Cummins 5.9 goes to 6.7. Torque goes up to a rumored 700 ft/lbswaytogo . Read more here: http://www.everytime.cummins.com/every/pdf/4103902.pdf
Yall better watch out, muy truck is pushing out an amazing 250hp, and thats only in stock form, just wait till I mod it, then it will be 260hp
Sounds interesting, too bad Dodge doesn't have a transmission to handle it. Considering their past history, I'm not sure how much I would trust their manuals or autos behind that even with the sure to be announced "upgrades". Could be similar to the 6.0 fiasco, but with transmissions this time... Still, I'm all for the one-upmanship and leap-frog games; I hope it continues for a very long time.
What part of that do you have a problem with? My enjoying the leap-frog as they each try to top each other? Or my opinions on the history of Dodge transmissions behind the Cummins?
I'd be happy if they put a stout manual transmission in there with enough gears for a double overdrive in there someplace. I have to assume the transmission situation refers to automatics, which I consider to be junk anyhow regardless who makes them.
Yes, mostly the autos. Something comparable to the 6 speed Alli but beefed a bit more would be great on a CTD-700. But they'll probably put out yet another auto that is barely sufficient (or not quite sufficient) rehash of the same thing they've done for years. And historically, the manuals aren't exactly without problems. The CTD low rpm harmonics wreaked havoc on the NV4500 due primarily to bad design by NV and bad application (behind a CTD) by Dodge. I saw this first hand with my neighbors bone stock CTD dually that eventually had 2 different "fixes" (one twice IIRC) before he finally got fed up when the synchros started going with around 100k on the clock and got rid or it. Then there is the NV5600 which is fine, but I'm told has issues with the output(?) shaft at around (IIRC) 700ft/lbs. And of course, there seems to be a general consensus that all the big-3 (most notably GM) have barely sufficient clutch/plate/wheel configs in stock form that need upgrades to survive in 700 land.
I guess I should've simply stated automatics aren't for me. I'm just old school I guess, and prefer to be able to select a gear myself. I test drove a few trucks with automatics and my last truck (92 K2500 Chevy with the 4L80e (I think it was the e version) with a 350), and didn't care for it much in that truck either. It's difficult to describe why. I guess for me automatics just don't have quite as much personality, and I just can't seem to feel "connected" to the machine when operating with an automatic. Plus I have a short attention span, and if I don't have to perform a manual input once in a while I'll get distracted too easily. I read a rumor or two on the TDR about the possibility of a 6 speed aisin automatic transmission, although that's probably just speculation. Also, I can't wait to see and take the 6.7L for a spin. I'd love to have that in a 4x4 megacab 8' bed dually.
I'll be interested in taking a look at a Mega-cab 8' dually 6.7 450/5500 series truck ... It should have a "big truck" tranny , not a pick up truck tranny ...
As to the tranny bashing.....can you even get a LBZ with a manual tranny?......I didn't think GM was even offering it. That will do a fine job of alienating a certain segment of their customers! As to the tranny rumours for the 6.7....it is supposed to be equipped with a 5 or 6 spd Aisin auto. This does make some sense since that would keep the auto tranny offering in-house for DC.....no word on a manual tranny for the 6.7, though! Since the 6.7 is a stroked 5.9 with the same bore, you will likely see a upper rpm hp limitation that didn't previously exist since the rod ratio will decline.....this will limit the ability of the engine to rev and make upper rpm hp. There is limited room for movement within the existing deck height so I wouldn't expect a change in rod length. As we get into 2007 and closer to 2010, we will probably only see bores get smaller and strokes get larger......big bore engines have a tough time with emissions. With big bore engines, combustion chambers get too large, spray patterns and flame travel become more erratic and difficult to tune and control and combustion temps will be comparitively lower when compared to another engine of the same displacement that has a bigger stroke and a smaller bore. The big stroke/small bore engine characteristics are not typically good for power and efficiency when taken to extremes but the latest emissions mandates are forcing manufacturers to head in this direction. The 2007 light duty diesel engines from the big 3 are going to be interesting....
Tranny bashing? If you're talking about my post, that was not my intent, and I think my stated opinion is also the common opinion of both owners and mechanics. No idea on the LBZ manuals. But no doubt the GM manual (or more specifically, the DM flywheels + clutch & plate) is the saddest offering of the 3. Frankly, it seems like each of the "Big 3" are absolutely determined to give their LD trucks an Achilles heel of some sort. GM with the sad manuals and a bad injector design that is both trouble prone when fed domestic fuel AND a major PIA ($$$) to work on. Some (many here) would also complain about the IFS, though I think that it is a good differentiator and satisfies a market that would otherwise be ignored. Ford with the 6.0 fiasco and their own share of transmission problems even before the 6.0, though the new auto sounds promising, and the ZF seems well adequate even for reasonable performance levels. Then, of course there is Dodge without a true crew cab (and even now with no long bed), no MD offerings, the NV4500 plagued with problems, and for the entire run since the Cummins was introduced, an auto that often gives trouble with even moderate use at stock power levels, much less with hard use and/or increased power. Thanks for the great info and perspective on the changes coming down the pipe.
