(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

Diesel torque gas vers diesel attempt II

L

LJD

Well-known Member
Looking at some of posts - I can see how these myths get started.

Again - diesel versus gas when bore and stroke are the SAME and aspiration is the SAME.

Nonsense. Show us one engine that came as gas and diesel and the diesel has more torque at lower RPM (with equal aspiration) I can show you many that do NOT.

Long stroke is what makes torque. Just like putting a piece of pipe on a wrench handle. Just so happens that most engines now adays with long strokes are diesels. Gas engines usually have shorter strokes to make higher RPMs.

One example of many:
Deere three cylinder engines with equal bore and stroke (except 135 gas has shorter stroke):

135 gas: 43 HP @ 2500 RPM, 110 TQ @ 1300 RPM
152 gas: 42 HP @ 2500 RPM, 110 TQ @ 1300 RPM
152 diesel: 42 HP @ 2500 RPM, 110 TQ @ 1300 RPM
164 diesel: 42 HP @ 2500 RPM, 110 TQ @ 1300 RPM
 
Have to compare a gas and diesel with identical ports, manifolds , valves and the biggy, CAM timing.
The diesels have very short cam duration and valve overlap . That they build lots of cylinder pressure at low rpms but fall on their face and starve for air when reved up.
Can"t put a gas cam in an ordinary diesel as the valves will hit the pistons at TDC . If the pistons had deep enough valve reliefs cut to allow long duration and overlap. The compression and expansion ratio would drop to the point where cold starting would be difficult.
We all have seen these long duration cammed diesel puller engines that make lots of high rpm HP. However starting requires a high powered starter, pull starting and/or a snort of ether. The compression ratio is low due to cam duration and high manifold pressure.
 
What is lost on mechanical advantage with the short stroke is gained on the larger surface area of the piston to have more thrust upon it.
 
A few more examples. I'm still waiting for somebody to show me the diesels with more torque the same bore/stroke gas engines.

7.3 diesel (445) in Ford trucks was made from the IH MV446 HD gas truck engine.

Ford-IH 7.3 diesel (445 cubic inches), no turbo: 185 HP @ 3000 RPM, 360 lbs. max TQ @ 1400 RPM. 4.1" and stroke 4.18"

IH gasoline 7.3 (446 cubic inches), no turbo, 235 net hp at 3600 rpm, 8:1 compression ... 385 lbs. max torque at 2600 RPM, 4.125" bore x 4.18-"stroke


Oldsmobile 5.7 (350) diesel - 120 HP @ 3600 RPM and 222 TQ @ 1900 RPM

Oldsmobile 5.7 (350) gas engine - 170 HP@3800 and 275 ft/lbs of torque @ 2000.
Both 4” bore X 3.38” stroke


Tractor engines with equal sizes in gas and diesel (same bore and stroke):

Hercules DD and GO engines (Oliver)

130 gas: 30 horse, 97 lbs. torque @1400 RPM
130 diesel: 30 horse, 96 lbs. torque @1200 RPM

Hercules 133 c.i. engines (IXB and DIX4B)

133 gas 43 horse @ 2600 RPM, 92 lbs. torque @ 1800 RPM, 3 1/4" bore by 4" stroke. IXB engine.

133 diesel 45.5 horse @ 3000 RPM, 96 lbs. torque @ 1500 RPM, 3 1/4" bore by 4" stroke. DIX4B engine

Continental 157 c.i. engines (G157 and GD157)

157 c.i. gas 37.7 horse @ 2000 RPM, 121 lbs. torque @ 2000 RPM. 3 3/8" bore X 4 3/8" stroke.

157 c.i. diesel 37.5 horse @ 2000 RPM, 109 lbs. torque @ 1200 RPM. 3 3/8" bore X 4 3/8" stroke.

Waukesha 135 GK and DK engines:

426 c.i. gas: 138 horse @ 2400 RPM, 264 lbs. torque @ 1200 RPM. 4 1/4" bore by 5" stroke.

426 c.i. diesel: 140 horse @ 2400 RPM, 259 lbs. torque @ 1600 RPM. 4 1/4" bore by 5" stroke.

Buda 153 c.i. engines (4B153 and 4BD153)

153 c.i. gas, 49 horse @ 2800 RPM, 112 lbs. torque @ 1500 RPM, 3 7/16" bore X 4 1/8" stroke.

