'm making roughly 50 more hp and 50 more ft-lbs of torque at 6000 rpm. That has managed to flatten the hp and torque curves a bit and it pulls way harder all the way up to the rev-limiter which is at 6500.
Here's what it looks like on paper.
http://members.home.net/cartel5/duner/Duner47DynoWcooler.JPG
Regardless of what it looks like on paper..... there is a huge difference according to the "butt dyno". When you hit the throttle, it just keeps pulling! Since this whole thing is supposed to be about Chevy power... I hope I can catch a 5.3 at the track one of these nights! hehehe
|
Chris
Dodge Dakota
9/09/2001
15:53:25
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
I agree with Duner. I've been saying all along the one is nothing whitout the other. Hey Duner, what mods do you have in your truck? Mine is still completely stock (only 3 weeks old) and I'm trying to decide exactly whot to install on it.
Hey Hesbird... A Dakota with the F360 engine will pull much harder than with the 5.9, the only difference will be that it;s in the higher RPM range. If there was a way to figure out the acceleration in units of g's, the peak would be much higher with the F360 engine. (again, hp accelerates)
Truck on...
2001 QC 4x4 SLT+
4.7 auto LSD 3.55
|
SuperDak
Dodge Dakota
9/09/2001
16:59:23
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
allright hersbird i concede i was off on the 4.7 , r/t thing. the 5spd 4.7 is faster than an r/t stock but how sad is that? so i wasnt that far off... my apologies. and Eric i was talking about an r/t price tag. still i am a mopar nut to the core but chevy is high on the respect list. as far as where i spend my money i'd pay for a new ls1 way before i'd even consider another dak. and i didnt hear a single thing about the fact that the magnum is a joke in the performance world. seriously guys we are talking about racing trucks running 14's. jeffster, where you at i got bud with a chevy silverado with your name on his kill list. :D
~Vince
|
SuperDak
Dodge Dakota
9/09/2001
16:59:41
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
allright hersbird i concede i was off on the 4.7 , r/t thing. the 5spd 4.7 is faster than an r/t stock but how sad is that? so i wasnt that far off... my apologies. and Eric i was talking about an r/t price tag. still i am a mopar nut to the core but chevy is high on the respect list. as far as where i spend my money i'd pay for a new ls1 way before i'd even consider another dak. and i didnt hear a single thing about the fact that the magnum is a joke in the performance world. seriously guys we are talking about racing trucks running 14's. jeffster, where you at i got bud with a chevy silverado with your name on his kill list. :D
~Vince
|
Jeffster
Dodge Dakota
9/09/2001
18:29:56
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
bullshiit. No god damm chevy truck has beat my Dak ever. And I mean ever.
Atually that's a lie a 70's 3/4 ton at the track with a heavily modded 454 was running mid 13's. He had $15,000 into the engine alone. As for current production N/A vehicles using their original running motor dream on.
|
SuperDak
Dodge Dakota
9/09/2001
21:30:33
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
ooh so wanna talk lightnings then? stock for stock?
~Vince
|
kota on 20s
Dodge Dakota
9/09/2001
21:49:56
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
vince, why do you keep compairing the LS1 to a truck engine? why not compaire it to a 528 hemi insted? or even a 426 hemi.
and why not compaire your buds POS chevy to a lightning?
like i have said in a previous thread, chevys are like tampons, every pu$$y has one
|
Jeffster
Dodge Dakota
9/09/2001
22:45:18
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
I didn't know that the Lightning was a current production n/a truck. hmmm I guess I forgot about that one.
|
Mar
Dodge Dakota
9/10/2001
13:50:54
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Hp to me is a fake idea of performence. Torque is much better to describe the performence of a truck.
As for dodge and there low hp engines. Just wait a few years they will get there wheels rolling again. And the LS1 chevy. is very simular to the viper motor and the new 4.7 other then the fact that the 4.7 is SOHC.
