6.7 on the dyno...
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sask, Canada
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
6.7 on the dyno...
280/540 stock, 380/780 with help from Edge....
YouTube Video
I didn't see this here before on a quick scan...hope it's not a repeat for you guys.
YouTube Video
I didn't see this here before on a quick scan...hope it's not a repeat for you guys.
#5
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: living in hotels like an underpaid rockstar!
Posts: 1,529
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok now throw an exhaust on a 5.9 with like 3 mufflers one of which is packed tight with CRAP!!! and you would be impressed....and i imagine its tuned down a lil bit to help with emissions
Trending Topics
#8
280/540 stock, 380/780 with help from Edge....
YouTube Video
I didn't see this here before on a quick scan...hope it's not a repeat for you guys.
YouTube Video
I didn't see this here before on a quick scan...hope it's not a repeat for you guys.
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 1,610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The flamethrower numbers cant be right....hp and torque don't add up....even the guys on the ford site dont believe it...and there's no way they only loose 5% between the crank and the rear wheels....if i recall correctly it was something like 280hp and 620lbs....so 5% loss on tq and 20% loss on hp????
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Rolla, MO and Blytheville, AR
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was that dyno test done on the early 6.7s in the cab & chassis rated at 325/610 or was it done on one of the 6.7s now that is rated at 350/650?
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
Posts: 1,245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
it is a 350/650. Remember guys, most of the losses arent driveline losses!!! The engine produces these numbers, then they stick the restrictive honeycombs and junk on them!!! I'll bet if you threw that exhaust on a 5.9 it would dyno down in the 240-250 range!!!
As for the 6.4 dynos, nobody can get a decent run out of them on the dyno, because they seem too be allways spiking!!!
As for the 6.4 dynos, nobody can get a decent run out of them on the dyno, because they seem too be allways spiking!!!
#12
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: South Indy
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The flamethrower numbers cant be right....hp and torque don't add up....even the guys on the ford site dont believe it...and there's no way they only loose 5% between the crank and the rear wheels....if i recall correctly it was something like 280hp and 620lbs....so 5% loss on tq and 20% loss on hp????
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Maritimes, Canada
Posts: 2,696
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The numbers that the manufacturers use are weighted average power numbers...of the engine but they are still just numbers....subject to variance with a word processor. I don't think saying 20% loss torque and 5% loss hp is the problem....I think it is the 280/630 is over twice the torque as hp...that there is the problem for me. Maybe it is the sequential turbos ability to hold torque higher during testing. I'd like to see a real world bone stock honest shootout between three regular cab 2wd trucks with the same size tires and the 6 speed autos. Just tell me that Dodge still doesn't have this same lame poc single Torque Converter...If it does then the Ford tranny is the difference. We all know that with the 2007 EGR engines that the Duramax will be able to make the power easiest when modded thanks to EFI live...until Marco gets a crack at it. ks
#14
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: South Indy
Posts: 1,370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree. I really don't care much for the tests that magazines conduct with the trucks. Oftentimes they are so mismatched with different configurations. I say if you're gonna test, make them even....and don't tell me that's not possible, lol!
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: South Fork, Colorado
Posts: 939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
with a VGT thats supposedly more efficient, a bigger displacement engine, and a 6sp auto that i have read is one of the best out right now, i expected a little better.