64thunderbolt wrote:

Sport45, i agree but a gas eng is not built heavy enough to last several hundred thousand miles towing hard under boost. The bottom end won't last.

Another thing people don't realize is the wgt of the rotating mass. The rotating mass in a diesel is much heavier than a gasser. Once @ the needed rpm that wgt will keep it turning where a light wgt gass eng will start falling off. Remember the very old 3 cyl John Deere's? The huge flywheel on the side? That's what gave them the torque needed to do the job.

My 7.3 is arould 17/18 to 1 comp. Put that into a gasser and the bottom end won't last.

Compare it to a Nascar eng. The speedway eng runs about 16 to 1 Lucky to get 500 miles out of a $100K eng. Not going to go half a mil.

Lastly check into the hp per btu difference between gas & #2.

And to ans another comment someone made about boost. I only run about 20/22 psi. I have a small oem turbo & inj and run conversative tunes.

I'm not trying to sway anyone. Just stating the reasons I would never tow heavy in any terrain other than flat with a gasser. I run these mtns every trip in summer for over 15 yrs and started with a gasser. I know the difference.

One more thing to add then I'm outa here.
How could you cool a boosted gasser? I mean intake air? Intercooler. Well, after you make it work you are almost @ the cost of a diesel and are going to only get maybe 30% @ very most life out of it compared to the diesel.

OhhWell wrote:



I would imagine.e an intercooler would do nicely. it wouldn't be that big of a concern though because you would only need to run a few psi just to help with high altitude. they already have enough power that they don't need to push 20 psi or so. a lightly boosted modern Gasser that is taken care of should.easily see 200k+ miles.

torque torque torque... torque at the wheels can easily be boosted with gearing. I can personally put out 600lbft of torque with a 3 foot breaker bar but I sure as heck ain't ratcheting a drivetrain up a hill with 15,000 lbs attached to it. at least not very fast.

diesel has longevity and thermal efficiency. The high torque ratings on diesels is real nice for the seat-of-the-pants feeling but has nothing to do with how fast you can pull weight up a hill.

transamz9 wrote:

It's not how fast but how easy. My Vette will pull just as much just as fast as any stock pick-up but it's going to be screaming getting it done.

wnjj wrote:



But screaming is easy for a gas engine.

Pushing extra fuel into a low-reving engine is not what I call "easy" on the engine. High torque = high stress on lots of components up to and including the transmission.

Sport45 wrote:

The turbodiesels have low torque, high rpm components as well. Just look at the turbo. It takes horsepower to compress air and the turbo compresses a lot of it. The bearings don't have to be massive to keep it operational for years at a time. They just have to be designed to handle the loads they are subjected to.

Diesel and gas engines are different critters. You shouldn't be surprised that the components look different. The "stronger" diesel engine would come apart at rpm's a "weaker" gas engine might laugh at.

But then again, the old Superduty gas Ford engines (534ci, 477ci, etc) might not be able to turn the rpms of some our modern diesels. But some are still chugging along today in industrial applications after decades of service. Sevice life has nothing to do with the fuel choice. It has everything to do with the engine being properly designed and used for its application.


My Uncle owed a water hauling business in Oklahoma in the 50's an 60's. Every one of his tractor/trailer and bobtail rigs had a big gas engine. Gasoline was cheap at the time and that's what you used it if you wanted power. Diesel really only became an option when gasoline prices started to go up relative to diesel prices. Economics drove the haulers to use diesel. Poor diesel performance led to the turbodiesel. If diesel prices go high enough now, we may well see a switch back. It all depends on what will deliver the load for the least life cycle cost. I know he couldn't have cared less what his drivers thought would climb hills faster. The truck just had to make it to point A, pick up a load and deliver it to point B.

For someone who keeps their truck for 20 years and racks up 750,000 miles fuel cost might be the limiting factor in life cycle cost. If you trade vehicles every 2-3 years fuel might not have as a large an influence on the cost of ownership. For some of us it’s not about cost at all. Its just a willingness to pay for what we want. It's silly for any of us to think that what's important for us should be important for everyone. If that was the case, we wouldn't need a 2-party (or more) political system, representative government, or different flavors of ice cream at the store.

Tom isn't stupid for thinking diesel is best and Harry isn't a moron for liking gasoline. They both may have the perfect fit for themselves. That's just Tom and Harry, we'll leave the other guy out since the filter would probably delete his name anyway.

64thunderbolt wrote:

Agree, but I still want the gassers to keep to the right on the hills so I don't have to slow down for them.