What I do understand is that my 12V got better fuel economy (that's FE if you need engineer speak I guess) than 2 24V trucks over a long period of time (months) that I feel help make up for differences in driving style and loads. My 12V was also dead reliable for the 250,000 miles that I owned it (sold it with 365K on it). So, while I can't quote your lame BSFC stats I can quote real world stats. If you've never owned any of the three you can't possibly try to argue what one is better.
DrBoost wrote: If you've never owned any of the three you can't possibly try to argue what one is better.
never owned them. Had all three in my lab at the same time.
bsfc isn't lame? That's how engines are bought and sold.. Bsfc man.. It rules class 8.
and if you all want to know why I don't like dodge.. Let me talk to you about Chrysler-supplier relationships for complex systems..
Basically a group of Germans(DCX daze) decends upon your plant. The disect your design and manufacturing operations then give you "help" with your product. Then they force you to implement some of their ideas, most of which you've already tried and know are worthless or are already in progress in testing, but aren't proven to be good enough for production.
They then beat the living crap out of you until you give them a price reduction and implement their ideas. Then when their ideas don't work and your product fails in the field they deny anything and demand money back for warranty costs...
Thats why I dislike dodge. Yes, I know this happens in automotive. No, I never had another customer do it. Not even Walmart, and they are cheap.
ignorant wrote:93gsxturbo wrote: ...just because Holset fired your ignorant butt doesnt give you the right to bash Dodge products.thanks for being a total douche. It's cool, I now fire guys like you for a living. Watch out who you tick off.
You crack me up, dude!
93gsxturbo wrote:ignorant wrote:You crack me up, dude!93gsxturbo wrote: ...just because Holset fired your ignorant butt doesnt give you the right to bash Dodge products.thanks for being a total douche. It's cool, I now fire guys like you for a living. Watch out who you tick off.
Yeah I know.. Actually, It's partially true. I'm doing a ton of strategic resourcing of parts. Lots of stuff going overseas.
btw though I am currently being sent around the globe to reduce direct costs... if you know what that means.
Also try to find anywhere that I denegrate my previous employers product.
Yeah I am pretty familiar with direct costs, indirect costs, burden rates, overheads, fixed costs, etc. Deal with them on a daily basis, actually. Usually busting balls in the engineering department for designing stuff that cant be produced for cost-effective means.
naa man.. It wasn't meant as a slur..
It was just corporate code for I'm going get a bunch of folks fired...
lame, but I've got a plan to reduce only temporaries and not "real" employees.
edit:wow.. i just reread the posts I just wrote.. I'm berkeleying drunk.
ignorant wrote:DrBoost wrote: If you've never owned any of the three you can't possibly try to argue what one is better.never owned them. Had all three in my lab at the same time. bsfc isn't lame? That's how engines are bought and sold.. Bsfc man.. It rules class 8.
Ok, you are right. The 12V is terrible, the 24V is the bomb dog! You and your engineering-speak acronyms are king and rule the internet roost. My quarter of a million miles of experience means nothing (although THAT is how engines are bought and sold in the real consumer world) and you are smarter than I. Everything you say is right and I'm just trying to make myself look smart by pushing things into other peoples mouths (or keyboards) and making that the central point of the pointless argument.
Word.
I value the size of my e-weiner.
sometimes when I wear leopard print spandex, I can't take my eyes off my own butt. It's luscious.. Like two pats of butter on top of a cracker barrel biscuit.
really.. don't go making statements about something being "engineering wise" better or some crap if you can't back it up with data. sorry you lose.
Ok.. you want to know the funny part
Cummins dosen't disclose BSFC numbers to the general public..
ha ha haa ha ha I so funnay.
Turbo Diesel Register has them posted.
93gsxturbo wrote: Turbo Diesel Register has them posted.
they are available through dealers if you know cpl. duh!
Actually (ASSuming you were talking about the Cummins motor used in a Dodge Ram, and "The Dealer" being a Cummins dealer, not a Dodge dealer) not so due to the politics of a motor that was only sourced for one very specific application, but apparently you know more than me so I will just let that one go.
93, he knows more than EVERYONE here. Haven't you figured that one out yet. He takes one or two things different people say, combine them, remove them from context and throws some obscure stat (that may or may not even exist) and proves a point that nobody cares about or has even discussed, to be true-ish. I mean seriously, we were talking about the reliability of said engine and he's talking about something that has nothing to do with reliability. But because that's the only thing he learned before failing out of engineering 101 he keeps throwing that up. Jeezus, it' like my three year old when he just keeps saying "why, why why?" except my 3 year old has an excuse, he's 3.
He spouts crap about the only thing he knows, some dumb a$$ stat that he swears is the only consideration when buying an engine (if this were true there would only be one engine out there, the one with the best XYZ statistic) and ignores the actual day-in-day-out ownership/repair/economy/justplainlike experience of folks that own them. He's had 3 in the lab where he cleans the tools and benches so that makes him an expert?
You just can't have an intelligent discussion with somebody like that, just an ignorant one.
Having the biggest e-wiener doesn't mean you have to BE the biggest one does it?
I'm done. I feel myself being pulled down to the lowest common denominator.
DrBoost wrote: I mean seriously, we were talking about the reliability of said engine and he's talking about something that has nothing to do with reliability. But because that's the only thing he learned before failing out of engineering 101 he keeps throwing that up.
three quick points..
understand what we are aruging about. Reliability never entered into the equation. When someone says that something "engineering wise", to me, that means that the design of the components are all the best. Yes, 12v's are very reliable, like a hammer. But.. the actual design of the components could be optimized to remove some inefficiencies in the engine that weren't readily noticed when the engine was designed. (I mostly attribute to the poor CFD modeling of the mid to late 80's). The emissions of the 12v motors are also quite toxic. NOx is through the roof. I'd say the design is far from optimal. Be very careful what line you are arguing. Also.. Remember that arguing with an engineeer is like wrestling with a pig in the mud, after a while you start to realize the pig likes it.
Failed engineering 101? No. Sorry, However, I'd be more than happy to send you my resume and discuss it in detail offline. I did leave engineering though, I was at the point in my career where It is choose a broader path or get pigeon holed. It's actually a really interesting story.
The BSFC of most of the early mechanical 12v motors is marginally better than the early 24v motors. yes.. ZOMG. I was arguing a line of false logic. If you had actual gone to the data you could have proven me wrong quite easily. Ohh well.. A teaching point lost.
You'll need to log in to post.