153 c.i. diesel, 40 horse @ 2400 RPM, 102 lbs. torque @ 1400 RPM, 3 7/16" bore X 4 1/8" stroke.

Here are a few examples of tractor engines with equal sized power ratings in gas and diesel with different sized engines - and also two equal sized in gas and diesel:

Deere 2010 (and 1010 with diesel version)
Note that both 145 engines are equal bore and stroke, and the gas has more torque)

145 gas: 39 horse, 114 lbs. torque @ 1500 RPM
145 diesel: 36 horse, 95 lbs. torque @ 1500 RPM
165 diesel: 46 horse, 119 lbs. torque @ 1500 RPM
Those are specs published by Waukesha. The gas 426 runs 6.2 to 1 compressoin ratio. Diesel runs 17.5 to 1. Horsepower is stated as "rated horsepower" and torque as "maxium torque - RPM."
So the 426 diesel runs a max torque of 259 lb. ft. at 1600 RPM.
Gas 426 264 lb. ft. @ 1200 RPM

Mack had a pile of long-stroke gas engines.

707 cubic inch gasoline Mack had 5" bore by 6" stroke. 232 horse @ 2100 RPM and 617 lbs. of torque @ 1200 RPM.

707 cubic inch diesel Mach had 5" bore by 6" stroke. 201 horse @ 2100 RPM and 602 lbs. of torque @ 1500 RPM.

Mack's "little” 464 in gas and diesel:

464 gas engine, 464,cubic inches, 4 7/16" bore by 5" stroke, 185 horse @ 2800 RPM and 380 lbs. torque @ 1400 RPM

464 diesel engine, 464 cubic inches, 4 7/16" bore by 5" stroke, 140 horse @ 2600 RPM and 325 lbs. torque @ 1800 RPM
 
That, RPMs, and other things.

I'm not a gas or diesel hater. Just mystified at some diesel "myths" out there.

For my use, diesels were great when diesel fuel was cheaper then gas and the "diesel option" for a pickup truck - new - was only an extra $1000. The "diesel equipment package" in 1982 for a GM full sized truck was an extra $996. At that time a new 2WD 1/2 ton truck from GM was $6600 for gas and $7600 for a diesel. Things have changed a big with the disparity.
 
if you want to compare the gas to diesel pickup put them in the mountains diesel will come out ahead ,we used a V-10,2-6.0 chev and a 6.6 duramax all automatic transmission 4wd when the access roads got long and steep i'm talking about steep to the point that low range in the transfer case would only cause you to spin out, the gas engines would start out at locked in low gear turning around 6000 rpm's and stall out not spin out before they could reach the top and come sliding backwards,kinda makes one nervous when there's a couple hundred foot drop if you loose control before you land will also show one how WORTHLESS AND DANGEROUS abs brakes are,the duramax would only turn 3750 rpm's but it would never stall it would go all the way or spin out using the same gear,i realize that the 6.6 is a little larger but if i make no mistake the difference is referred to as torque curve that is were the diesel gets the advantage
 
Maybe some people have not read the original post? I made the comparison to a gas and diesel engine with equal bore and stroke and equal aspiration. Either both non-turbo or both with turbo.

Your comparison relates to neither. Gas and diesel engines - when they have the same bore and stroke - and same aspiration - have equal torque curves and equal torque at low RPMs. That except often the gas engines beat the diesels by a bit.
 
um, no. Bore does not make up for stroke and vice versa. As much as I'd like to explain this I don't have all day to waste on it.
 
V10 Ford, 6.8 liter, 415 cubic inches, 3.55” bore by 4.16” stroke. NO turbo. 310 horse @ 4250 RPM. 425 lbs. torque @ 3250 RPM.

6 liter GM. 364 cubic inches. 4” bore X 3.62” stroke. 300 horse @ 4800 RPM. 355 ft. lbs. of torque @ 4000 RPM. NO turbo.

GM 6.6 Isuzu Duramax, 403 cubic inches. 300 HP @ 3000 RPM and 520 ft. lbs. torque @ 1600 RPM.
4” bore X 3.89” stroke. Turbocharged.

Find a gas engine with 4" bore, 3.89" stroke, with turbo and 403 cubic inches and then we can compare a gasser to a Duramax.
 
