How Many Miles Can I Get Out Of The Pentastar?

[Wizard]

Actually being a "car engine" or a "truck engine" is much less about peak hp/torque numbers, and far more about construction of the engine and torque/hp curves. Take for example the chevy 4.3 and the turbo i4 they put in their trucks. They are clean sheat designed engines, specifically for trucks. I'm not an expert on this, but my understanding is that they have been tuned to produce their power low in the RPM band (torque), and not higher up which is more typical of "fast sedans". Other factors like materials and strength used in the crank shaft, pistons, block etc, are chosen specifically with the knowledge that this engine will be worked.

So the 3.6 definitely falls under car engine, I would not consider the 5.7 a car engine specifically, think it's much closer to a truck engine.

Being a mechanical wonder is completely irrelevant. It's not a truck engine. It's not a workhorse, it's just a really great engine dumped in a truck because FCA had no better option available as a base motor. I'm not saying it's a bad experience, or that it can't work well for some usages, but calling it a workhorse .... that goes way too far. The 6.4 (or 7.3 from Ford) is a workhorse.

###

HP and TQ are about construction of the engine I believe you thought of endurance if so all series engines are built to last at peak of their performance (exception being the movie designated builds or some weird experiments where the target is a one time proof of concept but those are not series engines). Truck engines are simply car engines that fit purpose -- purpose is carrying heavier loads or towing . The main difference between a truck and a car is the frame not much else. Here's an example . A MB E55 has 460hp and 560 n/m tq this is on par with a truck but the MB can't tow like a tuck can because its frame and suspension are
not build for that purpose.

 

[ramffml]

###

HP and TQ are about construction of the engine I believe you thought of endurance if so all series engines are built to last at peak of their performance (exception being the movie designated builds or some weird experiments where the target is a one time proof of concept but those are not series engines). Truck engines are simply car engines that fit purpose -- purpose is carrying heavier loads or towing . The main difference between a truck and a car is the frame not much else. Here's an example . A MB E55 has 460hp and 560 n/m tq this is on par with a truck but the MB can't tow like a tuck can because its frame and suspension are
not build for that purpose.

There are many differences between car and truck. Ladder frame vs unibody (which you mentioned), but also bigger brakes, alternator, cooling, and also the engine (which is what I'm trying to argue). Chevy seems to do this a little better. They have specific engines for specific purposes, for example, several different variations of the V8. But they don't just drop a corvette v8 into the truck and call it a day. They have a 6.6 truck engine, and a 4.3 truck engine, and a 6.2 L vette engine. The truck engines stay in trucks, the car engines stay in the cars. They are designed with different needs. Look at the little turbo i4. It redlines quite low, and the reason is because they built it to produce torque very low in the RPM range (truck duty). The 3.6 (and even hemi) need to rev higher to make torque. So it's not about peak torque at or near redline (or whatever) that matters when used in a truck, it's about building torque very low down and durably, even if it means it makes less overall power (and MPG) than it otherwise could.

 

[Wizard]

There are many differences between car and truck. Ladder frame vs unibody (which you mentioned), but also bigger brakes, alternator, cooling, and also the engine (which is what I'm trying to argue). Chevy seems to do this a little better. They have specific engines for specific purposes, for example, several different variations of the V8. But they don't just drop a corvette v8 into the truck and call it a day. They have a 6.6 truck engine, and a 4.3 truck engine, and a 6.2 L vette engine. The truck engines stay in trucks, the car engines stay in the cars. They are designed with different needs. Look at the little turbo i4. It redlines quite low, and the reason is because they built it to produce torque very low in the RPM range (truck duty). The 3.6 (and even hemi) need to rev higher to make torque. So it's not about peak torque at or near redline (or whatever) that matters when used in a truck, it's about building torque very low down and durably, even if it means it makes less overall power (and MPG) than it otherwise could.

###

https://mechanics.stackexchange.com...rs-different-from-trucks-and-performance-cars

 

[rvance]

The 3.6 makes 1.4 hp/ci. The Hemi makes 1.15 hp/ci. This doesn't have much to do with this discussion, but it does show which is the "performance" engine. I would like to see them drop the Hemi and make a V8 on the Pentastar design. 2 more cylinders would give 4.9ltrs/420 hp and 200 lbs less weight.

