Jump to content

the wanderer

Member
  • Posts

    222
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by the wanderer

  1. I've you've ever pedalled a mountain bike it becomes very obvious; I have a 21(?) speed, but I don't have 21 unique gears. There is an incredible amount of overlap depending on where the front and rear gears are sitting. I can change the front gear and change the rear gear at the exact same time, make a lot of noise and fuss, and if I pick my change correctly.... end up right where I started in terms of pedalling rpm vs wheel rpm.
  2. Yes, that was the assumption in my example. I forget how you and I got to this point and I'm too lazy to look, but somebody somewhere implied that the TFL test of this truck would have went better with a higher gear ratio, but I was just saying that gear ratio doesn't affect this specific test. As long as you have room in the transmission to downshift, then the axle gear ratio won't change anything as far as getting up the IKE quicker. The transmission gears and axle gears do the exact same thing. You don't have to change the rear end to make more power, you can also change the transmission gear; that's exactly what it's there for.
  3. Interesting, I didn't know that about the octane. That certainly makes a difference. I think the 7.3 is probably a beast, and it's probably an advantage to some buyers over the 6.6. I suspect that after GM bumps up the power output on the 6.6 then Ford will simply turn a screw somewhere and do the same, with that much difference in displacement there has got to be a ton of room left on the table. The problem with the 7.3 is not the 7.3, it's everything else holding it off the ground.
  4. Yes it does, but there's a catch; Rear end gear allows you to increase the torque that you would have in each transmission gear, but the flip side of the coin is that you need a higher transmission gear number now at that same speed (otherwise you're redlining). So you lost your torque advantage because you upshifted. If two otherwise identical trucks are running at the same speed/mph, and the same rpms, then they are putting down the same power. It doesn't matter what gear ratio they have, or what gear number they're in at that point; they will have the same final gear multiplication. So keeping that in mind, you can have a 5.10 or a 3.21 rear end, as long as your transmissions are in a gear that ends up putting both trucks at 4000 RPMs at 40mph, then both trucks are putting down the same power at that speed.
  5. I didn't realize that no, my 8 speed doesn't. But it doesn't matter, because that's even better; the gears are available when needed, but doesn't waste time up shifting every 200 rpms if it doesn't need to. Here is something interesting that highlights what I'm saying (apologies for the non gm content, it's just two trucks I'm familiar with but I'm sure it would be a very similar story going from GM 6 speed to GM 10 speed) The Ram 3.21 with zf 8 speed has a starting gear ratio of 16.05 The 4.30 Tundra with 6 speed has a starting gear ratio of 14.33 Ram 3.21 final gear ratio is 2.05 Tundra final gear ratio is 2.52 That's incredible for the Ram/3.21. Not only does it have a deeper first gear off the line, it also has a taller final gear for better fuel efficiency. And, it has more gears to choose from while towing. In other words, those 2 extra gears allows the highway tuned Ram to pull better, and get better fuel efficiency than the Tundra. The same ram with the 3.92 gears has even stronger first gear, while STILL managing to outdo the 4.30 tundra in 8th (3.92 final gear is 2.50) So if GM does it right, I'm sure the difference from the GM 6 speed to GM 8 speed would be even stronger than my example above. If you keep your truck forever then I can see the concern about rebuilding cost, but at that point what's an additional $2000? Most of us trade up long before then so it's not a concern at all. By the time the 10 speed comes out, and then add additional years of use, well at that point gas trucks won't even be viable, we'll be all pushing batteries
  6. I don't think it's a given that 10 speed is naturally going to fail quicker than 6 speed just because it has more gears. Look at the ZF 8 speed, it's legendary and bullet proof, used in exotic sports cars, lots of Jeeps, the Ram's as well. We (us ram guys) all know it's far more reliable, and far more buttery smooth than anything FCA has ever put out. So I think it's more about design, tuning, and manufacturing than simply "high gear count = worse reliability than low gear count". Speaking of comfort, a 10 speed might mean you can cruise at 2200 RPMs instead of 2900 (or whatever). Basically, you have more ability to find that optimum RPM where it is making enough power but not revving higher than it needs to. That definitely adds comfort to your ride on long hauls.
