3rd Gen Engine and Drivetrain -> 2003-2007 5.9 liter Engine and drivetrain discussion only. PLEASE, NO HIGH PERFORMANCE DISCUSSION!

'02 HO vs. '03 SO

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Mar 17, 2004 | 09:24 AM
  #1  
schorb's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
From: Weatherford, TEXAS
'02 HO vs. '03 SO

I've got an '03 SO 4x4 Reg Cab with 4:10 gears - 5 speed. This engine is rated at 250 horse.
But I look at the '02 HO and it's said to have I guess 245 horse with a 6-speed.

Why do the HO's have the 6 speeds and the SO's have the 5 speeds?? It can't be a power thing, cause my '03 SO has more power than the '02 HO. I'm not complaining, just confused! Does anyone know why this is?
Reply
Old Mar 17, 2004 | 09:48 AM
  #2  
ddestruel's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 2
From: Used to be missoula, montana: Now in Sonoma County California
Torque rating on the trannys, the 5 spd is rated for 450 ft/lbs or so and the 6 spd used to be rated for something like 550 ft/lbs from New venture which makes no sense because the exact same tranny in a commercial application is rated for 650 or 680 ft/lbs, in the rebuild manual it uses the same bearing kit and parts lists? Anybody feel free to correct me if i spit out some inaccuracies since i am not posting facts here just pulling on my memory.

To answer your question though my understanding is that it is all based on torque ratings for the trannys that is why the numbers where the way they were, they might bump the fueling on the HP end to make it look better but they will restrict the fueling during the peak torque levels to save drivetrain parts.

Also your SO is 250 HP but i think the torque is not 505 ft/lbs where as the 245 Hp HO motor in 02 had 505 ft/lbs

Dusty
Reply
Old Mar 17, 2004 | 09:57 AM
  #3  
schorb's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
From: Weatherford, TEXAS
Wow! I didn't know the '02 HO had more torque than the '03 SO!! Great, that makes me feel just peachy about buying an SO.
At the time, there wasn't very many '03 HO's and I wanted to get rid of my chebby 5.3 really, really fast.
Oh well, I guess that's the way the ball bounces. Thanks for the explanation ddestruel.
Reply
Old Mar 17, 2004 | 11:30 AM
  #4  
bulabula's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,239
Likes: 0
From: Eastern & Western Merryland
I thought the '03 SO was rated at 250/460.
Reply
Old Mar 17, 2004 | 11:33 AM
  #5  
schorb's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
From: Weatherford, TEXAS
It is, but I think when ddestruel said 450 or so, the "or so" accounted for the extra 10 foot pounds....
Reply
Old Mar 17, 2004 | 12:06 PM
  #6  
ddestruel's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 2
From: Used to be missoula, montana: Now in Sonoma County California
or so...



I was close, as to the NV4500 i also recall, now that you mention the HP numbers, questioning why dodge had a max torque rating in thier manual trannys of 450 ft/lbs, 10 ft/lbs under what the out put of the motor was they were already exceeding thier own specs?

As to the NV5600 i looked it up the HD version availible in commercial applications and possibly now? (i dont have any details) is rated to 650 ft/lbs. The dodge version availible from 99 on is rated at 550 ft/lbs


And like the nv4500 they are putting more ponies through it than it is specd for.
Reply
Old Mar 17, 2004 | 03:27 PM
  #7  
bigblock2stroke's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,147
Likes: 0
The 2003 S0 was 250/505
The 2002 HO was 245/505

Axles can also limit torque ratings.
Reply

Trending Topics

Old Mar 18, 2004 | 07:25 AM
  #8  
2broke2smoke's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
From: weston,wv
'03 250/460 per engine tag and shop manual (pg. 9-293)
Reply




All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:43 AM.