Good Sam Club Open Roads Forum: New Ram/Cummins vs GM/Duramax on the IKE
Open Roads Forum Already a member? Login here.   If not, Register Today!  |  Help

Newest  |  Active  |  Popular  |  RVing FAQ Forum Rules  |  Forum Posting Help and Support  |  Contact  

Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Tow Vehicles

Open Roads Forum  >  Tow Vehicles

 > New Ram/Cummins vs GM/Duramax on the IKE

Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Page  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 12  
Prev  |  Next
Cummins12V98

on the road

Senior Member

Joined: 06/03/2012

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 07/01/19 11:10pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Ram:
HP 385/338 88%
TQ 900/828

Ford:
HP 440/387 88%
TQ 925/806

Chevy:
HP 445/337 76%
TQ 910/771

Ford produced much higher % than the other Dyne's I have seen.

I hit 332 of 385 in Vegas a couple months ago. Engine was not as cool as it should have been.


2015 RAM LongHorn 3500 Dually CrewCab 4X4 CUMMINS/AISIN RearAir 385HP/865TQ 4:10's
37,800# GCVWR "Towing Beast"

"HeavyWeight" B&W RVK3600

2016 MobileSuites 39TKSB3 highly "Elited" In the stable

2007.5 Mobile Suites 36 SB3 29,000# Combined SOLD

ShinerBock

SATX

Senior Member

Joined: 02/22/2015

View Profile



Posted: 07/02/19 06:59am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

FishOnOne wrote:



Not sure I agree with this... TFL did a DRW race and the Ford beat the Chevy and Ram unloaded when the trucks could reach there upper rpm range. Put a heavy load and they performed within ~2 seconds in which torque played the major role in which all had similar torque ratings.

Dynos:

Factory Rating/Dyno Measurement

Ram:
HP 385/338
TQ 900/828

Ford:
HP 440/387
TQ 925/806

Chevy:
HP 445/337
TQ 910/771

Link


The turbo tuning of each truck will make a big difference in dyno numbers. Some turbos like to be loaded down to get their best numbers and some don't. It mainly depends on how the VG vane actuation is tuned.

Also, there is a huge difference between short term power on dynos (and 0-60 runs) versus sustained power. These engines will defuel and lower its power output if the temps get too hot so the most important number (to me) is how much power can it sustain pulling a load for a long period of time before the temps get too hot to the point it has to cut fuel and/or inject more exhaust gas to keep NOx within limits both of which will reduce power output.

* This post was edited 07/02/19 07:19am by ShinerBock *

ib516

Canada - soon to be Costa Rica

Senior Member

Joined: 04/18/2003

View Profile



Posted: 07/02/19 09:08am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Huntindog wrote:

With the 60MPH limit for this test.... That was the biggest factor in the outcome. Both trucks were pretty much at the limit the whole way up the hill. With both trucks able to do that, there were very few areas where one could assert an advantage.
Though I would have liked to see a couple of DRWs go at it, I doubt the result would have changed much. With a 16k trailer and a 60 MPH limit... Neither truck will be pushed enough to make a difference.

What I saw, and what they said was that both trucks were only able to get to 56-58 mph flat out on at least some sections.


Prev: 2010 Cougar 322QBS (junk)
02 Dodge 2500 4x4 5.9L CTD 3.55
07 Dodge 3500 4x4 SRW Mega 5.9L CTD 3.73
14 Ram 2500 4x4 Crew 6.4L Hemi 4.10
06 Chevy 1500 4x4 E-Cab 3.73 5.3L
All above are sold
Current: 07 Dodge 1500 5.7L Hemi 3.55 / 2010 Jayco 17z


Cummins12V98

on the road

Senior Member

Joined: 06/03/2012

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 07/02/19 10:00am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

ib516 wrote:

Huntindog wrote:

With the 60MPH limit for this test.... That was the biggest factor in the outcome. Both trucks were pretty much at the limit the whole way up the hill. With both trucks able to do that, there were very few areas where one could assert an advantage.
Though I would have liked to see a couple of DRWs go at it, I doubt the result would have changed much. With a 16k trailer and a 60 MPH limit... Neither truck will be pushed enough to make a difference.

What I saw, and what they said was that both trucks were only able to get to 56-58 mph flat out on at least some sections.


CORRECT!