  7. Gear ratio doesn't come into play in that test. Power comes from RPMs, not gears. Gears (both transmission and rear end) simply allow you to change what RPM you get at what speed, but as long as the truck has room to downshift then gear ratio is unimportant. The truck had room to downshift, but didn't. They should have manually forced a downshift and the power would have come back on strong.
  8. One obvious benefit of a 10 speed is fuel efficiency. Willing to bet it takes off much easier from a stop as well under heavy load. It's like going from a 3.73 to 4.30 when accelerating from a dead stop; but when on the highway you also get to keep your 3.73 for fuel efficiency. Best of both worlds. 10 gears is reaching diminishing returns, no doubt, but it's almost double the gear count of the 6 speed and I'm sure the difference in drivability will be huge. Not saying you guys with the 6 speed should be unhappy, but there is room for improvement as well. And "always shifting" is not a hard and fast rule, that's a result of transmission tuning, not a result of simply having 10 gears.
  9. I'd love to hear more towing reports. Do any of you guys tow 7000+ pound RV's long distance on a regular basis?
  10. They are somewhat of a joke; I would never tow more than 8000 pounds with any half ton. But people just don't think anymore. There is a huge difference between a utility trailer loaded up with flatbar weighing 10,000 pounds, vs a 34 foot toy hauler RV weighing 10,000 pounds. The wind and instability of the RV will make your experience far worse even though they weigh the same. So these manufacturers don't know what you're pulling, you can tow some trailers weighing X pounds but you can't pull just any trailer weighing X pounds.
  11. Yeah and I was born yesterday. You said at the top of your post "I'm averaging 29.2" and then posted a pic showing "best = 29.2" the exact same number down to the decimal point. Hmmmm. Yeah it's me that doesn't understand math. Rather than admit you made a mistake you're going to just double down on being a child; carry on.
  12. That's not how averages work. Your best was 29.2, your average can't also be 29.2. You average is far lower, and your worst must be quite low to get an average of 20. I have averaged 23 to 25 in my hemi v8 and guys on this forum are doing better than that even with the 5.3. So that screenshot there is very unimpressive. Not saying you can't do far better with the turbo than you can in a v8, but that screenshot you posted is not showing you what you think it is, that's all we're saying. In fact its showing you that you got pretty miserable mileage all things considered.
  13. GM and Ford wrote their own software/tuning for the shared physical hardware. They may as well be completely different transmissions. I read nothing but good things about the GM 10 speed, but read some bad reports about the Ford.
  14. I just got 12 mpg towing my trailer in my hemi yesterday, 3 hour trip on the freeway with the hammer down doing 110 km/h, no stops, some decent hills and lots of passing as I was in a hurry. I have the highway gears, so at that speed I was locked in at 6th gear doing 2200 to 2300 rpms. Not hating on GM at all, I love them as well; but my hemi has not disappointed me in any way yet. Lot of it has to do with driving style as well; you can be constantly in the pedal doing nothing but forcing yourself to keep up with traffic (so on pedal, backing off, on again, backing off, lots of passing etc) and that will kill your MPG. A calm steady foot will get you +2 mpg easily while towing. My trailer isn't overly heavy; it's short (23? feet), but has the same frontal area as a larger 28 to 33 foot for example, so at that point you're pushing the same amount of wind, and I had a 12 foot kayak strapped to my truck as well so I ain't complaining.
  15. I'm saying the whole car is, yes. But the engine is a huge part of it, I just don't like v6's in a performance car/truck. Remember GM's mantra: "there is no replacement for displacement", and the 6.4 SRT is literally twice the engine found in that little genesis. If I simply wanted the fastest car from 0 to 60 I'd get a tesla. There is far more to a car than that.
  16. At a certain point you have to get in and drive. Ignore the fake drama about reliability (FCA's are just as reliable as GM on average, the big 3 are all the same) and about platform age; how does it feel to drive? And looks? And sounds? No question about it; I'll take a 6.4 manual challenger 100 times over the genesis. It's bigger, more comfortable, sounds amazing, and is a total brute. It's a comfortable city/highway cruiser or muscle car, it's not a track car so don't judge it as one. You buy it to drive around comfortably and with power, performance, and noise which is exciting. Nobody who owns one gives a second of though as to how old the platform is, they're too busy enjoying it. At my height I doubt Id' even be able to scrunch myself into a Korean puddle jumper but I may be surprised. And yes, the genesis is very effeminate, I cannot find a more politically correct term to describe the difference, not going to apologize if you're offended over that opinion of mine. It's the choice of motor, the lack of exhaust burble, the size, the soft swooping lines etc. It's too soft and refined.
