End of the V8 Power Wagon's?

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

OP
OP
UTAHPWRWGN

UTAHPWRWGN

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2020
Posts
325
Reaction score
816
Location
Hurricane, UT
Ram Year
2020
Engine
6.4L Hemi

Grand Mesa

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Posts
1,687
Reaction score
1,764
Location
.
Found this comment on a forum in regards to putting a turbo on a boat engine, "Turbo's make power in mid to upper RPM ranges. A boat engine needs low end for a good hole shot."

The Power Wagon also needs power at a low RPM for ascending slow steep off-road gradients. Not certain if a turbo engine would be any improvement over the 6.4L for the Power Wagon's 4 wheeling capabilities.
 

bcbouy

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 12, 2014
Posts
1,730
Reaction score
1,184
Location
pitt meadows/100 mile house
Ram Year
2021 power wagon
Engine
hemi
I already have mine so I really don't care if they dump a Hurricane in them in the future.
By the time I'm ready for a new truck internal combustion engines will most likely be extinct anyway...
same.i don't care what they do next.unless mine gets totalled, i won't be buying another truck before i croak.my son is buying the wife a cybertruck anyway.
 

British Bulldog

Senior Member
Military
Joined
Sep 14, 2016
Posts
2,036
Reaction score
730
Location
Jacksonville NC
Ram Year
2021
Engine
Hemi 5.7 etorque
I’m confused here. Been following
discussions about this Hurricane engine. Reading deeper into article, it says 91 octane needed for HO engine and 91 recommended/advised for standard!
The price of fuel differs so much from 87/89 to 91 ( if you can find it) how is this going to be better for us, the end user?
Imagine filling a 33 gall tank with 91………
 

wgreggking

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2017
Posts
681
Reaction score
677
Location
rural Arizona
Ram Year
2017 4x4 offroad
Engine
6.4
"The price of fuel differs so much from 87/89 to 91 ( if you can find it) how is this going to be better for us, the end user?
Imagine filling a 33 gall tank with 91………"
 

Trailmaker

Locked and Loaded
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Posts
1,799
Reaction score
1,668
Location
Conroe Texas
Ram Year
2019 PW
Engine
6.4
Doubt this is for the 2500/3500. Though is might effect the TRX
 
  • Like
Reactions: BWL

Grand Mesa

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Posts
1,687
Reaction score
1,764
Location
.
Going to need that 500 horsepower to tow the much heavier new electric ski boats.

 

ramffml

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2019
Posts
2,811
Reaction score
5,145
Location
ramforum
Ram Year
2019
Engine
hemi 5.7
Found this comment on a forum in regards to putting a turbo on a boat engine, "Turbo's make power in mid to upper RPM ranges. A boat engine needs low end for a good hole shot."

The Power Wagon also needs power at a low RPM for ascending slow steep off-road gradients. Not certain if a turbo engine would be any improvement over the 6.4L for the Power Wagon's 4 wheeling capabilities.

That comment is wrong. Turbos excel at low end torque. All the turbos out there in trucks, feel stronger off idle and low RPMs vs the N/A counterparts. Think F150 2.7/3.5, the Chevy 2.7, they all feel stronger than the v8s. Our hemi's for example, don't build peak torque until (what) 4500 RPM's? The 2.7 is making peak torque below 2000 RPMs or thereabouts. If I was a chevy fan and wanted to buy a truck for pulling a 0 to 7000 pound trailer I'd sooner get the 2.7 over the 5.3 if I just cared about power and performance and mpg.

So as far as performance goes, don't worry about turbos. Turbo lag is non existant when done right in modern engines, and power off the line is far stronger than v8's.

As far as durability, reliability, and engine lifetime... that remains to be seen.
 

wgreggking

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2017
Posts
681
Reaction score
677
Location
rural Arizona
Ram Year
2017 4x4 offroad
Engine
6.4
Going to need that 500 horsepower to tow the much heavier new electric ski boats.


Brace yourself, though, the price starts at US$292,711. for a ski boat
 

Trailmaker

Locked and Loaded
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Posts
1,799
Reaction score
1,668
Location
Conroe Texas
Ram Year
2019 PW
Engine
6.4
That comment is wrong. Turbos excel at low end torque. All the turbos out there in trucks, feel stronger off idle and low RPMs vs the N/A counterparts. Think F150 2.7/3.5, the Chevy 2.7, they all feel stronger than the v8s. Our hemi's for example, don't build peak torque until (what) 4500 RPM's? The 2.7 is making peak torque below 2000 RPMs or thereabouts. If I was a chevy fan and wanted to buy a truck for pulling a 0 to 7000 pound trailer I'd sooner get the 2.7 over the 5.3 if I just cared about power and performance and mpg.

So as far as performance goes, don't worry about turbos. Turbo lag is non existant when done right in modern engines, and power off the line is far stronger than v8's.