But , it might put reliability in a higher place ..... Diesels are "supposed" to be long stroke ,lower RPM torque monsters ... swinging heavy diesel rods around at 3400 RPM in a v8 just goes against my "diesel thinking" ... less RPMs and more tranny gears
1) The term tranny "bashing" was not an attack......it was used simply to spark some lively debate!:stir: .....Nothing more.....It is your opinion.waytogo 2) Now, onto my opinion .....Don't get me started on the rediculous Mega Cab. I agree that it is silly not to offer a long box and that short box dually is U-G-L-Y!!! I think the Mega Cab is a truck that is finally too big for it's own good. As to the NV4500 being "plagued" with problems. It did have one problem...certainly not multiple problems.... abiet one significant problem. But, IMO, "plagued" is inaccurate since the 5th gear problem was properly fixed. I have 343,000 km on my bombed 3500 that grosses out quite heavy from time to time and have had no problems with my NV4500. By far, what seems to have happened to perpetuate this problem is the ill-informed mechanics and aftermarket that caused and created many poorly designed so-called 5th gear "fixes". The properly redesigned 5th gear and shaft from New Venture works fine and as demonstrated time and again that it is certainly up to the power of a bombed CTD. As to the other manuals from DC, there seems to be very little trouble with the NV5600 and the G56 when behind a bombed CTD. As to the autos, I had 221,000 km on my auto with a mildly bombed CTD before the converter lock up clutch packed it in. With a BD X-converter and a properly built budget-minded tranny, it ran another 100,000 km at about the 450 hp/ 1000 ft/lb level before I had to sell the truck. I know the new owner well and it continues to run trouble free. That said, I do agree that a completely stock 47RE or RH will probably have converter trouble at around the 650-700 ft/lb range. I can't help but notice that when the Ford or Ally autos are exposed to this torque level that their converters perform quite poorly too. Please note that I have no experience with the new 6 spd Ally version behind the LBZ so I can't comment on that.....but I did notice they did switch to a completely redesigned, larger converter to handle the 650 ft/lbs!
I would imagine Dodge will put some sort of beefy 6 spd auto behind the 6.7L. From all the trouble in the past, I think they would make sure the next trans is stout, like what the other two brands offer. BadDog, Your neighbor had some bad luck with a lemon. Yes, the 5th gear nut has always been a problem, but besides that the 4500 has been one of the most reliable and stout trans out there. His syncro problems were probably due to bad luck or a defective trans. The 5600 doesn't have any output shaft problems at moderate power levels, that I know of. What I have heard is that the output shaft becomes a weak link at 1,400+ft lbs of torque or something like that. My dad's '02 HO makes about 700ft lbs at the flywheel and no output shaft problems yet.
Yeah, maybe my NV4500 opinion (which is all it is, I've never claimed to be an expert) is colored by my neighbor's experience which I witnessed semi-firsthand, and then backed up by all the typical internet noise. I don't recall which "fixes" he had applied, not sure if he ever gave details. Probably didn't know himself since he basically dropped it off with an "expert" to get if "fixed". I readily agree that the 4500 is practically bullet proof by all accounts (probably among THE best trans available behind an LD gasser) when behind anything but the CTD. And my comment on the 5600 theoretical limits was just repeating something I've been told and read. Sorry if that was not clear, I have no first hand knowledge there. On the autos, I've personally seen more than one expire on "stock" CTDs with 100k or so on the clock. But that may be like the 4500 already discussed and/or the 700R4 reports that are so common. While they do lay down with higher frequency that they should, they are not exactly a ticking time bomb as attested by several on this and other boards. <shrug> But it is still a "well known" (accuracy not withstanding) weakness in the Dodge offering that I would hope they would correct before dropping a 700 ft/lb CTD into their LD chassis. If not, then I still think they may be opening up a can of worms for warranty work much like Ford has with the early 6.0s. On autos in general, I agree with the "need a converter upgrade" on all of them. Even the Alli could use an upgrade there, at least on the LLY/LB7 offerings. Then again, my bone stock Alli has been running in 700+ land with a heavy foot since 2003 without a single complaint *yet*. I don't think the stock Dodge or Ford autos (excepting the current Ford that I know nothing about) would stand a chance in the same application. Someday I do want to do an upgrade so I can use the upper "levels" of my Juice module.
Well pin a rose on your nose... I've tried to get my dad to go for a little more power, but he seems content with Mach 1 injectors. The thing is he wants to keep the stock exhaust and intake. That pretty much limits any other power mods.
