In article <RZAA80-201192144538@222.18.80.28>, RZAA80@email.sps.mot.com (Jim Chott) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov20.162341.2189@nosc.mil>, koziarz@halibut.nosc.mil
|> (Walter A. Koziarz) wrote:
|> >
|> >actually, the Navistar lacks the *torque* of the Cummins, as does virtually >any other passenger-vehicle engine... 400lb-ft @ 1700rpm is nothing short of
|> >wonderful... the Navistar has more horsepower...
|>
|>
|> The Navistar in the Ford (7.3 liter version) puts out 345lb-ft @ 1400rpm,
|> and about 185 horsepower @ 3400rpm.
|> True, not quite what the Cummins has, but a good engine nonetheless.
|> However, the comment about the rest of the truck not able to handle it
|> is true. Rear is okay, but I went through 2 front axles, one front
|> differential, one front driveshaft, and the radiator core support,
|> (sheetmetal cracked up). This is with heavy 4WD use. The Dodge
|> has much heavier drivetrain throughout, and I would recommend it
|> over the Ford.
|>
|>
I'll have to check my manual when I get home, but I seem to remember that it
notes 385 lb-ft at 1400 rpm, and not 345. Your woes with the drive train seem
to indicate a weakness with the 4WD components, not a weakness with those
components connected to the Navistar engine. I would hazard a guess that you
would have had the same problems if you had the 460 gas engine. As far as
recommending the Dodge over the Ford, it appears to be the case for most
applications, but if you need a combination of a heavy, economical hauler
AND a people mover, you're out of luck looking in the Dodge stable. Cummins
will not certify the engine for use in a crew cab configuration so if you
need to move up to 6 adult size bodies in FULL comfort the Ford is the only
option.
--
Alan Hepburn "An ignorant person is one who doesn't know
National Semiconductor what you have just found out."
