Mechanical or Electronic CAT, which one is better

WOW we have to many davids...lol

I went from the OR3423 to OR3421.

Don't the 400's have the 14.6L pistons?

 

400's are "intercooled" where the 425 is "air to air"..

With a "charge air cooler" the volume of air you have to fill before pressure is seen at the intake manifold is far greater..

The benefit is pulling long hills with lower exhaust temp..

So.. You may beat a 425 through the gears..
But when you get down to buisness on the mountain..
It will be a sad day for the 400's..

 

Well no thats not quite right.....My 400 Cat was air to air too. I'll never forget the time I was in NM going west and a couple guys were patting there self on there backs(via the CB) as to how well they were going up 9mile hill on I40, I know one of them said they had a 470 Series 60 Detroit and the other was a 425 Cat, both had reefers. I never said a word as my little 400 tanker yanker went around them both at the same time.

 

O.K.... I'm guessing your knowledge of truck engines is very limited since you think passing a Detroit is a big deal..

So here you go.. When referring to any engine by its HP rating, it is usually just generally speaking.. The HP ratings on electronic engines is usually more accurate because they are programmed to specs but.. Mechanical engines HP ratings are accurate from the factory.. {and regarding 400 vs. 425 Cats the only difference being ATAAC}.. but if you start making adjustments to it without a dyno there to verify it on, you can only estimate really, and 25 hp is not alot of difference..

Anyway.. Since you think I'm "not quite right" about 400 vs. 425 Caterpillars and you had a 400 that was ATAAC..
I will be anxiously awaiting your reply, because I was unaware that ancient history {also common knowledge of B model Cats} had been changed..

 

Mechanical wont adjust timing and fuel for elevation changes, etc. E model hands down, way better engine, bullet proof and will put down 1000+hp without breaking a sweat. The B model is a liability past 750whp, been proven. Better millage, dont have to worry about bearings every 500k. Not trying to say the B model is bad because it is bullet proof but at 425hp, not 1000. (550 over and out)

 

No passing Detroits aint a big deal, unless the one your passing thinks there doing a hellva good job.....reread my post.
I do believe your vast carnal knowleage of Cats has failed you, Late 80's vary early 90's all Cat's were air to air including the 400. In 1990 I had a 3ZJ 3406C 400 Cat that was in fact air to air and would out pull most any other stock 425.
No where in my post did I ever say I had a "B" model Cat....pay attention Junior

 

07-379.. Unless you fancy having your dress pulled up over your head.. and getting bent over in public.. then you really need to learn what you are talking about before you post..

I am pretty sure you must get off on it though.. because this is twice that you have disputed my post with nothing but pure BS for backup..

So either produce a engine serial # for a 3ZJ ATAAC # 400hp.. or be humiliated everytime someone reads this and has access to SIS..{where Caterpillar keeps records of all engines}.. and you also will have proof that you are retarded.. and then you can give up truck driving and get your disability check started..

Also.. if you were "sucking the fuel out of the tanks of the 425's as you went by" you were in the right lane with a large straw in your mouth..


New Dynamic Fuel Ratio Control (FRC) Settings Provide Improved Engine Response

SMCS - 1278


3406C (3ZJ) Truck Engines
There have been some performance complaints on 1992 and 1993 model year 415 and 425 hp ratings. These complaints, in most cases, were tied to engine response rather than actual engine horsepower. Caterpillar now has new EPA certified FRC settings for the 425 hp standard torque rating for 1992. There are also new EPA certified FRC settings for the 1993 415 hp standard torque rating and the 425 hp standard and high torque ratings. These new settings are included in the chart that follows. These setting changes will improve the 1200 rpm engine speed turbocharger response by fifteen percent. Under some operating conditions, the setting changes will improve the 1000 rpm engine speed turbocharger response by thirty to forty percent. An engine with perceived low power or poor response may have the FRC settings changed to the new values.

 

When a timing advance and fuel pump are set right to begin with.. it is already where it needs to be.. the only adjustment would be backwards.. so if you can use your right foot and read a gauge.. there is way more to be had than with most ecm programs.. This is the only reason I don't like the E's..

I'll agree with you that over time the 3406 was beefed up.. There have been some good changes.. but not always for performance..
If 750 whp from a working truck is not enough.. then you will be spending money on either engine.. You should know better than most that the price of playing goes up with the year models and emissions laws.. and you can beef up the B model rod and main bearings.. you can even go electronic if you wish.. but I have yet to see the need for either..

Also.. the electrical wiring and sensor issues with ecm engines will shoot holes all in your bullet proof theory way more often than spun bearings ever even thought about it..

 

3406b all the way!!! Never made a better motor. Don't care if it don't get the greatest fuel milage. They were and still are great motors.

 

The B model is an awesome engine, however the E has a few changes that make it a little more user friendly. If you have any mechanical Knowledge the B is the way to go I think, but if you dont know a whole lot about working on a truck you should probably stick to the E.