As far as durability, reliability, and engine lifetime... that remains to be seen.
Twin turbo is key to keeping the power curve correct as both turbos are tuned differently my daily is a 3.5 Raptor running stock 450hp and 510 torque. Though it has the balls, is does not have the weight or length to tow above 8000 lbs. I pulled a 9500 RV and it was going great till it pushed me through the stop light. I was so used to towing with the PW that I misjudged my abilities.
 
Last edited:

Trailmaker

Locked and Loaded
Joined
Jul 28, 2019
Posts
1,799
Reaction score
1,668
Location
Conroe Texas
Ram Year
2019 PW
Engine
6.4
I forgot “Pictures or it didn’t happen”:
 

Attachments

  • A45B4703-8914-42ED-BA4D-BF8A6B616772.jpeg
    A45B4703-8914-42ED-BA4D-BF8A6B616772.jpeg
    237.2 KB · Views: 21
  • 308858F0-F3E4-45F6-BDC0-A245D36EF785.jpeg
    308858F0-F3E4-45F6-BDC0-A245D36EF785.jpeg
    298.4 KB · Views: 21

BWL

Embrace the skeptisism
Joined
Oct 14, 2017
Posts
8,547
Reaction score
8,471
Location
BC Canada
Ram Year
2017
Engine
hemi 5.7
Going to need that 500 horsepower to tow the much heavier new electric ski boats.

I guess you don't need the ballast tank for the wake with the extra 1100 lbs of battery pack.
 

Grand Mesa

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Posts
1,687
Reaction score
1,764
Location
.
I guess you don't need the ballast tank for the wake with the extra 1100 lbs of battery pack.

Just like Ram
I guess you don't need the ballast tank for the wake with the extra 1100 lbs of battery pack.

2 to 3 hours of normal usage for an expensive boat, followed by a 10 hour 240V recharging. Not much time for wake boarding.
 
Last edited:

Jim888

Junior Member
Joined
Jan 20, 2022
Posts
2
Reaction score
1
Location
IA
Ram Year
2019
Engine
5.7 etorque
Found this comment on a forum in regards to putting a turbo on a boat engine, "Turbo's make power in mid to upper RPM ranges. A boat engine needs low end for a good hole shot."

The Power Wagon also needs power at a low RPM for ascending slow steep off-road gradients. Not certain if a turbo engine would be any improvement over the 6.4L for the Power Wagon's 4 wheeling capabilities.
Turbos make power down low to start with and just keep going up .
 

BWL

Embrace the skeptisism
Joined
Oct 14, 2017
Posts
8,547
Reaction score
8,471
Location
BC Canada
Ram Year
2017
Engine
hemi 5.7
Doubt this is for the 2500/3500. Though is might effect the TRX
I think you're correct, but with mandated fuel economy and emissions requirements at some point we may run into smaller turbo gas engines on the HD eventually. I don't think government regulators care if the average consumer has to spend more on repairs and maintenance and the cost per vehicle for not meeting them is so high we'd have to pay the extra one way or another.
 

Grand Mesa

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Posts
1,687
Reaction score
1,764
Location
.
I think you're correct, but with mandated fuel economy and emissions requirements at some point we may run into smaller turbo gas engines on the HD eventually. I don't think government regulators care if the average consumer has to spend more on repairs and maintenance and the cost per vehicle for not meeting them is so high we'd have to pay the extra one way or another.

I hope not.

Small turbo gas engines may out perform large block V8's, but at our elevation (9,900 feet average for my zip code) the turbos need to work harder from what I've read. Spinning faster to compensate for the thinner atmospheric pressure which generates more heat. With the thinner air comes less heat displacement. I understand that restrictions can be put on turbos so that they don't exceed a set maximum speed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BWL

2003F350

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2013
Posts
1,241
Reaction score
1,141
Location
Michigan
Ram Year
2022
Engine
6.7 CTD
Twin turbo is key to keeping the power curve correct as both turbos are tuned differently my daily is a 3.5 Raptor running stock 450hp and 510 torque. Though it has the balls, is does not have the weight or length to tow above 8000 lbs. I pulled a 9500 RV and it was going great till it pushed me through the stop light. I was so used to towing with the PW that I misjudged my abilities.

That's really the issue with newer Fords with the all aluminum body - they're rated to pull and carry more because they're lighter, but they're LIGHTER which isn't always a good thing. As you discovered, that light (I'm guessing) aluminum-bodied Raptor didn't have enough weight to help slow you down. I mean it'll do it, but you've got to be 100% aware of what you're doing.

For instance, between my wife, me, and my FIL we have 3 trucks: her F150, his F250, and my PW. Her F150 supposedly has a curb weight of about 4500 lbs. His F250, with the 7.3 Godzilla motor, comes in at about 6200 lbs. My tank of a PW comes in at over 7k. Having pulled a lot of the same trailers with both his truck and mine (we don't usually pull much with hers, though that 2.7 twin-turbo has some giddyup)...I'd rather have my PW. It just feels like I've got more control over what's behind me.
 
Top