In my opinion the 4.7 is way more capable then the 5.9 under enviromental restrictions. They are holding it back till the new 5.7 hemi comes out to replace the 5.9. Then there will be much more power out of the 4.7 something like 280hp. Even now with a simple pcm flash they made a HO version for the jeep.
|
SuperDak
Dodge Dakota
9/10/2001
17:06:09
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
hp, tq, who cares. get it to the track end of story.. jeffster my bad dude... i didnt read your cool post that closely.. look im only talkin trash cause these guys are doggin chevy just because it's chevy. im using the ls1 as a model because it's in about the same price range as an r/t. if you guys are talking performance there it is. drop 500 bucks for exhaust and a lid and go 12's you drop 3k into a dak and wonder why am i stuck in the 13's???
i didnt compare it to the hemi because its an obvious diffrence... we all know the hemi is better but besides were talking about chevy power arent we? come on guys lighten up...
Eric my buddy in the chevy races lightnings quite often, and hangs...
|
RJKobbeman
GenIII
9/10/2001
17:33:22
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
This thread cracks me up. HP means nothing if you do not look at the torque and RPM numbers. HP is not a 'real' number, it is a derivative (sp?) of torque and RPM. Many low torque motors can achieve high HP numbers because of their high RPM. Crotch-rockets are an example of this. Many high torque motors can have low HP numbers because of their low RPM. An example of this is a semi. The crotch-rocket can go 180+ miles an hour but cannot pull a lot of weight. The semi can pull your house off of its foundation but cannot drag race (realistically speaking). Torque, RPM, weight, gearing, etc. are ALL factors in any application (e.g., racing, pulling, etc.).
Rob
|
Chris
Dodge Dakota
9/10/2001
23:14:27
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Hey Rob, hp is real enough to win drag races, and that is the initial point of this thread. And if you don't believe hp is real, go to a university library, borrow a Thermodinamics book and read the chapter on Power. Afterwards you'll probably agree with me.
Truck on...
2001 QC 4x4 SLT+
4.7 auto LSD 3.55
|
Hersbird
Dodge Dakota
9/10/2001
23:21:24
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Chris, The ferrari motor will never pull as hard as the 360 with equal gearing and weight because it never makes as much torque, period. Yes it will pull harder then the 360 when both motors are wound up to 5000+ RPM but that pull that the ferrari motor makes at 6000 rpm is still not as much as the 360 was making back at 3500 rpm. The peak toruqe is as hard as a motor will ever pull and it is directly comparable by the lb-ft rating to any other motor. It doesn't matter what rpm you are at, as I said before 200 ft-lbs at 2000 rpm pulls exactly as hard as 200 ft-lbs at 4000 rpm but the motor at 4000 rpm is making twice the HP. So the Dakotas 350 ft-lbs pulls 40% harder then ferrari motor ever does but the ferrari will still win in the long run as it can pull almost twice as long before shifting. I agree it's not about the peak torque but the area under the total torque curve. To peak at 350 is great but to hold 320+ for 3500 rpm (as the 360 does) is where it's at.
superdak, I still think the 4.7 5-speed is not faster then an R/T stock. Some are as fast but the truly best stock times I have ever seen have come out of the R/T's, just look at Duner's old R/T CC that ran faster stock then any RC 4.7 5-speed I have ever heard of.
|
Jeffster
Dodge Dakota
9/11/2001
01:26:11
| RE: CHEVY POWER
IP: Logged
Message:
Well Hersbird the 4.7's and 5.9's seem to be all over the place with their E/T's. I have seen and talked to some R/T owners that have never broken into the 14's ever. Some have even had crappy days where they turn in a 16!! Some stock 4.7 5 speed's have been known to run 14.7 bone stock!! Some have claimed this also from their R/T. I know what mine will do or at least have an idea. I had a 15.5 with a blown shift. Ya that's right even after jamming 2nd pulling the shifter back to neutral and redoing it still managed a trap time of over 90 mph. The same run also had a big burn out. I feel like this 4.7 SOHC is a natural for sprinting but that's IMHO after test driving an R/t to boot. Anyways as far as appearnce goes the R/T is definetly sharp and a very sexy looking ride. They are quick but IMHO not quite as quick as a 4.7 5 speed especially once through 70 MPH. Ask Duner what these trucks can do when you hammer the gas on the highway.
Let's agree to disagree. I know we both agree that no production Chevy has a real chnace against either.
|
| | P 1 Next Page>> |
