Cummins 5.9 vs 6.7 Dyno
03-20-2010, 08:17 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 936
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cummins 5.9 vs 6.7 Dyno
Has anyone seen this article? I was ok giving up the fuel mileage with the 6.7 but after reading this the 5.9 gets better mileage and more power? Does the emissions stuff really choke it that much? How much hp will I gain from dfp delete, egr delete and electronics?
http://www.dieselpowermag.com/tech/d...nes/index.html
Im not one for dyno numbers but it seems to me if the 5.9 gets better mileage and better power, why would I get a 6.7L
Stock Power NumbersThe 5.9L-powered truck put down 269 hp at 2,550 rpm and 594 lb-ft of torque at 2,300 rpm; and the 6.7L-equipped Dodge put down 259 hp at 2,850 rpm and 487 lb-ft at 2,750 rpm. Runs were made in direct drive for both trucks-however it should be noted that the 5.9L Cummins was backed by the 48RE four-speed automatic transmission and the 6.7L used the new 68RE six-speed automatic. Unfortunately, the 5.9L Dodge used in our test had 35-inch Toyo tires on 20-inch Eagle Alloy rims. In order to limit the variables between the two trucks, the stock tires and wheels from the 6.7L truck were swapped onto the 5.9L truck, resulting in 10 additional peak hp and 10 lb-ft of torque. Advantage: 5.9L Cummins
Im not one for dyno numbers but it seems to me if the 5.9 gets better mileage and better power, why would I get a 6.7L
03-20-2010, 08:38 PM
#2
Administrator / Severe Concussion Aficionado
Has anyone seen this article? I was ok giving up the fuel mileage with the 6.7 but after reading this the 5.9 gets better mileage and more power? Does the emissions stuff really choke it that much? How much hp will I gain from dfp delete, egr delete and electronics?
http://www.dieselpowermag.com/tech/d...nes/index.html
Im not one for dyno numbers but it seems to me if the 5.9 gets better mileage and better power, why would I get a 6.7L
http://www.dieselpowermag.com/tech/d...nes/index.html
Im not one for dyno numbers but it seems to me if the 5.9 gets better mileage and better power, why would I get a 6.7L
Stock for stock, that is.
The 5.9 is much easier and cheaper to make big numbers with, no way am I gonna talk down on it, its one of the best and always will be.
The 6.7, heck, just keeping it running in stock form is an exercise in patience. Once they get fixed its a whole different ball game.
The 5.9 will make better mpg than the 6.7, thats just how it is. But Im happy with my 6.7 and its economy where its at.
. I cant buy this article either.
03-20-2010, 08:47 PM
#4
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Falling Waters, WV
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ive driven both, and stock for stock id say the 6.7 will slightly, and i mean slightly, outrun the 5.9. Lets not forget the 6.7s are rated 350/650 and the "ole" 04.5-07 5.9 is rated at 325/610. The 25 extra horses and 40 extra lb. feet of torque sure helps i suppose.
03-20-2010, 08:49 PM
#5
Administrator / Severe Concussion Aficionado
Ive driven both, and stock for stock id say the 6.7 will slightly, and i mean slightly, outrun the 5.9. Lets not forget the 6.7s are rated 350/650 and the "ole" 04.5-07 5.9 is rated at 325/610. The 25 extra horses and 40 extra lb. feet of torque sure helps i suppose.
The way I see it, either way, youve got a winner.
03-21-2010, 01:47 AM
#6
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gents,
Became the proud owner of 2007.5 2500 QC SB 4X4 6.7 G56
a couple of days ago. I was curious as to how it would compare to the 2004 I just sold (3500 QC LB DRW NV5600 4X4). Without any hesitation, the 6.7 is waaay faster stock for stock. It pulls harder throughout the rpm band as well, and both have the same gearing (3.73). To be frank, my brother (sabreson, a member here and the new owner of my 2004) and I cannot believe how fast and powerful this truck is COMPLETELY STOCK. I'm not trying to be a smart-A, but I'm calling BS on those numbers. This thing is a no-**** freight train. I am the biggest 5.9 fan on this planet, but the 6.7 is stronger 
.
