Last two episodes of the Ike Gauntlet 2.0
11-19-2013, 05:15 PM
#51
Ok, so I kind of see where your going with this. The chevy might have had a little more at the top end of the rpm range. It was able to demonstrate this by dropping one gear lower than the ford. IF there was no rpm limitations on the chevy AND it could stay in that lower gear for the extent of the uphill portion, then yes, I too believe that the chevy could possibly be a little faster than the ford while pulling that grade.
However, that was not the case here. The ford was able to maintain a higher gear longer at a lower rpm because at that lower rpm the ford actually makes more power which allowed it to stay in that higher gear.
However, that was not the case here. The ford was able to maintain a higher gear longer at a lower rpm because at that lower rpm the ford actually makes more power which allowed it to stay in that higher gear.
11-19-2013, 05:24 PM
#52
Inebriated 4 ur safety
I agree with the comments in the video itself. This is a good break down and the F150 obviously didn't have the grunt to accelerate as hard as the 6.2L to shift as often but the F150 did shift twice but it had less power to make it more obvious. Guarantee if they MANUALLY forced it to hold the gear it would have kept 65+ in the Silverado with no issues.
NO it wouldn't. I did some more research and found out that in manual mode the rev limit is 6,000 rpm and not the 5,750 rpm in regular drive. At 65 mph in 2nd gear the truck would be over 6000 rpm which is past it's max speed/fuel cutoff. So that means the max that truck can go in 2nd gear is 64.6 mph even in manual mode. If you needed to go faster then it would have had to up-shift and we all now what happened then with the speed dropping like a rock when it shifted into 3rd. So this statement is false, and my previous statement about the rev limit at 5,750 rpm is updated. The Ecoboost had enough power to gain speed in 3rd gear and the 6.2L didn't which is why the Ecoboost was going faster with less rpms.
Oh and notice "premium is recommended" in the GM spec sheet? All of the 6.2L spec sheets say that so I wonder what power this thing had if they were running regular unleaded and the 420/460 power numbers are with premium. http://www.gmpowertrain.com/VehicleE...nProducts.aspx
Last edited by Al Kohalic; 11-19-2013 at 05:31 PM.
11-19-2013, 05:31 PM
#53
Meaner than ymeski56
One thing I forgot to add in my last comment was how poorly the Silverado handled the tongue weight. It dropped 2.5 inches with only ~900 pounds on the rear end as opposed to the Ford's ~1 inch.
As far as transmission shifting, I sure hope Chevy's 3rd gear isn't an OD but it might explain their mileage numbers haha. None of the vehicles ever got close to OD towing up that hill.
Chevy needs to reassess their tow ratings and actually be honest.
As far as transmission shifting, I sure hope Chevy's 3rd gear isn't an OD but it might explain their mileage numbers haha. None of the vehicles ever got close to OD towing up that hill.
Chevy needs to reassess their tow ratings and actually be honest.
11-19-2013, 05:34 PM
#54
Hey BigTexasTundra, ya headin' over to the Chevy forums next? You looking to buy an Ecoboost? Tough to beat, huh? Wait until the next one 
Last edited by LyteFly; 11-19-2013 at 06:24 PM. Reason: Removed link to TundraTalk. It has mysteriously disappeared.
The following 2 users liked this post by LyteFly:
Bryson (11-19-2013),
crockett56 (11-19-2013)
11-19-2013, 05:41 PM
#55
Inebriated 4 ur safety
One thing I forgot to add in my last comment was how poorly the Silverado handled the tongue weight. It dropped 2.5 inches with only ~900 pounds on the rear end as opposed to the Ford's ~1 inch.
As far as transmission shifting, I sure hope Chevy's 3rd gear isn't an OD but it might explain their mileage numbers haha. None of the vehicles ever got close to OD towing up that hill.
Chevy needs to reassess their tow ratings and actually be honest.
As far as transmission shifting, I sure hope Chevy's 3rd gear isn't an OD but it might explain their mileage numbers haha. None of the vehicles ever got close to OD towing up that hill.
Chevy needs to reassess their tow ratings and actually be honest.
Here is the gearing between the two.
GM 6L80
Ford 6R80
As you can see these transmissions are nearly identical which put each truck nearly identical with everything besides their engine. This was an all motor show and the 6.2L lost going up the hill no if's, and's, or but's about it. However it did do a lot better job then the EB going down the hill.
11-19-2013, 05:44 PM
#56
Retired and loving it!
One thing I forgot to add in my last comment was how poorly the Silverado handled the tongue weight. It dropped 2.5 inches with only ~900 pounds on the rear end as opposed to the Ford's ~1 inch.