  17. Really? You'd pick an effeminate v6 over an 840 hp v8 "srt demon"? You can turn off the MDS by using the gear limiter on automatics ("limit" it to 8th gear and MDS stays off), or just buy the manual and you don't get MDS. For me it's not all about 0 to 60 though. If I were to get a challenger, it would the srt scat pack with a N/A 6.4 hemi and 6 speed manual. I have nothing against Genesis, they are just not what I'm looking for. I want a car with some presence, some rumble, some character, something a little brash.
  18. They really did, didn't they? The only company that has delivered on trucks/suvs with some balls is FCA, and people like to trash them for some reason. But find me a manufacturer that has put more tire shredding v8's in everything they possibly can; from charger, challenger, 300, grand cherokee, durango, rubicon, trx ... I'll wait. GM is what you get when you put someone with an aversion to risk and all things "fun" at the top of the corporate ladder. I love the 1500 with 6.2 and/or 3.0 and of course the 2500's and new vette but other than that, there is literally nothing else I would buy from them at this point and my family was literally force-fed GM for at least 2 or 3 generations.
  19. The 5.3 still has more power, willing to bet it tows more and has better performance on the highway. Some people still prefer the sound and linear acceleration of a N/A v8, Ford keeps their 5.0 for the same reason even though their turbo lineup has better numbers. I find the 2.7 very interesting and would look hard at it but it's mated to the crummy 8 speed, and I'm not sure yet how well it would stand up to frequent heavy towing. The 5.3 is rock solid at this point (lifter issue notwithstanding).
  20. I run Redline 5w-30 in my hemi, manual calls for 5w-20. The RL 30 is so thick it's almost a 40 weight. But the hemi was designed in early 2000's and called for a 30 weight back then, and the 6.4 and SRT hemis call for 0w-40 weights still even though they are pretty much all the same engine. So to your point "engineer's know best", they probably do. But they don't write the service manual, and even though they most definitely would prefer the 30/40 weight oils, the 20 weight is in the manual because FCA needs to increase their corporate MPG. Using water for oil kills our engines (especially if you work them hard while towing), but helps them out corporately. So the manual says use 20 weight, but they really do need a 30 or 40 weight. Sometimes it pays to look into it instead of blindly thinking your interests are the same as GM's/Ram's interests.
  21. Yes they are, they have tons of videos and articles about all sorts of topics.
  22. Imagine if a large youtube producer like TFL actually used the truck like they knew what they were doing and actually educated everybody, instead of contributing to the problem. Ignorance is no excuse, you need to know how to work a truck just as much as you need to know how to safely connect the trailer. Can you imagine them loading up an 8000 pound trailer with no WDH just because a ton of people don't know better and do that too? They are more about entertainment at times then they are about actually educating people; if you want entertainment, fine, that's your right, but in my opinion they are not helping matters.
  23. Yes its less the testing and more the scoring/weights that I have a problem with. I would never take off "points" for getting up a hill 30 seconds slower than the next truck; I just don't care. However I do care about transmission/oil temps, and you never hear them talk about that for example, these last 2 videos have been an anomaly and only because "bad things happened". I also don't care if my truck gets 3 mpg up the IKE vs 5; its an 8 minute run. I do care about overall MPG while towing, but those computer/ECU readouts on an 8 min run at WOT are random and irrelevant, don't even need to see those numbers because there is no way they are even close to accurate. Using points to rank a truck is just silly, because we can't all agree on what makes a truck "better" than another. If all you care about is WOT performance than those Ford turbos are going to always get ahead on their test track way up in Colorado mountains. If you care about durability/reliability than you want more weight applied to temps and less to raw speed. Etc etc. Basically their scoring system favours Ford in a big way, and its very inaccurate at times. They would do much better to just drop the final scoring altogether and just present all the raw data; everything, speed, temps (especially!), shifting behaviour (is it hunting?) and let us make up our mind depending on what we look for most in a truck. And then do your best to override the system if it's obvious the truck is in the wrong gear, and make a note of it too in case that bothers you. Basically; Kent and Andre and Roman are huge Ford fans. I don't trust their subjective scoring (25% of final score) at all so that for a start needs to be dropped.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.