Cheers,
BlackBanshee
Became the proud owner of 2007.5 2500 QC SB 4X4 6.7 G56
a couple of days ago. I was curious as to how it would compare to the 2004 I just sold (3500 QC LB DRW NV5600 4X4). Without any hesitation, the 6.7 is waaay faster stock for stock. It pulls harder throughout the rpm band as well, and both have the same gearing (3.73). To be frank, my brother (sabreson, a member here and the new owner of my 2004) and I cannot believe how fast and powerful this truck is COMPLETELY STOCK. I'm not trying to be a smart-A, but I'm calling BS on those numbers. This thing is a no-**** freight train. I am the biggest 5.9 fan on this planet, but the 6.7 is stronger .Cheers,
BlackBanshee
03-21-2010, 02:47 AM
#7
I have to agree with everyone else. I can outrun my '06 with the 48RE with my '08 and G56. I nailed it one day and left 4th gear doing 70 plus MPH with every gear giving you that "pressed into the seat" feeling.
Trending Topics
03-21-2010, 06:37 AM
#8
Administrator / Severe Concussion Aficionado
Gents,
Became the proud owner of 2007.5 2500 QC SB 4X4 6.7 G56 a couple of days ago. I was curious as to how it would compare to the 2004 I just sold (3500 QC LB DRW NV5600 4X4). Without any hesitation, the 6.7 is waaay faster stock for stock. It pulls harder throughout the rpm band as well, and both have the same gearing (3.73). To be frank, my brother (sabreson, a member here and the new owner of my 2004) and I cannot believe how fast and powerful this truck is COMPLETELY STOCK. I'm not trying to be a smart-A, but I'm calling BS on those numbers. This thing is a no-**** freight train. I am the biggest 5.9 fan on this planet, but the 6.7 is stronger .
Cheers,
BlackBanshee
Became the proud owner of 2007.5 2500 QC SB 4X4 6.7 G56
a couple of days ago. I was curious as to how it would compare to the 2004 I just sold (3500 QC LB DRW NV5600 4X4). Without any hesitation, the 6.7 is waaay faster stock for stock. It pulls harder throughout the rpm band as well, and both have the same gearing (3.73). To be frank, my brother (sabreson, a member here and the new owner of my 2004) and I cannot believe how fast and powerful this truck is COMPLETELY STOCK. I'm not trying to be a smart-A, but I'm calling BS on those numbers. This thing is a no-**** freight train. I am the biggest 5.9 fan on this planet, but the 6.7 is stronger .Cheers,
BlackBanshee
I don't if you have any plans to delete the emissions stuff, but if you do, get ready. It only gets better and better.
03-21-2010, 06:57 PM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blake,
I would love to do the deletes...I just have too much warranty left to waste and I cannot afford to buy another programmer right now
. I have a series of questions about the delete process, but that's for another thread. Hijack over.
BlackBanshee
I would love to do the deletes...I just have too much warranty left to waste and I cannot afford to buy another programmer right now
. I have a series of questions about the delete process, but that's for another thread. Hijack over.BlackBanshee
03-21-2010, 07:04 PM
#10
Administrator / Severe Concussion Aficionado
No prob. Lot of guys cant put themselves in the position to take there warranty into there own hands. But when and if you can, I always advise guys to go for it. Lot of 6.7 guys on here that have pulled the trigger, have lots of knowledge bout it and will glad to help you out.
03-23-2010, 10:46 AM
#15
Chapter President
The numbers do seem low for both IMHO... Most dyno numbers I have seen on stock 6.7's are around the 290 mark at the wheels with the 68RFE and near 300 with a G56..
The torque numbers are just wrong too.. Peak torque isn't at 2800 rpm on either engine, more around the 2100-2300 mark on dyno runs. Those numbers are hand calculated from peak HP.
Nice comparo...
The torque numbers are just wrong too.. Peak torque isn't at 2800 rpm on either engine, more around the 2100-2300 mark on dyno runs. Those numbers are hand calculated from peak HP.
Nice comparo...