RCMAN46

NorthWest

Senior Member

Joined: 02/24/2008

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member


Posted: 07/02/19 11:05am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Dynos:

Factory Rating/Dyno Measurement

Ram:
HP 385/338
TQ 900/828

Ford:
HP 440/387
TQ 925/806

Chevy:
HP 445/337
TQ 910/771


interesting when the same trucks were tested at the IKE run.


[image]

Bionic Man

Colorado

Senior Member

Joined: 04/03/2009

View Profile



Posted: 07/02/19 11:15am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

ib516 wrote:

Huntindog wrote:

With the 60MPH limit for this test.... That was the biggest factor in the outcome. Both trucks were pretty much at the limit the whole way up the hill. With both trucks able to do that, there were very few areas where one could assert an advantage.
Though I would have liked to see a couple of DRWs go at it, I doubt the result would have changed much. With a 16k trailer and a 60 MPH limit... Neither truck will be pushed enough to make a difference.

What I saw, and what they said was that both trucks were only able to get to 56-58 mph flat out on at least some sections.


Which honestly still seems high to me. I tow that stretch several times per year. Did it 3 weeks ago with my 12k fiver and my 3k(?) Boat. My truck was between 40-45 most of the way up. I think that the higher profile of the RV must make a huge difference as I have a friend with a 2013 Ford and he is about the same speed.

As a side note, the speeds are about the same regardless if I tow the boat or not.


2012 RAM 3500 Laramie Longhorn DRW CC 4x4 Max Tow, Cummins HO, 60 gallon RDS aux fuel tank, Reese 18k Elite hitch
2003 Dodge Ram 3500 QC SB 4x4 Cummins HO NV5600 with Smarty JR, Jacobs EB (sold)
2002 Gulf Stream Sea Hawk 29FRB with Honda EV6010

Cummins12V98

on the road

Senior Member

Joined: 06/03/2012

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 07/02/19 12:29pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

" I think that the higher profile of the RV must make a huge difference"

HUGE is correct!

Huntindog

Phoenix AZ

Senior Member

Joined: 04/08/2002

View Profile



Posted: 07/02/19 08:01pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

ib516 wrote:

Huntindog wrote:

With the 60MPH limit for this test.... That was the biggest factor in the outcome. Both trucks were pretty much at the limit the whole way up the hill. With both trucks able to do that, there were very few areas where one could assert an advantage.
Though I would have liked to see a couple of DRWs go at it, I doubt the result would have changed much. With a 16k trailer and a 60 MPH limit... Neither truck will be pushed enough to make a difference.

What I saw, and what they said was that both trucks were only able to get to 56-58 mph flat out on at least some sections.

I used an online calculator to figure the average speed. We know the times. 8.24-8.25.
The distance is either 7.9 or 8.1 miles. That works out to 56-58 MPH... Which is actually gonna be higher, as the clock was started at about 30 MPH on the onramp. No way to account for that accuratly, but it means that the average speed will be higher than the calculator showed. IMO, they were at 60 MPH a lot.



Huntindog
100% boondocking
2010 Palomino Sabre 30 BHDS
84 gal. Grey. 84 gal. Black
2 bathrooms, no waiting
2011 Silverado CC DA big dually.



Learjet

Louisiana

Senior Member

Joined: 02/21/2006

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 07/03/19 06:49am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

you guys are trying to use math and science on a non-scientific test...LOL


2017 Ram Big Horn, DRW Long Box, 4x4, Cummins, Aisin, 3.73
2015 Wildcat 317RL, MoRryde rubber pin box, Titan Disc Brakes, Trojan T105
B&W Ram Companion

Yamaha EF2600c tri-fuel generator
Champion Model 46595- 3000/3500w


Cummins12V98

on the road

Senior Member

Joined: 06/03/2012

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 07/03/19 08:47am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Watched the vid again. RAM was 1 second slower not 2 as mentioned, no biggie just stating facts. The guesstimated distance of 2" behind center of rear axle, I am betting it's more.

Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Page  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 12  
Prev  |  Next

Open Roads Forum  >  Tow Vehicles

 > New Ram/Cummins vs GM/Duramax on the IKE
Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Tow Vehicles


New posts No new posts
Closed, new posts Closed, no new posts
Moved, new posts Moved, no new posts

Adjust text size:

© 2019 CWI, Inc. © 2019 Good Sam Enterprises, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Terms of Use | PRIVACY POLICY | YOUR PRIVACY RIGHTS