I believe the engine is a 6.4 L inline 6

 

Now for the BIG question, who's gonna go after cummins?

 

I'll believe it when I see it, and I'm hopin I don't

 

I wonder if anyone is you working on bombs for the Mercedes?

 

I might be interested if the price doesn't go up and gets 25mpg highway.

MikeyB

 

1000 ft/lbs should be fun on snowy roads in 2wd. the engine is indeed a 6.4L inline 6.

end of a legend

 

I am pretty sure the CUMMINS will be in the Dodge truck in 2007...I would probaly bet on it ...

 

either way the engine will be a monster. Mercadies does have a good track record, but I do like the U.S. made CTD.

 

If something like this does happen, I am sure it will be a "torque on demand" engine, so you don't have to worry about too much power ... I bought my truck to keep for many years and miles, so it really isn't a big deal for me... Let them do what ever they want now, I got my slice of the pie ...

 

i can't remember who it is but someone on here used to have a sig that mentioned their truck having a mercedes engine. where is that poor soul

 

That would be good.... that would leave Cummins for Ford to pick up.... I want a Cummins powered F350..... that would make my day

 

I wonder how much the price would differ? Cummins in a Ford? Mercedes in a Dodge. I would be a Ford fan again.. But I have seen Mercedes diesel powered cars with some incredible miles. Fords cost a lot compared to Dodge. Which might drive people back to Dodge. Idunno

 

Why did the software put this message in the incorrect place????

Obviously, there are many V engine configuration adherants who do not have a complete understanding about what makes an inline engine superior in some respects, while a V engine is better in other areas of performance. An inline engine can be made to run at high rpms similar to a V engine, but the inline engine, in that case, would have to lose some of its durability at low rpms. Engine components would have to be made lighter. The V engine during manufacturing can be strengthened to be able to withstand a somewhat high torque at low rpm, but it would then lose some ability to sustain high rpms without possible damage resulting in the engine. The V engine components would have to be made stronger and heavier to withstand a higher early torque. The unchangeable fact remains in that the inline engine can always be made the strongest if maximum low end torque is the only priority to consider. On the other hand, the V engine can never be made to rev higher than a inline engine if that is the only criteria when maximum strength to sustain torque at low rpms is theoretically or hypothetically not an issue.

If eveything is of equal strength the following is the deciding factor or the bottom line. I have said before that seven crankshaft main bearings for six connecting rods will be stronger than five crankshaft main bearings for eight connecting rods when all materials are of equal strength. There is also more tension on the V engine crankshaft rod journals with two connectiong rods on each crank throw as compared to an inline crankshaft rod journal with only one connecting rod if both types of engine produce an equal force on each power stroke.

In other word, if Cummins is replaced by a Mercedes V8 diesel, it will have the same physical limitations that the present deficient V8 diesel engines have with few exceptions. The inline engine has a lower rpm red line than a V engine if the inline engine needs a strong bottom end. The inline engine cannot have its cake and eat it too, just like the V engine cannot have as high a rpm red line if maximum bottom end strength is needed.

If V configuration would have been superior for utilizing maximum low end torque, then all transport trucks would be fitted with V configuration engines, but it is the other way around. All work units have inline engines. The 8V92 got tired looking at a grade incline, unless the rpm was kept above 2700 rpm.

The world has been brain washed to think V configuration engines are superior to inline engines because V engines provide more power in less engine length. I think it is rediculous to put a V6 gas engine in a full size pickup with a foot and a half space between the front of the engine and radiator. An inline six cylinder gas engine would have produced more power and utilized the wasted space.

 

Wonder what would be the cost to maintain/repair a Mercedes Motor?

 

Only one item of the inline engine setup features did you omit: The I-6 is a Naturally Balanced engine on a four-stroke-cycle design. This makes them the most inheriently smooth and vibration-free design avalible, therefore extending not only engine but also vechile and component life.

The question that needs to be asked: How many over the road enginee do you find today running anything OTHER than a I-6? Cat and Cummins tried, with only marginal sucess, the V-8 setup for OTR rigs in the 70's and early 80's. John Deere built a short-lived four-valve per cylinder V-8 for it's top end 4-wd tractors in the early eighties. It took them quite a while to recover from that *costly* mistake.

Regarding your comment on V-6's in 1/2 ton trucks today and all the "wasted space" under the hood. There is another issue that is rising rapidly on the radar screens of car designers today. Crash safety. This is a primary reason you see engines being pushed back under the windshields (making them a real pain to work on). This trend is only going to increase with the upcoming European Pedestrian Safety regulations going into effect. Read more about it...
http://www.safetyissues.com/magazine...edestrians.htm

I'm a safety-driven person. However I think these regulations border upon being extreme to say it lightly. This IS one big reason that fully-electric vechiles are a thing of the past - you cannot hear them coming at you.