2050lbs of torque

There is a second reason.
Overpowering a modern engine can lead to DPF issues.

 

Anything better than 1800 foot pounds is a winner. The more you have on hand, the less winding out you have to do. Horses are secondary to this topic. again the more you have the less work you need to do to it.

What I cannot stand is trucks that generate inadequate torque. Ive had a few that could not do 1350 even. The company thinks they get good fuel mileage but you never got anywhere in a timely manner. If you were to compare that one at 5 miles to gallon against a newer rig at 150 more horses and 500 more torque you got 8 average many times depending on where you are in the USA.

The more you have on hand, the less work, less fuel you burn to do that work. (Less time too) Keep in mind I stand against emissions that require liquids to be in compliance. I prefer to deal with non fluid emissions engines, generally 1998 and older.

 

The thing that is missed is that displacement no longer is tied to fuel consumption. The fuel management system of now beats the hell out of the older mechanical/older electronic systems where displacement was the only means for power.

 

And with torque available at much lower RPM on new motors that's also part of the mpg improvement. The normal operating range is several hundred rpm lower on new motors.

I really wish the X15E was available in 2050Tq , i would've spec that in a heartbeat !!

Biggest killer to the current X15 performance series is lower compression (lower mpg) and the peak TQ is 150rpm higher than the Efficiency series.
1000 rpm vs 1150 rpm

2050@1000rpm would be awesome, like the old D16s were.... Actually the highest they offered in US trim was 2250@1100 i believe (625hp)


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...FjABegQIBxAB&usg=AOvVaw3-bMD8Q4uheBbUzDYvLHjR



I think this was the highest factory Tq (2250) ever produced in the USA....CAT was 2050 max at one point?
(Volvo being the king of the hill, who would've thought)

Volvo Introduces VT 800 Daycab with Powerful Engine

 

So my DD 60 12.7 is not a modern engine?
It was modern in 1999

 

Lol.

Good morning

 

A couple of things to remember:

1. Higher torque rate will mean heavier driveline. It'll be within a hundred or so pounds from an 1850 driveline, but the parts will be more expensive and may be a little harder to come by in a pinch.
2. The flip side to that above is higher resale value. Guys looking for power or wanting to modify something for more power will want to start with a stout platform. This will hold value over the long term.
3. Fuel mileage will be negligible between an 1850 torque rate and a 2050 torque rate if both are big bore engines.
4. Reliability. The X15 Performance series with it's lower compression will have fewer issues than the Efficiency series.

Spec for fuel mileage and aero to realize savings in operation. Spec for power and looks/long hood for resale on the back end. It's usually a wash either way.

 

Just to visit #4 , look at the cost difference in long term warranty of X15E vs X15P series.... It's substantial.. There's something to that.. (Some of the longest ones aren't offered in the performance series either like 6yr/600k)


Any of these new emissions motors it's wise to get maximum warranty on engine AND emissions. Couple thousand now will save tens of thousands later...beyond the base warranty period.


Agree mostly on the rest but the 1850 vs 2050..
If you compare 1850 vs 2050 and both are performance series, it'll be smaller.

Comparing a 2050 Tq "performance" series versus a 1850 Tq "efficiency" series is a big difference....and the efficiency pulls down 150rpm farther, most likely outpulling a 1850 "performance" series.

*Specing a bigger 2050 driveline is smart for long term durability and resale , i agree.

The X15E with 2050tq rated driveline is the cat's meow for efficiency and uprating later..

 

The X 13 package works well, know a O/O running it in a 730. Getting good mpg, high 8s. Typically runs around 75k loaded in the northeast.

 

Modern=newer(means has DPF and DEF)
I think you don't have those.