DiamondSCattleCo
Well-known member
jasrnch,
Yeah, thats not exactly a fair comparison. The 6.0L makes 570 lbft. Even at highway RPMs, the 6.0L is making more torque than the 97 5.9.
Gertman,
The issue I have with high RPM torque is that you're not revving 2500 RPM with a diesel truck. At 55mph cruising speed, the 97 5.9 is revving around 2000 RPM, the 97 Powerstroke a hundred or so less. Which means less available torque for acceleration than the 5.9. In my old line of work, I saw loaded PSs outpaced by loaded Cummins trucks time and again.
I do however agree with what you say about the 7.3 being a good engine. Its too bad Navistar hadn't kept the 7.3 and simply upgraded the injection system to a good common rail system. I've always considered the 7.3 to be the second best diesel ever planted in a light truck.
Rod
Yeah, thats not exactly a fair comparison. The 6.0L makes 570 lbft. Even at highway RPMs, the 6.0L is making more torque than the 97 5.9.
Gertman,
The issue I have with high RPM torque is that you're not revving 2500 RPM with a diesel truck. At 55mph cruising speed, the 97 5.9 is revving around 2000 RPM, the 97 Powerstroke a hundred or so less. Which means less available torque for acceleration than the 5.9. In my old line of work, I saw loaded PSs outpaced by loaded Cummins trucks time and again.
I do however agree with what you say about the 7.3 being a good engine. Its too bad Navistar hadn't kept the 7.3 and simply upgraded the injection system to a good common rail system. I've always considered the 7.3 to be the second best diesel ever planted in a light truck.
Rod