I was told, maybe erroniously, that a diesel has more torque because the fuel burns slowly and is burning and still expanding all the way down the power stroke. It's also one of the reasons a diesel is slow reving. Gasoline makes complete combustion at the top in a quick flash and the expanding gasses push the piston down. This is just hearsay and I can't document it in any way. Jim
 
(quoted from post at 20:11:53 12/14/12) I was told, maybe erroniously, that a diesel has more torque because the fuel burns slowly and is burning and still expanding all the way down the power stroke. It's also one of the reasons a diesel is slow reving. Gasoline makes complete combustion at the top in a quick flash and the expanding gasses push the piston down. This is just hearsay and I can't document it in any way. Jim
Click to expand...

This is true in my mind. You are comparing fuels that explode when ignited to fuels that combust. Its not apples to apples. Bore and Stroke, are only part of the equation. You have to consider fuels, burn properties, btu's, efficiencies, it isn't only math, its also physics.
 
I've been told many things over the years also. Some I found to be true and some of it pure nonsense. When I was young, I often soaked in all the stuff the old-timers told me. It took me awhile to learn that young BS artists grow up to be old ones. Age does not always add to a person's credibility.

I've been told many times that diesels have more low-end torque because the air-intake is always wide-open. That is still written in a few text books. Not mentioned is that some diesels do not run wide-open air intakes - like some of my IH diesel tractors with air-governed fuel injection pumps.

No matter what someone says - I think what matters is . . . when two engines, gas and diesel, with same bore and stroke, same aspiration - are tested side by side. That has been done many times and it has proved over and over that the low-torque thing about diesels is a myth.

It just so happens that in the modern auto/truck industry, there are NO long-stroke HD turbo gas engines. In the past - during the early trucking days up to the 50s, there were many big gas and diesel engines - including Mack. Side by side, the big gas engines won but they were miserable on fuel use.
 
You are correct Jim. Fuel of any kind only burns so fast that is why we have advance timing of ignition or fuel injection so the fuel is burning at it's maximum output when the pistion is at the best position to make use of it.
 
One thing to remember on the old diesel fuel injection pumps like on a cummins it was called a PT pump. Pressure versus Time. Lugging a diesel at wide open throttle allowed the fuel ports to remain inline with each other inside the pump allowing more fuel to be injected into the cylinder.
 
I would agree with LJD.

I would also think that the additional torque from a diesel is due to the turbo, and the additional economy is due to the compression ratio.

It will be interesting to see the results from the batch of new direct injection gas engines that are coming out.
 
Several things to say:
Turbos on either engine are not to be considered, as they "create" additional compression ratio, and volume of air/fuel passing through the engines displacement which invalidates either argument.
Gasoline burns from point of ignition, to the quench areas of the farthest combustion chamber cold walls (slow is relative).
Timing is always functioning to produce the Peak Effective pressure shortly after TDC, and usually not much after 10degrees past TDC. Piston provided crank speed increases dramatically in that window.
If the ignition is spark induced, the prime timing is always at the ragged edge of spark knock. Usually held to that in a very modern gasoline engine in every cylinder by sonic analysis of the sound of the tiny beginning of knock and learned to stay there at a wide variety of speeds/loads/temps/altitudes and fuels.
Late timing is obviously not causing the Pressure to be available for better down push on the piston, the engine just heats and makes no real power.
Any explosion in a gasoline engine combustion chamber is very bad (with the exception of the tiny spark knock above). When fuel detonates, it combusts through its entire volume at the same instant. This is due to the heat and pressure on a fuel being high enough that it reaches its kindling temperature through its volume, rather than as a flame front progressing through the volume.
Diesels inject fuel into the super heated air well within the fuels kindling temp. It also burns in a flame based manor, but far more all at once than gasoline as it is atomized into the ignitor (hot air) in a fog of spray that makes the typical diesel rattle from its rate of combustion.
There is more energy in a gallon of diesel, than gasoline.
The slow reving of a diesel is related to the dramatically heavier internal parts and flywheel, not flame rate. these are related to higher instantaneous loading, and far higher compression and expansion ratios of the engine.
Direst injection gasoline engines are incredibly interesting and in many ways mimicking properties of diesel combustion tactics. Particularly in that the quench areas of the chamber and walls are never presented with fuel, and thus far less unburned HC, and cooler surfaces as well as less fuel dilution of cylinder wall oil on cold start, or intermittent running.
I just had to get these thing said. Jim
Data on energy in fuel
 
The local wrecker company runs 6 trucks mostly for cars only has one diesel left and that is the truck wrecker. quality of new diesel fuel is very poor its dirty and doesn't have the quality of the old sulfur diesel. the old gas truck engines were monsters I once worked on a 409cid v6. One reason big diesels have so much torque is the large rotating mass.
 