As far as transmission shifting, I sure hope Chevy's 3rd gear isn't an OD but it might explain their mileage numbers haha. None of the vehicles ever got close to OD towing up that hill.
Chevy needs to reassess their tow ratings and actually be honest.
As far as transmission shifting, I sure hope Chevy's 3rd gear isn't an OD but it might explain their mileage numbers haha. None of the vehicles ever got close to OD towing up that hill.
Chevy needs to reassess their tow ratings and actually be honest.
I get a kick out of those here saying that if the 6.2 could be manually held near redline (!!) it would pull that hill no problem......who here wants to listen to that V8 at 6,000 rpm for MILES.....makes my teeth hurt just thinking about it.
This is one of the reasons that I moved from my 5.4 to the EB to tow our TT. I'd MUCH rather listen to the EB at 2,900 rpm doing the same work pulling a hill that the 5.4 was doing at (an unhappy) 4,000...........much less listening to that 6.2 at nearly 6,000 (!!).
The following users liked this post:
Al Kohalic (11-19-2013)
11-19-2013, 05:46 PM
#57
Hey BigTexasTundra, ya headin' over to the Chevy forums next? You looking to buy an Ecoboost? Tough to beat, huh? Wait until the next one
Hopefully by then Ford releases something on it.
11-19-2013, 05:47 PM
#58
I too was very surprised that the Chebbie dropped that far, and they did not mention the difference after hooking up.
I get a kick out of those here saying that if the 6.2 could be manually held near redline (!!) it would pull that hill no problem......who here wants to listen to that V8 at 6,000 rpm for MILES.....makes my teeth hurt just thinking about it.
This is one of the reasons that I moved from my 5.4 to the EB to tow our TT. I'd MUCH rather listen to the EB at 2,900 rpm doing the same work pulling a hill that the 5.4 was doing at (an unhappy) 4,000...........much less listening to that 6.2 at nearly 6,000 (!!).
I get a kick out of those here saying that if the 6.2 could be manually held near redline (!!) it would pull that hill no problem......who here wants to listen to that V8 at 6,000 rpm for MILES.....makes my teeth hurt just thinking about it.
This is one of the reasons that I moved from my 5.4 to the EB to tow our TT. I'd MUCH rather listen to the EB at 2,900 rpm doing the same work pulling a hill that the 5.4 was doing at (an unhappy) 4,000...........much less listening to that 6.2 at nearly 6,000 (!!).
11-19-2013, 05:52 PM
#59
Retired and loving it!
The real comparison would be to see what the Tundra V8 and the Chebbie 6.2 are making for torque at only 2,100 rpm. The EB starts to make its really flat torque curve at that point, and I'll bet it takes at least another couple thousand of rpm for either of the other engines to match the torque the EB is making much lower in the rpm range.
11-19-2013, 05:54 PM
#60
Senior Member
All I can about this is WOW. Watch the video again. There are a couple reasons the Ford beat the Chevy. #1 the peak torque comes on much lower. It doesn't need to rev to the sky to make the power so it could do so without hunting. As posted the gear ratios are very close between the two. This is very desirable in towing & even a daily driver. Peak power at the top of the power-band is only really desirable in a racing application. #2 it's a forced induction engine. When running at high altitude the turbo engine will lose less power because it artificially crams more air in already. The engine blows off boost at sea level & when the air is thinner it can maintain power by simply not blowing off as much of it's boost. The naturally aspirated engine has no coping mechanism and simply looses power. Put a turbo on the 6.2 or a supercharger & it would be a different story. But then that's not what the point of the test was is it? Also if the 6.2 loses 30% of it's power at altitude its down to 322ftlbs at peak. There is no way it will be able to keep up with the low end boosted power of the Ecoboost. On flat terrain at sea level the 6.2 might be faster but the Ecoboost does the job quite well enough. No one ever goes drag racing pulling 10k lbs. Well no one with any brains. Simply put the Ford while over loaded wins & the GM truck is over rated since it can't keep up under it's posted limits.
On the braking l would say two more things I can say is #1 the gain was obviously not set correctly on any of those trucks. #2 If they would have actually used tow/haul mode downhill like they did on the Chevy the brakes would have been cooler.
On the braking l would say two more things I can say is #1 the gain was obviously not set correctly on any of those trucks. #2 If they would have actually used tow/haul mode downhill like they did on the Chevy the brakes would have been cooler.
The following 2 users liked this post by Magnus1350:
Adobe2X (11-19-2013),
Al Kohalic (11-19-2013)
