The numbers are out.

[jimmac28]

Here are the new numbers for 2017

Ford Power Stroke
440 hp @ 2,800 rpm and 925 lb-ft of torque @ 1,800 rpm.

GM Duramax
445 hp @ 2,800 rpm and 910 lb-ft of torque @ 1,600 rpm.

And no change for Ram.
385 hp @ 2,800 rpm and 900 lb-ft of torque @ 1,700 rpm.

[RustyJC]

Ummm, okay. All look to be more than sufficient. Ya pays yore money and ya takes yore choice.

Horsepower ratings don't really mean much for towing as my 385/900 Cummins-equipped Ram never sees 2800 RPM on the road. Even towing our 19,000 lb GVWR MS through the Ozarks in Arkansas, Missouri and NE Oklahoma, it only runs between 1700 and 2300 RPM to hold a steady 65 MPH. It's just working on its midrange torque curve.

Rusty

[Cummins12V98]

When they test the trucks on TFL the GM will destroy the Ford and I am sure RAM will be 3rd place again. Then it will all start over again as RAM/Cummins have 2019 being a big year. 6.7 RAM will have only after treatment for emissions that along will improve performance by 10%. It will be a new truck in 19 and 30 year anniversary with RAM/Cummins and 100 year anniversary for Cummins. Should be a big deal. Most likely will be ordering one.

[Travelin' Texans]

Wonder if Ford will do as they did 3-4 years ago & have,a recall to flash the ECM to make 446hp?

[Chance]

Originally Posted by Travelin' Texans

Wonder if Ford will do as they did 3-4 years ago & have,a recall to flash the ECM to make 446hp?

Funny, but why bother? Just point out the Ford makes more torque which seems to be what buyers want.

[Hunter11]

I quit worrying about hp and torque ratings back when I bought my 2005 Dodge 3500. All of them that are out right now will do anything I want them to do so I do my research and buy the one I like at the time I am looking. Of course that has always been Dodge or Chevy but that is just what I prefer. If Chevy does not do away with the CP4 when I get ready for a new truck I will probably go back to Dodge and who has the most hp or torque will not weigh into my decision.

[Cummins12V98]

Originally Posted by Chance

Funny, but why bother? Just point out the Ford makes more torque which seems to be what buyers want.

Bottom line the GM has out performed the others with less HP. I dynode my 11 HO RAM at Las Vegas a few years aGO ALONG WITH THE BD FORD, THE RAM PUT MUCH HIGHER PERCENTAGE OF ADVERTISED HP than the Ford.

IMHO they should all have to advertised RWHP.

GM's torque numbers are at a fairly low rpm. Let's hope they really beefed the Allison 1000 since it was at it's design limits with the lower HP engines.

Can't wait for 2019.

[JBurg]

Originally Posted by Hunter11

I quit worrying about hp and torque ratings back when I bought my 2005 Dodge 3500. All of them that are out right now will do anything I want them to do so I do my research and buy the one I like at the time I am looking. Of course that has always been Dodge or Chevy but that is just what I prefer. If Chevy does not do away with the CP4 when I get ready for a new truck I will probably go back to Dodge and who has the most hp or torque will not weigh into my decision.

This^^^^

Wifey and I drove each truck and then bought the one we liked most. It happened to be the Ram. Brand loyalty makes no sense to me.

[RustyJC]

Originally Posted by JBurg

This^^^^

Wifey and I drove each truck and then bought the one we liked most. It happened to be the Ram. Brand loyalty makes no sense to me.

My Ram is rated at 39,100 GCWR and 30,050 trailer tow. It has no trouble holding 65 MPH on cruise control through the Ozarks. It's far more than sufficient for my needs. Why would I need more unless I wanted to play the manufacturers' childish "Mine's bigger than yours" game?

Rusty

[Chance]

It really is amazing how much power all these new trucks have. Not long ago diesel pickups only had about half as much power. For that matter, not that long ago many 18-wheelers didn't even have 400 HP to move 80,000 pounds.

I still recall installing a couple of Cummins 855 cubic inch (14-liter) diesels a long time ago that only put out about 200 HP each. It's amazing that engines half that size now make twice the power.