Having seen lots of gas and diesels on a dynamometer, all things being as equal as possible, same bore, same stroke, gas verses diesel, horsepower & torque is nearly the same at rated horsepower. What is very different is the very narrow power band of most gas engines vs diesel. Lug them down to half rated speed and the diesels almost always lay a whippin' on the gas counterpart. That's called bottom end torque, and bottom end torque starts loads much better.
 
Gas diesel it did not matter back then NONE i mean None got any fuel mileage 3-4 was about tops . Ya had enough fuel for a day of driving . There were fuel stops everywhere . The big horses on the road were the 220 Cunnins and the 238 Detroit and the Macks with the 711 and a turbo then the 250 cummins and the super 250 then the 318 Detroit and the 335 Cummings . I have seen a lot since 1963 till now . From first driving a B60 Mack with a gas burner and a Quad plex transmission to today with engines over 600 Hp. and 18 speed transmissions to autoshift and automatic , From only doing a fast pace walk up a mountain to topping it today on the 4 lane at 72 with a 100000 on the deck . From freezing in the winter with a blanket wrapped around your legs to standing on the fuel tanks with the door open and your right foot flat on the floor climbing a long hill outside the cab due to the heat in the cab , To today when ya set on and air ride seat in and air ride cab setting ontop of air ride suspension with a heater that will run you out of the cab when it is fifty below or hang ice sickles off your nose in 130 degree heat . From stopping for fuel every 10 or twelve hours to something that you can lay down 1800 miles before ya need to feed the truck. Thenya say that Diesel is not what it USE TO BE , yep your 100% correct , AND NEITHER IS THE GAS . You will NOT run the trucks of the OLD days on todays gas . THEY REQUIRED yes REQUIRED 105 PLUS octane gas , NOT 87 -89 -93 . THEY REQUIRED ETHYL Ethyl was good she made the OLD trucks run . They did not have ELECTRONIC FUEL Injection They had and old fashioned Governed Carb and they did not have a computer doing the ing. timing they had a distributor with a Governor in it . OLD gas trucks were Really hot in the summer . They were not Fast and they all ran over 3200 RPM Most in the 38-4000 RPM range . The OLD gas engines DID not last vary long maybe 40 -60000 miles and they were done for with a couple valve jobs inbetween . OLd 238 and 318 Detroits ya got if and again i said IF you were Lucky ya got a 110-115000 out of them or about a year and a half .
 
I had a recent argument with B&D about this, and stand by what I said. Hp for HP, a turbo diesel will outdo a NA gas. B&D claims hp is all that matters which is untrue on so many levels. In my opinion, a gas with more torque and hp than the diesel engine your comparing it to will outdo that diesel all day long. Fuel economy is another matter, given the extra energy in a gallon of diesel. The thing that I think will be a game changer, and has already shown to be, is direct inject turbo charged gas engines. Namely the 3.5L Eco-boost, it has direct inject, turbos and a toruqe curve with 370+ft.lb of torque from 1500-5100rpm, peaking at 420ft.lb. This isn't the gas engine that B&D brags about having 380ftlb of torque at 4400rpm and 360 hp at 5500 rpm. Who tows a trailer all day long at 4500 rpm and had a transmission left after 3 hours. Those hp and torque numbers are worthless if they aren't in a place you can reasonably run the truck at.
 
I think this discussion is sort of going in circles. I started out mentioning that equal bore and stroke gas & diesel engines, with like aspiration, have at least equal torque - and often the gas engine has more torque. That includes at low RPMs.

I made no mention of longevity or fuel economy. Just the max an low-end torque and horsepower myth. Many of the responses had nothing to do with the initial statement.

You state . . . "Lug them down to half rated speed and the diesels almost always lay a whippin' on the gas counterpart. "

I'm still waiting for you or anyone else to name even one engine series to support that argument - with the test data.

I posted data on many engines that share bore and stroke and came in gas an diesel and all those gas engines had the same low-end torque at the diesels - and sometimes more.

I'm not saying that maybe a few exist somewhere - but I've yet to see one or read about one. Since so many say I am incorrect - prove me wrong and post data to the contrary.
 
