RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Tired of getting slammed 4.7L TQ curve

From: Stlaurent Mr Steven (STLAURENTS@mctssa.usmc.mil)
Date: Wed Aug 30 2000 - 16:20:13 EDT


Sorry! I would do the reverse. Dyno is a preferred choice over real world
feelings.

-------------------------------------------
Steven St.Laurent
Test Engineer
Test Branch, GSD, MCTSSA
MARCORSYSCOM, USMC
760-725-2506 (DSN 365-2506)
Work:mailto:stlaurents@mctssa.usmc.mil
Home:mailto:saint1958@home.com

 -----Original Message-----
From: Chapell, Ron [mailto:RChapell@rlps.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 11:53 AM
To: 'dakota-truck@buffnet.net'
Subject: DML: RE: RE: RE: RE: Tired of getting slammed 4.7L TQ curve

This is just my opinion but I would take real world results over a dyno
sheet anyday. Dyno sheets don't mean sh!+ if you can't prove it. JMHO

Chapell

-----Original Message-----
From: Barret, Matt [mailto:MATT_BARRET@earthtech.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 2:48 PM
To: 'dakota-truck@buffnet.net'
Subject: DML: RE: RE: RE: Tired of getting slammed 4.7L TQ curve

I'd like to see your dyno graph for your 3.9L, apparently you haven't seen a
dyno graph for a 4.7L, cause its torque curve is as flat or flatter and ALOT
higher than a stock 3.9L. You are basing your observation on assumption and
feeling, and not facts. At 1200 rpm the 4.7L puts out more torque to the
rear wheels than the maximum flywheel torque of a 3.9L (220).
What exactly is "smooth" when referring to the torque curve?? Lets talk
dyno graphs and not what this truck "felt" like or that truck "felt" like.
I know you're not slamming the 4.7L, but lets talk facts here, instead of
fiction and dreams.

__________________________________
Matt--VA--Y2K-HEMI `00 Sport Plus RC
4.7L 5spd. 14.48 @ 92.40 MPH
209.9 RWHP/285 RWTQ
ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ

-----Original Message-----
<From: Kenneth Berntsen [mailto:kenneth@berntsen.cc]
<Sent: Wednesday, August 30, 2000 1:45 PM
<To: 'dakota-truck@buffnet.net'
<Subject: DML: RE: RE: Tired of getting slammed-kinda long

<Ya know,

<HP is one thing but the V6 has something the 4.7 doesn't. Not trying to
<slam the 4.7 but the 6 and 318 both have a nice smooth torque curve. When
I
<pull my boat out with my 3.9 I just giver her a little gas to get the RPMs
<up to around 1200 and she just rolls right up the ramp. Pulled it with a
<friends 4.7 and yes by all means it pulled it right up the ramp but just
<didn't seam to come as naturally to that engine. I hope the new 3.7 V6
<doesn't inherit the torque curve of the 4.7.

<Just my 2 cents.

-----Original Message-----
From: Stlaurent Mr Steven [mailto:STLAURENTS@mctssa.usmc.mil]
Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2000 9:48 AM
To: 'dakota-truck@buffnet.net'
Subject: DML: RE: Tired of getting slammed-kinda long

<The problem with the old V6, no Bernd it is not generalization, the HP was
<not quite there yet. With the new line of V6 coming it will surpass the
<current V6 and some of the V-8 on the current market.

-------------------------------------------
Steven St.Laurent
Test Engineer
Test Branch, GSD, MCTSSA
MARCORSYSCOM, USMC
760-725-2506 (DSN 365-2506)
Work:mailto:stlaurents@mctssa.usmc.mil
Home:mailto:saint1958@home.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 11:53:50 EDT