Up'n the Ante...Ford Twins
02-06-2007, 04:19 PM
#46
DTR Detective
Commercial calls them Dual Turbos? See link below...
edited by admin.
Last edited by Totallyrad; 02-06-2007 at 07:35 PM. Reason: Too much profanity on linked page in commentary
02-06-2007, 05:04 PM
#47
Registered User
Is it just me or did they put the compressor housing on the turbine and the turbine housing on the compressor? (just in that little video)
EDIT: I'm guessing compound (not sequential, thanks for the correction) turbos.
EDIT: I'm guessing compound (not sequential, thanks for the correction) turbos.
02-06-2007, 06:10 PM
#48
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fruitport, MI
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sequential and compound turbos are not exactly the same. Sequential turbos are parallel but only boost from one turbo until the desired rpm/load when the second turbo is allowed to spool(like RX7 and Supra). Compounds have a large turbo feeding into a smaller turbo.
02-06-2007, 06:21 PM
#49
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: calgary
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kinda off topic a little bit but would a exhuast only turbo running after the holset we have make any differance in power/spooling/EGT's?? the other forum i go to guy's where using STS exhaust turbo's, but the created a plenum distibution problem, that cause a bad lean out, then piston rod destruction. anyhoo these fellas have pulled there systems and are supercharging and almost giving the sts systems awayat a 1/4 of the price of a new one.
02-06-2007, 08:19 PM
#50
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Twins always lite slower than a single unless you run a very small secondary,and then exhaust restriction plays a role on top end when the primary is doing its thing.Anytime you twin something it lights noticeably slower than the secondary would when run as a single.The fact that it lights as fast as a stock 6.0,while meeting the new emissions regs,which are 90% less soot,tells me they reduced the turbo size of the secondary quite a bit,so dont expect big power numbers out of these twins,they are likely small to meet emissions.
Ford has alot riding on the success of the 6.4. Unfortunately,they are still running only 10 head bolts in the 6.4 engine,but they are now larger at 16mm.I still do not feel this is even enough clamping pressure.They should have 5 or 6 per cylinder.Even if they head gaskets last 150K miles,it isnt enough ,IMO,they should last longer,esp on an engine that requires you to remove the cab to do any engine work what so ever.I find it intersting that Navistars highest rated 6.4 is 230HP. To me that says it all,I bet they have no troubles with there versions at 230hp.IAs of now I feel this is the power level this LIGHT duty engine is capable of producing ,if you want it to live a long,long life like the 7.3PSD's and early IDI's.To make big power with long term reliability/durability you need either a bigger engine or heavier duty contruction on the smaller ones.The much heavier built Cummins with a single is still going to outlive the 6.4 easily,with complete new engines costing 10-15K now,this is a big deal down the road a few yrs for hotshotters esp.
Ford has alot riding on the success of the 6.4. Unfortunately,they are still running only 10 head bolts in the 6.4 engine,but they are now larger at 16mm.I still do not feel this is even enough clamping pressure.They should have 5 or 6 per cylinder.Even if they head gaskets last 150K miles,it isnt enough ,IMO,they should last longer,esp on an engine that requires you to remove the cab to do any engine work what so ever.I find it intersting that Navistars highest rated 6.4 is 230HP. To me that says it all,I bet they have no troubles with there versions at 230hp.IAs of now I feel this is the power level this LIGHT duty engine is capable of producing ,if you want it to live a long,long life like the 7.3PSD's and early IDI's.To make big power with long term reliability/durability you need either a bigger engine or heavier duty contruction on the smaller ones.The much heavier built Cummins with a single is still going to outlive the 6.4 easily,with complete new engines costing 10-15K now,this is a big deal down the road a few yrs for hotshotters esp.
Derek
02-07-2007, 10:54 AM
#52
Registered User
02-07-2007, 12:25 PM
#53
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: CT
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I doubt those are automatic tranny numbers.
the allison LBZ dmax's (360/650) bone stock dyno around ~315 and ~600 ft lbs of torque at the rear wheels. Doesnt make sense that the ford is rated the same but makes 30 ft lbs more torque??
the allison LBZ dmax's (360/650) bone stock dyno around ~315 and ~600 ft lbs of torque at the rear wheels. Doesnt make sense that the ford is rated the same but makes 30 ft lbs more torque??
02-07-2007, 04:43 PM
#54
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
02-07-2007, 07:30 PM
#56
Banned
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 365
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's physically BIG too, looks really heavy.Derek
02-11-2007, 08:33 PM
#57
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The new 6.4 uses a sequencial set up on the turbos...smaller turbo blowin into a big turbo, prolly got the idea from Caterpillar with the set up on their C15. Now only if Cat would make motors for these trucks we'd have r made.
02-18-2007, 10:36 PM
#59
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is frustrating that so many people can miss the point. Ford buys that engine from Navistar. Navistar builds that engine for it's own 'Medium Duty' trucks and tractors. It is not a light duty engine. It is the equivalent (stock) of the Cummins 'B Series'. Navistar has probably run that engine in test fleets across the country for the last year or two.
Why do you think the 5.9 is now a 6.7? For the same reason Detroit dropped the 12.7L in favor of it's 14L. The current emission regs are easier to meet with cubic inch. What does forced induction do? It fools a little engine into believing it's a big engine.
CAT has gone to two turbos on the 3406 because it enables them to meet the '07 regs without spending millions of dollars redisigning and certifying a new engine. They can now buy time, while selling engines and making money, to R&D the successor.