Janicholson, you have that exactly backwards. A gasoline engine gives the effect of an explosion of the fuel/air mix. It burns very quickly in a single direction. Detonation is when two flame fronts collide inside the chamber. The explosion is always there. Diesel burns in a more controlled manner with length of burn directly controlled by the length of time fuel is injected. Diesels get their high torque from the longer combustion time that pushes on the piston longer than the gas engine"s explosion.
 
I will say that I agree with the idea, that cu.in for cu.in a gas and a diesel are equal in torque if they are both naturally aspirated. Take a 6.0 GM gas and a 6.2 diesel. There's no comparsion. The 6.0 will do 2x the work. That said, in the real world, it does matter that it takes way more fuel to do it. The other problem is that you rarely see turbos and direct injection used on gas engines. That's where the main difference lies. A gas is nearly always N/A and IDI, while most diesels have been turbo charged and direct injected for 20+ years. Like I mentioned though, with the new direct inject turbo charged engines, things will be changing. The high torque that has been associated with diesel engines is starting to go away.
 
I hate to tell you this B&D, you don't have a clue about what you're talking about. My 262 diesel in my D17 has a gas engine cam in it. You're right about the overlap, totally wrong on duration.
 
(quoted from post at 20:22:12 12/15/12) Janicholson, you have that exactly backwards. A gasoline engine gives the effect of an explosion of the fuel/air mix. It burns very quickly in a single direction. Detonation is when two flame fronts collide inside the chamber. The explosion is always there. Diesel burns in a more controlled manner with length of burn directly controlled by the length of time fuel is injected. Diesels get their high torque from the longer combustion time that pushes on the piston longer than the gas engine"s explosion.
Click to expand...

The gasoline engine's combustion is not supposed to be an explosion.
Have you ever heard tell of cam shaft lift, duration, overlap and lobe centers?
Did you know that diesels by design have to be cammed with very duration and overlap?
 
(quoted from post at 20:38:23 12/15/12) I hate to tell you this B&D, you don't have a clue about what you're talking about. My 262 diesel in my D17 has a gas engine cam in it. You're right about the overlap, totally wrong on duration.
Click to expand...

The gas engine has a diesel cam in it. Not a gas cam in the diesel. The valves would be hitting the pistons with a gas cam in a diesel. A diese wouldn't start worth beans either with a gas cam.
 
An old saying of maybe 50-60 years ago was: "A diesel will really get down and lug". This was a quite accurate statement. And it was considered an important quality. Back then, tractors only had 4, 5 or 6 rather widely spaced speeds forward. No 16 speed powershifts or CVTs. Around here, it is common to find nice level loamy fields with frquent red clay knolls. Moldboard plowing was the standard back then and plowing along in, say third gear, you encounter one of those clay knolls 50-100 or so feet in length. If your tractor doesn't have good "lugging ability" you will find yourself stopping, shifting down, and then starting, only to find yourself stopping a few feet down the furrow, shifting back up and starting up again. Across a 40 acre field, that could happen 4 or 5 times. So, what better than to have a tractor that can lug through that little tough spot and then continue on. Look at Nebraska Tractor Test Lab test # 594 and 605. You will see the comparison between the John Deere 720 gas powered tractor and the 720 Diesel. At 54% of rated rpm, the lowest rpm tested, the diesel was producing a whopping 12% more torque than its gasoline counterpart. In fact, all the way down the scale, the diesel was making more torque than the gasser. Same was true of the Oliver Super 88 until the very last end when the diesel lagged a little behind the gasser. But, in the working rpm range, the diesel beat the gasser in torque. That was important and sold a lot of diesels, to the point that gassers simply disappeared
 
(quoted from post at 01:08:59 12/16/12) An old saying of maybe 50-60 years ago was: "A diesel will really get down and lug". This was a quite accurate statement. And it was considered an important quality. Back then, tractors only had 4, 5 or 6 rather widely spaced speeds forward. No 16 speed powershifts or CVTs. Around here, it is common to find nice level loamy fields with frquent red clay knolls. Moldboard plowing was the standard back then and plowing along in, say third gear, you encounter one of those clay knolls 50-100 or so feet in length. If your tractor doesn't have good "lugging ability" you will find yourself stopping, shifting down, and then starting, only to find yourself stopping a few feet down the furrow, shifting back up and starting up again. Across a 40 acre field, that could happen 4 or 5 times. So, what better than to have a tractor that can lug through that little tough spot and then continue on. Look at Nebraska Tractor Test Lab test # 594 and 605. You will see the comparison between the John Deere 720 gas powered tractor and the 720 Diesel. At 54% of rated rpm, the lowest rpm tested, the diesel was producing a whopping 12% more torque than its gasoline counterpart. In fact, all the way down the scale, the diesel was making more torque than the gasser. Same was true of the Oliver Super 88 until the very last end when the diesel lagged a little behind the gasser. But, in the working rpm range, the diesel beat the gasser in torque. That was important and sold a lot of diesels, to the point that gassers simply disappeared
Click to expand...

