6.4 getting a make over or going away?

[SouthTexan]

I don't claim to be an engineer but there's a reason these modern smaller "boosted" engines haven't been offered in heavy duty trucks. I believe testing has proved these smaller engines won't hold up to heavy duty towing. The big 3 would love to get EPA off their a$$ and satisfy customers at the same time by offering an engine that uses less fuel and has more power. If these smaller engines were an option I think we would have already seen them in hd trucks before now.

I worked for various truck and engine manufacturers over the years including Cummins, and you hit the nail on the head. While these engine are great in the duty cycle of a half ton truck, and possibly the duty cycle of an HD truck owner who never tows above 8k lbs, they have to make these engines to with stand the duty cycle of that fleet guy who keeps a 12k trailer hooked up to his truck 90% of the time. That thing would be in heavy to mid boost nearly all of the time.

More boost means more fuel which means more heat. Put that in a small package and you cannot get air in and out quick enough so it starts to dissipate into the oil and coolant causing them to get hot. Put less boost in a larger package and it will move enough air to keep heat in check.

It is like my diesel. High load at low rpms cause the exhaust gas temps to skyrocket because the pistons are not moving fast enough to expel the hot exhaust from all the fuel being dumped(less air displacement per minute). The same load and fuel at higher rpms have a lot lower exhaust gas temps because the engine is moving enough air to keep them low(more air displacement per minute).

 

[rule18]

Gotcha I remember reading about this a while back but never heard mention of it going in HD trucks.

It may be out there but I haven't seen evidence of their intent to drop the Hurricane into the HD lineup.

 

[Docwagon1776]

It may be out there but I haven't seen evidence of their intent to drop the Hurricane into the HD lineup.

There is very little, if any, info "out there" but they've dropped a few hints. I think they are in 'checking which way the wind blows' mode at the moment, but again I can 100% guarantee you they are focus grouping the idea.

NDAs exist, so not all information is freely available online. Make of it what you will.

 

[Fatbob Frank]

I am 100% sure they are focus grouping the concept with potential customers, so they are at least spending money on feasibility studies. If it comes to fruition or not is a different question.

I was one of them...

 

[Scottly]

But hey, if you have more experience with them to say they are an over-rated POS, then by all means.

My 2016 found itself on a flatbed wrecker for the third time in 12k miles after I bought it new. That was all I needed to know.

 

[pacofortacos]

I think a hybrid with a large battery would be a smarter option to pursue since they are going to be forced to go electric in a few years anyways. Ram has already said electric 2500's are coming.

 

[SouthTexan]

My 2016 found itself on a flatbed wrecker for the third time in 12k miles after I bought it new. That was all I needed to know.

My current Ram was on a flatbed wrecker at 7k miles. Using the same standard, does that mean all Ram 2500's are POS's? I don't think so, especially when there are plenty out there who haven't had issues. Judging a whole engine line based on one instance is a bit idiotic. Heck, even in the automotive world, a failure rate of less than 2% is decent which would be around 14k vehicles of the 700k F150s sold each year.

 

[ramffml]

Even Ford, the queen of tiny turbos, doesn't put their ecobooms in their real trucks (super duty). They have that 3.5 on their shelf they could have easily used instead of spending millions developing that 7.3 pushrod. Yet, they spent money on the 7.3, and now again on the new 6.8 as the base engine(!).

The reason of course as others have mentioned, turbos give horrible gas mileage when worked, and can't handle the abuse and heat and duty cycle of a large N/A pushrod that just loafs around with low compression etc.

 

[HEMIMANN]

Even Ford, the queen of tiny turbos, doesn't put their ecobooms in their real trucks (super duty). They have that 3.5 on their shelf they could have easily used instead of spending millions developing that 7.3 pushrod. Yet, they spent money on the 7.3, and now again on the new 6.8 as the base engine(!).

The reason of course as others have mentioned, turbos give horrible gas mileage when worked, and can't handle the abuse and heat and duty cycle of a large N/A pushrod that just loafs around with low compression etc.

This right here, thanks.

I participated in the focus group too. I hope there was enough of us to at least let them know USA is still here and is not Europe.

 

[pacofortacos]

The 3/4 ton pickup is technically a light duty truck the same as the 1/2 ton. ( 1/2 ton is 2a class, 3/4 ton is 2b class)

The EPA has given the 3/4 ton a different emission/mpg standard for years now, but what if the EPA changes course and says all 3/4 ton pickups have to meet the same standards as the 1/2 ton?

If they force 1/2 tons to go electric quickly many people will just jump up to 3/4 ton pickups - and there are already too many 3/4 ton pickups for the EPA to ignore if they choose this route.

If the EPA decides to get stricter with emission and mpg standards, what real options are there for manufacturers?
More power usually equals more fuel use.

I think a lot will be determined by the powers in charge. The stroke of a pen has a lot of power.

I would much prefer a true serial plug in hybrid over all electric. I don't consider the etorque a hybrid lol.

That all being said, if they can lower the peak torque rpm range and bump it up 20-50 ft.lbs from it's current config, I would certainly be happy with it. Imagine if you could get within 10% of peak torque as low as 2200-2400 rpm.

 

[JerryETX]

The 3/4 ton pickup is technically a light duty truck the same as the 1/2 ton.

I know there’s not much difference in class but there’s a big difference in suspension between my 2016 Ram 2500 and all the 1/2 tons I’ve owned.

In terms of the torque you mentioned the only time I’ve seen those figures from a gas engine is with turbo’s. A naturally aspirated gas engine will have a hard to hitting peak torque at lower rpm’s. The new 6 cylinder Tundra engines and the Ford Ecoboost hit peak torque well under 3k rpm’s. The 3.5 ecoboost I had hit 480 lb-ft of torque at 2500 rpm’s which why they’re so popular. As mentioned I don’t see those smaller boosted engines in a HD truck.