 

[Quyonmob]

There are many differences between car and truck. Ladder frame vs unibody (which you mentioned), but also bigger brakes, alternator, cooling, and also the engine (which is what I'm trying to argue). Chevy seems to do this a little better. They have specific engines for specific purposes, for example, several different variations of the V8. But they don't just drop a corvette v8 into the truck and call it a day. They have a 6.6 truck engine, and a 4.3 truck engine, and a 6.2 L vette engine. The truck engines stay in trucks, the car engines stay in the cars. They are designed with different needs. Look at the little turbo i4. It redlines quite low, and the reason is because they built it to produce torque very low in the RPM range (truck duty). The 3.6 (and even hemi) need to rev higher to make torque. So it's not about peak torque at or near redline (or whatever) that matters when used in a truck, it's about building torque very low down and durably, even if it means it makes less overall power (and MPG) than it otherwise could.

The ENTIRE LS engine platform was born out of a sports car engine, the LS1, so the LS is not a great example.

 

[Wizard]

The 3.6 makes 1.4 hp/ci. The Hemi makes 1.15 hp/ci. This doesn't have much to do with this discussion, but it does show which is the "performance" engine. I would like to see them drop the Hemi and make a V8 on the Pentastar design. 2 more cylinders would give 4.9ltrs/420 hp and 200 lbs less weight.

###
they could add a supercharger to the pentastar and get more granted they'd need to make some strategical changes mainly for improved lubrication under high rpm & improved burned gas evacuation but still be cheaper and probably more reliable than a hemi

 

[El Huapo]

I can't help but feel that the OP really wants the Hemi. Therefore, he should buy the Hemi and "Don't worry, be happy". Here's hoping it works out well for him/her.

 

[ramffml]

The ENTIRE LS engine platform was born out of a sports car engine, the LS1, so the LS is not a great example.

Chevy trucks use the Vortec family engines, which may be "based on" but is different enough to get its own family name. Some differences from the LS lineup used for cars include cast iron cylinder blocks, and a tall intake manifold which is explicity there to increase low end torque. The 3.6 pentastar is literally the same engine in the charger, challenger, Jeep GC, and Ram, possibly with minor differences in packaging and tuning/software. I belive the same is true for the Hemi, but again, not an expert.

 

[newdorplane]

Actually being a "car engine" or a "truck engine" is much less about peak hp/torque numbers, and far more about construction of the engine and torque/hp curves. Take for example the chevy 4.3 and the turbo i4 they put in their trucks. They are clean sheat designed engines, specifically for trucks. I'm not an expert on this, but my understanding is that they have been tuned to produce their power low in the RPM band (torque), and not higher up which is more typical of "fast sedans". Other factors like materials and strength used in the crank shaft, pistons, block etc, are chosen specifically with the knowledge that this engine will be worked.

You wrote what was in my mind; I am not concerned about power, as much as I am concerned about durability.

For example: if an auto parts shop employed a fleet of trucks, what's the heaviest thing that the vehicle would be carrying? A couple of car batteries? A head? A couple of rotors?

Meanwhile, the driver would be beating on the engine nonstop - racing to their auto shop destination, quite possibly up and down hilly terrain, etc. The drivers of auto parts delivery vehicles are usually younger, and sometimes apathetic, so I would expect the truck to have extended oil change intervals; maybe it'd be down a quart of oil at times, etc

In my mind, a truck engine is not only torque heavy, but it can take the abuse that a severe service schedule places on a vehicle.

Yours was an excellent post.

***

As for other thoughtful posters who suggested the Hemi, there's no doubt that the Hemi is a great motor, but it's much more of a motor than what I want. I accept that the Pentastar is a DOHC configuration. I prefer an OHV config, as I drive torque, not horsepower, but...

I will be buying a single cab truck, hopefully in the low to mid 20's. I want something economical, and the Pentastar seems pretty thrifty. My dream motor is GM's 262/4.3L OHV V6, but GM has overpriced their base trucks, and the Ram looks much nicer than the Silverado, IMO.

 

[newdorplane]

I can't help but feel that the OP really wants the Hemi. Therefore, he should buy the Hemi and "Don't worry, be happy". Here's hoping it works out well for him/her.

I appreciate your post, but the Hemi is too much motor for me. Right now, I have a last generation Ranger, and I love that it's economical.

 

[El Huapo]

If you can, get the bucket seats and 3.55 gears with LSD. Mine cruises on level roads at 60 mph doing 1500 rpm and if a hill comes up it downshifts so smoothly you have to look at the tach to be sure---that's all done with a very light foot.