Lets straighten out the mathamagics in your 12% . Look at total torque rise of both engines. If the diesel has a 47% torque rise and the gasser has a 35% torque rise, so what. Both will drop wheel and ground speed exchange for increased draft pull but with a drop in work per hour.
The past advantages of non emissions diesels with mechanical pumps along with cheaper fuel. Vs the poc gas engines of the era with higher priced leaded fuel, points and a carb.
Lets move ahead several decades to the direct port injection hawsers of the 90's and 2000's, post 2007 diesel emissions, gasoline vs diesel prices . Lets also consider the low maintenance the new gassers require .
 
You can come up with the work per hour figures based on the following: Length of a 40 acre field=1320'. Width of a 40 acre field=1320'. Width of plow=32". Width of cut per full round=about 5'. Number of rounds to finish field=264. Number of stops to shift down per round=10. Number of stops to shift up per round=10. Number of stops/shifts per 40 acre field=approx 5280. Time for each stop=10 sec. time spent stopping/shifting per 40 acre field=880 minutes=14.66 hours. OK, so you're a fast shifter. 2 sec per shift x 5280=176 minutes=2.93 hrs spent stopping/shifting. At this point, some farmers just decided to say to hell with it and plow the whole field in second gear. So, I could continue with the math on plowing the whole field in second gear vs using both second and third gear. But I hope you get the point. I used to drive those tractors in the conditions I described and diesels do, generally speaking, have better lugging ability than gassers. As for me, today? I gave the plows to collectors and drive a six cyl turbo charged intercooled monster w/ powershift, GPS, AC, stereo, weather band and lots of other stuff but heavens to betsy no seat massager and hardly think about plowing. I will never do that again.
 
Around here the clay soil and sub soil needs to be broken up at least every few years.Otherwise the rain will just sit on the surface and pond instead of sinking in.
I put the moldboard plow and V-ripper into my farm a few years ago. The soil was compacted and solid like a well travelled road.
Had to wait until spring after some moisture soaked into the soil all winter. Before being able to plough.
 
I deep rip with straight shanks and no-til points down to 18 inches. I also have a Brillion parabolic ripper that goes down about as deep but no coulters which pretty much rules it out in cornstalks. The red clay knolls are unique to this part of the country and I have a lot of them. They were deposited here by the last glacier and the red clay came from up around Calumet, Michigan. It grows terrific crops but can get as hard as a brick if allowed. Yeah, I can remember plowing along in third with a '36 JD A and hitting one and then either shift to second, which involved moving two levers, or just say to hell with it and move the one lever marked 1-3 and then I was in low.
 
IH used the same camshaft in both the gas and diesel engines when they developed the engines for the 460/560 tractors. The C221, D236, C263, D282, C282, C291, and D301 all use the same camshafts.
 

JDemaris posted using the handle of LJD a while back so yes I suppose one could state that LJD is still here posting but under a different handle.
 
(quoted from post at 23:16:25 12/14/12) A few more examples. I'm still waiting for somebody to show me the diesels with more torque the same bore/stroke gas engines.

7.3 diesel (445) in Ford trucks was made from the IH MV446 HD gas truck engine.

Ford-IH 7.3 diesel (445 cubic inches), no turbo: 185 HP @ 3000 RPM, 360 lbs. max TQ @ 1400 RPM. 4.1" and stroke 4.18"

IH gasoline 7.3 (446 cubic inches), no turbo, 235 net hp at 3600 rpm, 8:1 compression ... 385 lbs. max torque at 2600 RPM, 4.125" bore x 4.18-"stroke


Oldsmobile 5.7 (350) diesel - 120 HP @ 3600 RPM and 222 TQ @ 1900 RPM

Oldsmobile 5.7 (350) gas engine - 170 HP@3800 and 275 ft/lbs of torque @ 2000.
Both 4” bore X 3.38” stroke


Tractor engines with equal sizes in gas and diesel (same bore and stroke):

Hercules DD and GO engines (Oliver)

130 gas: 30 horse, 97 lbs. torque @1400 RPM
130 diesel: 30 horse, 96 lbs. torque @1200 RPM

Hercules 133 c.i. engines (IXB and DIX4B)

133 gas 43 horse @ 2600 RPM, 92 lbs. torque @ 1800 RPM, 3 1/4" bore by 4" stroke. IXB engine.

