mudguppy
New member
- 1,587
- 15
- 0
- Location
- duncan, sc
the new Fords do.No modern diesels that I know of use air to water intercoolers...
Steel Soldiers now has a few new forums, read more about it at: New Munitions Forums!
the new Fords do.No modern diesels that I know of use air to water intercoolers...
ATW intercoolers are more effecient than ATA 'coolers across the entire range.... Just wondering if a A-to-W is more efficent in lower boost applications? ...
seriously? even though it's evident where your loyalty lies, such a broad statement removes most of the credibility of anything else you just posted due to the enormous generalities and, for the most part, inaccuracies.... Modern diesel like the Powerjokes and Cummins have less than ideally designed heads with medicore air flow. That being the main reason the powerjokes and cummins use so much smaller overall turbo's than the Durama motors which have a pretty strong flow design. ...
it's been tried and proven to be a lesser performer than properly sized sequentials [on Cummins, not a MF].... I my opinion I would build a balanced multi fuel with a low pressure twin turbo setup I would say runnin an HX35 gated to 8-10 psi feeding each of the 3 cylinders will make an incredibly well rounded engine.
why not? they're all 4 valve heads...... Youc can't for one second tell me the 5.9 ... 24 valve heads will flow as well as the 32 valve d-max...
Somebody should talk to Brooks or similar about the pistons. They could certainly be reduced in weight w/o problems by a piston outfit that knows what they're doing. Should be that expensive either. I'd talk to a good piston guy first before putting them on a mill but once you figure out exactly how much to trim you could get a bunch of stress off the rods. Premium wrist pins are easy too. And ARP bolts together with polish the rods to eliminate stress risers. Perhaps fire ring the block -- couple of hundred $$ but then you're done with head gasket issues.Metal is a lot stronger in compression than tension. Power compresses the rod (where it is strong). The piston reversal at TDC puts the rod in tension. The force increases at an exponential rate as RPM goes up. This is why a lot of rods fail. Tension can also cause the big end to go out of round at extreme RPM. It takes only .001"deformation to turn a rod bearing into an oil wiper.
Increased power puts lot of thermal stress on the pistons. (deleted) These have a high surface area piston crown (w/o steel or thermal coatings). Their high compression ratio is not what you want when running high boost.
I have my LD (turbo added) turned up and set to run 12psi at 2500rpm (13 at 2600). It has been reliable. EGT will run high under heavy towing loads especially at the lower end or the operation range(~1500rpm). I consider 1000*F too high for continuous duty (post turbo probe) and prefer to stay at or under 950*F. It the duration is short (less than a minute) I think 1000*F is OK.
LDS is turbo -- No superchargers that I've ever heard of. A Whipple or Paxton supercharger would be a serious upgrade IMO for these engines. Boost right from the bottom where engines stresses are still low. Turbos produce max boost at higher rpm where centrifugal stresses are ganging up with combustion stresses to tear up the engine. i think a Whipple would make a HUGE difference in comfort level on hills of a laden deuce and make a bobber scoot!I was under the impression that the LDS engines was Supercharged, as in an actual supercharger. While the LDT models were Turbocharged. But according to some of the comments I read here it seems like that both the LDS and the LDT's were turbocharged, or?.
But wouldn't a path to "higher" power or more torque be to find a modern or more recent "equivalent" engine for the M35 or other model of truck and either drop it in, shoehorn in it etc. Would mean retaining the MultiFuel capacity of the engine, but at the same time hopefully get more power and torque with a modern or newer engine. Obviously wouldn't be a cheap solution or an easy solution. But alas its an option all the same, or would one struggle to actually find a modern day MF engine that could reasonably be fitted inside the engine compartment of the M35 or other MV truck...?
I won't belabor the point but I'm not convinced that cutting smoke was even the primary reason Continental added the turbo. Better fuel efficiency and more hp had to be way high on the list. It was the '60s, remember? EVERYBODY wanted more HP and the builder's were delivering. The small block Chevy (born same week as me) went from 265 cu in to 283. Buick brought out the first all aluminum V8 gas engine. Big block Chev was born. Ford brought out their big one, too. Mopar brought out big hemi (wow - serious hp w/o hardly trying!)Correct. The LDS and LDT both have turbochargers except for a few. The turbos were added to cut down on the smoke. You will find either engine with either a C or D turbo. My LDS has a C. A few LDS's have wastegate turbos but they are rare.
I would argue that turbines (Brayton cycle??) are not comparable 'engines' and you sure don't want to feed them fuel!hornetfan, I just thought that perhaps a more modern and contemporate MF engine could serve as a viable upgrade for a Mxxx truck, provided you could make it fit inside the engine compartment. I mean at least some of the vehicles used by the US army etc are still multifuel, and no I am even going to bother mentioning the ambrams since that would be too much of a headache to even consider .
But I mean the German Leopard I+II's and the British Challanger I+II's are MF TDI's so one would think or at least expect that innovation in regards to MF has at least gotten a few or more steps better since the days where the Deuce and its cousins were produced/released.
Surface vehicles NEVER see anything close to continuous duty!! The very thought is hilarious. "Continuous duty" by Cummins definition is commercial marine duty where the engine will see rated power operation continuously for multiple days of 24 hr operation. Think offshore fish boat or 24-7 ferry duty.But back to the topic. What is the anticipated max realistic HP that we might see from a MF? Anyone ever run a turned up multi on a dyno?
We have to keep in mind the duty cycle for the engine. In a 13,000# truck an 80 to 100% duty cycle is going to be required. The multi has a 100% duty cycle at full output.
What is the realistic duty cycle of a 5.9? A duramax?, A 7.3 or similar? (I think Bjorn posted some interesting comparisons some time ago covering this.)
It is no good to have 500hp available if it can only be used for a short time.
FWIW, the multi in the D4800 trim makes rated power for prime power generation and that is 100% duty cycle, and the only difference is the oil filters and the injection pump.
All are imperfect.Imperfection can be beautiful.
We get it, advertisements are annoying!
Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website like our supporting vendors. Their ads help keep Steel Soldiers going. Please consider disabling your ad blockers for the site. Thanks!