 

[Quyonmob]

Chevy trucks use the Vortec family engines, which may be "based on" but is different enough to get its own family name. Some differences from the LS lineup used for cars include cast iron cylinder blocks, and a tall intake manifold which is explicity there to increase low end torque. The 3.6 pentastar is literally the same engine in the charger, challenger, Jeep GC, and Ram, possibly with minor differences in packaging and tuning/software. I belive the same is true for the Hemi, but again, not an expert.

I’m a previous GM guy.

“Vortec” was used before the LS. It’s just a marketing name. The original vortecs were all based off the old SBC and BBC. The name carried over to LS engines. An LS is an LS, vortec SBC and vortec LS share nothing.

LS have been iron block and aluminum Blocks in trucks. I’ve had both LM7 and L33 trucks of the same gen. The L33 shares almost everything With the LS2 and LS6 (except for cam and intake manifold)

You can hate on the 3.6 all you want, but the LS family will not prove your point.

 

[newdorplane]

If you can, get the bucket seats and 3.55 gears with LSD. Mine cruises on level roads at 60 mph doing 1500 rpm and if a hill comes up it downshifts so smoothly you have to look at the tach to be sure---that's all done with a very light foot.

Perfect. Thanks for the suggestion; I hate high rpm cruising.

Now...what's LSD, and what kind of highway mileage are you getting, with the engine loafing at 1,500rpms?

 

[ramffml]

You can hate on the 3.6 all you want

Where, exactly, have I "hated on" the 3.6? You guys read what you want to read, not what I've written.

 

[newdorplane]

Where, exactly, have I "hated on" the 3.6? You guys read what you want to read, not what I've written.

You're quoting the wrong guy

 

[tnctx02]

Perfect. Thanks for the suggestion; I hate high rpm cruising.

Now...what's LSD, and what kind of highway mileage are you getting, with the engine loafing at 1,500rpms?

Limited Slip Differential - LSD

 

[tnctx02]

###
they could add a supercharger to the pentastar and get more granted they'd need to make some strategical changes mainly for improved lubrication under high rpm & improved burned gas evacuation but still be cheaper and probably more reliable than a hemi

Not real sure the trans would hold up to the added supercharger horsepower. Would be nice to see some specs on the 8 speed trans on the 3.6L after adding the supercharger.

 

[Quyonmob]

Where, exactly, have I "hated on" the 3.6? You guys read what you want to read, not what I've written.

That’s the part you chose to address out of all I wrote there, and accuse me of reading what I want? Uh-huh...

 

[ramffml]

That’s the part you chose to address out of all I wrote there, and accuse me of reading what I want? Uh-huh...

Yes, exactly. Some of you 3.6 owners are so freaking touchy that the second somebody writes something even remotely considered negative in some way about it, you jump out of the woodwork and start throwing labels like "hate". You're twisting my words into absolute false statements as nowhere have I written anything close to "hate". I've written here that the v6 is a great motor, very refined, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. Just, it's not a "truck engine", nor a "work horse". So yes, I chose to address that statement of yours because it's completely 100% false.

The LS vs Vortec is more of a side thread and I'm not qualified enough to argue there, though I will say you seem to disagree with a number of posts I've read on the internet concerning this. Chevy has clearly made significant mechanical changes to Vortec, specifically because it's being used in a truck. The 3.6 is just dropped in "as is" in every place they use (other than maybe moving oil filter/air filter around etc for packing purposes and maybe a detune here and there for cooling).

 

[rule18]

Yes, exactly. Some of you 3.6 owners are so freaking touchy that the second somebody writes something even remotely considered negative in some way about it, you jump out of the woodwork and start throwing labels like "hate". You're twisting my words into absolute false statements as nowhere have I written anything close to "hate". I've written here that the v6 is a great motor, very refined, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with it. Just, it's not a "truck engine", nor a "work horse". So yes, I chose to address that statement of yours because it's completely 100% false.

And you, my friend, have (probably) taken my original "workhorse" comment the wrong way. When I chose that phrase, it was considering my use case, which is the only one that I can speak to with authority. I haul everything from railroad ties to full whiskey barrels (different conversation) and tow a two horse trailer. The 3.6 when paired with the 3.92 is very capable. If I was going to tow heavy or haul any heavier than I do now, I would have gone with a 2500/6.4 (which I will when the time comes to upgrade). Looks like this thread has gotten a little out of hand, no surprise there when you consider how many opinions there are on this forum...