It will be interesting to see if there will be any downsizing in diesel engine displacement like we've seen with gasoline engines. I agree with many of you that many owners don't need 400 HP.

[Bob Montgomery]

Sweepstakes drawing: 1st prize. A new Chevy Truck. Consolation prize (2nd place) two Chevy Trucks...

[JBurg]

Originally Posted by RustyJC

My Ram is rated at 39,100 GCWR and 30,050 trailer tow. It has no trouble holding 65 MPH on cruise control through the Ozarks. It's far more than sufficient for my needs. Why would I need more unless I wanted to play the manufacturers' childish "Mine's bigger than yours" game?

Rusty

Completely agree. Course, if I move up to a New Horizon rig here in a couple years I'll probably need whatever the max available towing is. My '15 is "only" good to 28,750. Guess I could just swap out the gears and upgrade the brakes. Cheaper than a new truck!!! Especially by then seems how they'll probably all be at least 80k.

[kannon]

GM Answers with there all new 6.6L duramax L5P. 445H.P. 910 ft.lbs.torque.The H.P. wars continue.We all win if you have the $$$

[Cummins12V98]

RAM is the "Tortoise" once again!

[saddlesore]

It's not the HP you want to be focusing on... It's the true usable torque that gets the job done..
Unlike gas engines which measure "peak" torque & HP, a diesel measures "sustainable" torque & HP
Our coach has a ism 450 hp. but the torque is nearly 1300 lbs. @ 1250 rpm. This is for a coach with a GVW of 42k & a CGVW of 52k.

your results may vary...

[Chance]

Not sure what "usable" torque means in a technical context, but it's interesting to compare power of Ford Power Stroke at peak torque rating to that of a much bigger Cummins.

Ford -- 925 lb-ft at 1,800 RPM = 317 HP

Cummins -- 1,300 lb-ft at 1,250 RPM = 309 HP

So it appears that two very dissimilar engines of similar maximum HP (440 vs. 450) also have similar power at peak torque rating (317 vs. 309).


In either case if a driver wants to accelerate or climb faster, operating engine closer to maximum HP rating will result in improved performance.

[kannon]

Originally Posted by Chance

Not sure what "usable" torque means in a technical context, but it's interesting to compare power of Ford Power Stroke at peak torque rating to that of a much bigger Cummins.

Ford -- 925 lb-ft at 1,800 RPM = 317 HP

Cummins -- 1,300 lb-ft at 1,250 RPM = 309 HP

So it appears that two very dissimilar engines of similar maximum HP (440 vs. 450) also have similar power at peak torque rating (317 vs. 309).


In either case if a driver wants to accelerate or climb faster, operating engine closer to maximum HP rating will result in improved performance.

Banks told me operating at peak torque is most efficient.Not the fastest but most efficient.

[Chance]

Originally Posted by kannon

Banks told me operating at peak torque is most efficient.Not the fastest but most efficient.

Yeah. As a general rule that sounds about right to me. However, if fuel efficiency is the primary goal, one would probably end up running at around peak torque RPMs, and maybe around 80% of peak torque. That means a 450 HP engine would need to stay around 250 HP or lower.

I personally can't imagine too many drivers of 450 HP rigs limiting themselves that much. Besides, the difference in fuel economy is so small, that if you can afford a motorhome that powerful, why waste all those ponies to save a quarter on diesel?


To know for sure, you'd have to obtain a BSFC map for your particular engine. And that's not easy because manufacturers often consider that data proprietary. Also worth noting, on modern gasoline engines, peak efficiency can be at lower RPMs than peak-torque RPMs. But here too, differences in efficiency aren't that much as long as torque remains equal. So if you want to climb faster, by all means let the engine rev a little faster to get more power.

[kannon]

I have a manual transmission and I try to stay as close as possible to peak torque.Im usually running 200 r.p.m. over.No need for me to be at peak h.p. when just cruising effortlesly.I don't want all the extra piston speed.As long as egt's are low its good.Now if I have a head wind or an incline ill tap into that h.p. just drop a gear.