Gee guess what? That is exactly what Navistar is doing. Does anyone out there know what an NTC 475 is?
Okay I'll bite: It was Cummins 475 HP, 855 cubic inch engine of the early 1980's. It used two turbos. A low pressure feeding a high pressure. It was not one of their more successful offerings and did not stay around very long.
You all need to get used to it because the Navistar is the future. They have taken a quantum leap by introducing the first 'camless' engine. In the not too distant future all engines will be camless. Why? Control! By electronically actuating the valve events the engine computer can vary lift and duration.
Look at the large bore Detroit Series 60. It has been out since 1987. In the fleet version you can get a 370/430 HP. What that means is the engine is rated at 370 HP through normal operation. However, when on cruise control if the engine computer senses the truck is pulling a grade and determines that more power is needed, the computer will re-rate the engine to 430 HP. As the truck tops out the grade the computer senses the additional power is no longer needed. The engine parameters are then reset to 370 HP for fuel economy.
All of this is coming to a pickup near you. Both the Cummins and Navistar are medium duty 'throw away' engines. Fleets consider them cheap and not worth rebuilding. They do not have replaceable cylinder liners like heavy duty engines and therefore cannot be easily in-framed.
When you take a medium duty engine and put it in a light duty platform ( 1/2, 3/4, 1 ton) it becomes heavy duty only for purposes of that application. This is the reason why the Navistar appears to be shoe horned into the Ford. In truth these trucks do not need more power. They are already out classed by their engines.
Why do you think the 5.9 is now a 6.7? For the same reason Detroit dropped the 12.7L in favor of it's 14L. The current emission regs are easier to meet with cubic inch. What does forced induction do? It fools a little engine into believing it's a big engine.
CAT has gone to two turbos on the 3406 because it enables them to meet the '07 regs without spending millions of dollars redisigning and certifying a new engine. They can now buy time, while selling engines and making money, to R&D the successor.
Gee guess what? That is exactly what Navistar is doing. Does anyone out there know what an NTC 475 is?
Okay I'll bite: It was Cummins 475 HP, 855 cubic inch engine of the early 1980's. It used two turbos. A low pressure feeding a high pressure. It was not one of their more successful offerings and did not stay around very long.
You all need to get used to it because the Navistar is the future. They have taken a quantum leap by introducing the first 'camless' engine. In the not too distant future all engines will be camless. Why? Control! By electronically actuating the valve events the engine computer can vary lift and duration.
Look at the large bore Detroit Series 60. It has been out since 1987. In the fleet version you can get a 370/430 HP. What that means is the engine is rated at 370 HP through normal operation. However, when on cruise control if the engine computer senses the truck is pulling a grade and determines that more power is needed, the computer will re-rate the engine to 430 HP. As the truck tops out the grade the computer senses the additional power is no longer needed. The engine parameters are then reset to 370 HP for fuel economy.
All of this is coming to a pickup near you. Both the Cummins and Navistar are medium duty 'throw away' engines. Fleets consider them cheap and not worth rebuilding. They do not have replaceable cylinder liners like heavy duty engines and therefore cannot be easily in-framed.
When you take a medium duty engine and put it in a light duty platform ( 1/2, 3/4, 1 ton) it becomes heavy duty only for purposes of that application. This is the reason why the Navistar appears to be shoe horned into the Ford. In truth these trucks do not need more power. They are already out classed by their engines.
02-22-2007, 10:33 PM
#60
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Alberta
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is frustrating that so many people can miss the point. Ford buys that engine from Navistar. Navistar builds that engine for it's own 'Medium Duty' trucks and tractors. It is not a light duty engine. It is the equivalent (stock) of the Cummins 'B Series'. Navistar has probably run that engine in test fleets across the country for the last year or two.
Why do you think the 5.9 is now a 6.7? For the same reason Detroit dropped the 12.7L in favor of it's 14L. The current emission regs are easier to meet with cubic inch. What does forced induction do? It fools a little engine into believing it's a big engine.
CAT has gone to two turbos on the 3406 because it enables them to meet the '07 regs without spending millions of dollars redisigning and certifying a new engine. They can now buy time, while selling engines and making money, to R&D the successor.
Why do you think the 5.9 is now a 6.7? For the same reason Detroit dropped the 12.7L in favor of it's 14L. The current emission regs are easier to meet with cubic inch. What does forced induction do? It fools a little engine into believing it's a big engine.
CAT has gone to two turbos on the 3406 because it enables them to meet the '07 regs without spending millions of dollars redisigning and certifying a new engine. They can now buy time, while selling engines and making money, to R&D the successor.
Basically, you could throw EGR and a particulate trap on an older Acert engine and it would comply with the new regs, so it's not like it was a huge engineering hurdle to overcome.
Either way, I had the chance to test drive a "2008" Superduty with a friend a few days ago and was not overly impressed. The spooling is better than the death lag of the 6.0L but its not hugely so, and the power increase was not noticeable to us over the 6.0L. It could be because the 6 speed auto seemed to be constantly slipping/shifting. Then we saw the price tag and were even less impressed. It is quieter and smoother than the old 6.0L though.
The friend is a die hard Ford guy but he knows the spotty reputation of the outgoing 6.0L and after the test drive he said he'll be picking up either a Cummins or Dmax now. At the end of the day the Superduty is probably the best heavy duty platform of the Big 3 but it definately has the worst powertrain. On the Superduty forums they admit that (even the medium duty Fords are available with a Cummins 5.9L or Cat C7, no Powerstroke).
Not trying to start a war, just my two cents.