That's what I've been told they would do if you weren't in the hills too much or working it real hard, these were mostly 400s I believe.
Does speeding save fuel?
Discussion in 'Ask An Owner Operator' started by Shotgun94, Sep 7, 2018.
Page 4 of 9
-
-
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
-
-
-
-
And yes more rpm does equal more fuel burn. Problem with those big cams is they couldn't run in the lower rpms. Trying to do so would not only destroy them, they couldn't get out of theur own way, same as the detroits of that era.
I Leo seeing you post about how great the engines of the 80s were but have you ever owned one or even driven one? I owned them and they wasnt all that great. Now if you eat to talk about how good the engines of the mud and late 90s were you'd be correct. The n14, 3406e, and 60 series were definately sessions engines. All provided great fuel economy, great power, and great dependability and ease of maintenance. -
-
-
-
-
The n14 and series 60 are just as easy and cheap to rebuild as a big cam. Got to remember an n14 is basically just an electronic big cam with stronger parts and more power.
As to your question about a 60 series pulling power, if you build them right they will keep up with any cat or cummins. I've owned all of the electronic engines up till they started putting egrs on them and all of them do fine when talking in the context of working trucks. Start talking about engines built for tractor pulls and its a different story, cats definately have more potential of you got a deep enough pocket, but all of them can get to 2000 ft lbs and 750 hp relatively cheaply.
Trucking Jobs in 30 seconds
Every month 400 people find a job with the help of TruckersReport.
Page 4 of 9