 

[HEMIMANN]

There's a big difference in the frames and in the weight as well. A whiz motor can't pull 15,000 lbs reliably or for long.

 

[pacofortacos]

I know there’s not much difference in class but there’s a big difference in suspension between my 2016 Ram 2500 and all the 1/2 tons I’ve owned.

In terms of the torque you mentioned the only time I’ve seen those figures from a gas engine is with turbo’s. A naturally aspirated gas engine will have a hard to hitting peak torque at lower rpm’s. The new 6 cylinder Tundra engines and the Ford Ecoboost hit peak torque well under 3k rpm’s. The 3.5 ecoboost I had hit 480 lb-ft of torque at 2500 rpm’s which why they’re so popular. As mentioned I don’t see those smaller boosted engines in a HD truck.

I totally agree on the differences - but how many 3/4 tons are on the road. Many people wouldn't mind jumping from a 1/2 to 3/4 ton, but the number of people willing to go from 1/2 to a 1 ton as a driver won't be many.

There have been quite a few NA gas engines with lower rpm torque - the 5.9 magnum and V10 are recent ones. So it is doable, how hard it is to get that low rpm torque and high rpm power is the question.
Maybe a more complex intake manifold with 3 length runner systems?

The 5.9 and V10 both fell off hard in power on the top end - esp. the 5.9.

 

[JerryETX]

I totally agree on the differences - but how many 3/4 tons are on the road. Many people wouldn't mind jumping from a 1/2 to 3/4 ton, but the number of people willing to go from 1/2 to a 1 ton as a driver won't be many.

There have been quite a few NA gas engines with lower rpm torque - the 5.9 magnum and V10 are recent ones. So it is doable, how hard it is to get that low rpm torque and high rpm power is the question.
Maybe a more complex intake manifold with 3 length runner systems?

The 5.9 and V10 both fell off hard in power on the top end - esp. the 5.9.

I hear ya. I had a 97 Ram 2500 with that V10. Towing power was horrible same as mpg but it would run. I wish I remembered was rear end it had but obviously pretty high.

 

[ramffml]

I totally agree on the differences - but how many 3/4 tons are on the road. Many people wouldn't mind jumping from a 1/2 to 3/4 ton, but the number of people willing to go from 1/2 to a 1 ton as a driver won't be many.

There have been quite a few NA gas engines with lower rpm torque - the 5.9 magnum and V10 are recent ones. So it is doable, how hard it is to get that low rpm torque and high rpm power is the question.
Maybe a more complex intake manifold with 3 length runner systems?

The 5.9 and V10 both fell off hard in power on the top end - esp. the 5.9.

You should check out towing reviews of the Ford 7.3. Hate to say it but it crushes all other gassers. One guy was towing well over 20K with it, forget his name. And that engine is just getting started, it is tuned very conservative with peak numbers barely beating the GM 6.6 and Ram 6.4, but down below it must be making much more usable torque.

I know, Ford. But still, at the very least one can hope it inspires Ram to give us something competitive.

Edit: found it, apparently grossing 27K pounds!

7.3 godzilla! vs 27,000 lbs of hay!

another tow review and test with some more data on how this truck has worked out for us. thanks for watching! and remember! never overload your truck! lol

www.youtube.com

 

[Rbertalotto]

No I haven't but apparently I missed something please explain

The only engines that will be available are going to be turbocharged straight six cylinders. Huge torque and HP, should get better milage. Lots of YouTube videos about it. All big trailer trucks are now straight 6......can't get a V8 in the big trucks any longer. Four cycle straight six engines are inherently stable and can easily be designed for any needs a pickup might have.

 

[HEMIMANN]

The only engines that will be available are going to be turbocharged straight six cylinders. Huge torque and HP, should get better milage. Lots of YouTube videos about it. All big trailer trucks are now straight 6......can't get a V8 in the big trucks any longer. Four cycle straight six engines are inherently stable and can easily be designed for any needs a pickup might have.

They are all diesel. Max torque can't be achieved with spark ignited engines, hence the V8s.

 

[Rbertalotto]

"They are all diesel. Max torque can't be achieved with spark ignited engines, hence the V8s"

There is a great YouTube video on this. V8 engines can easily produce HP, but straight 6 engines can easily produce more torque.......this is why all big trucks are now straight 6 engines. With modern technology there is no reason we can't see I torque monster straight 6

 

[HEMIMANN]

"They are all diesel. Max torque can't be achieved with spark ignited engines, hence the V8s"

There is a great YouTube video on this. V8 engines can easily produce HP, but straight 6 engines can easily produce more torque.......this is why all big trucks are now straight 6 engines. With modern technology there is no reason we can't see I torque monster straight 6

Big trucks are straight six because they have diesels. Straight six is the strongest, best balanced, of all engine architectures. No splayed journal bearings. So they run the cylinder pressures up to the moon. Can't do that on spark-ignited engines. Can only whiz them to high rpm. A straight six is overkill for a gasoline engine - V8's have the most compact architecture to pack more cylinders into the smallest volume.

Which is why I call out Stellantis for trying to put a BMW sport sedan engine into a pickup truck. It's all about fuel mileage now - not about durability or towing.

 

[SouthTexan]

Some of the best and most reliable gasoline truck engines were straight 6 engines. One of the best was the Ford 300(4.9L). It didn't make much horsepower or rev that high, but it had plenty enough low end torque to pull a barn down. Out pulled my cousins 5.0L V8 he had in his F150 all the time, but he would blow me away unloaded.