133 diesel 45.5 horse @ 3000 RPM, 96 lbs. torque @ 1500 RPM, 3 1/4" bore by 4" stroke. DIX4B engine

Continental 157 c.i. engines (G157 and GD157)

157 c.i. gas 37.7 horse @ 2000 RPM, 121 lbs. torque @ 2000 RPM. 3 3/8" bore X 4 3/8" stroke.

157 c.i. diesel 37.5 horse @ 2000 RPM, 109 lbs. torque @ 1200 RPM. 3 3/8" bore X 4 3/8" stroke.

Waukesha 135 GK and DK engines:

426 c.i. gas: 138 horse @ 2400 RPM, 264 lbs. torque @ 1200 RPM. 4 1/4" bore by 5" stroke.

426 c.i. diesel: 140 horse @ 2400 RPM, 259 lbs. torque @ 1600 RPM. 4 1/4" bore by 5" stroke.

Buda 153 c.i. engines (4B153 and 4BD153)

153 c.i. gas, 49 horse @ 2800 RPM, 112 lbs. torque @ 1500 RPM, 3 7/16" bore X 4 1/8" stroke.

153 c.i. diesel, 40 horse @ 2400 RPM, 102 lbs. torque @ 1400 RPM, 3 7/16" bore X 4 1/8" stroke.

Here are a few examples of tractor engines with equal sized power ratings in gas and diesel with different sized engines - and also two equal sized in gas and diesel:

Deere 2010 (and 1010 with diesel version)
Note that both 145 engines are equal bore and stroke, and the gas has more torque)

145 gas: 39 horse, 114 lbs. torque @ 1500 RPM
145 diesel: 36 horse, 95 lbs. torque @ 1500 RPM
165 diesel: 46 horse, 119 lbs. torque @ 1500 RPM
Those are specs published by Waukesha. The gas 426 runs 6.2 to 1 compressoin ratio. Diesel runs 17.5 to 1. Horsepower is stated as "rated horsepower" and torque as "maxium torque - RPM."
So the 426 diesel runs a max torque of 259 lb. ft. at 1600 RPM.
Gas 426 264 lb. ft. @ 1200 RPM

Mack had a pile of long-stroke gas engines.

707 cubic inch gasoline Mack had 5" bore by 6" stroke. 232 horse @ 2100 RPM and 617 lbs. of torque @ 1200 RPM.

707 cubic inch diesel Mach had 5" bore by 6" stroke. 201 horse @ 2100 RPM and 602 lbs. of torque @ 1500 RPM.

Mack's "little” 464 in gas and diesel:

464 gas engine, 464,cubic inches, 4 7/16" bore by 5" stroke, 185 horse @ 2800 RPM and 380 lbs. torque @ 1400 RPM

464 diesel engine, 464 cubic inches, 4 7/16" bore by 5" stroke, 140 horse @ 2600 RPM and 325 lbs. torque @ 1800 RPM
Click to expand...
hat's the (oliver) beside hercules for? oliver NEVER owned hercules although they obviously used them in some applications.white later bought hercules but never did oliver own them.
 
I'm probably one of the few who agree with you (LJD). Partly because I read your claim correctly and partly because it's true. Let's go back in the mid '60's and suppose you could get a 4020 with a "gas" 404 in it. The 4020 diesel will get more done per gallon but it would NOT out-pull a gasser with the same cubes (404). As it was, the gasser only had 362 and still didn't give up much in the field to the 404 diesel. Can anyone tell me why JD rated both 4020,s at same hp when one was 42 cubes smaller? What's the reason they didn't make a 404 gas?
 
The problem with your data on first couple pages of this post is that you are referencing mostly manufactures rated specs. Not true dyno results. A engine marketed as making for example 70 horsepower and 426 ft/lbs of torque when it mass produced every engine varies in performance. It might actually make 71 horse and 430 ft/lbs of torque for example. My point is that the rated specs are rounded off approximate numbers. To prove my point I have put gathered resources from Nebraska dyno tests to shine some light on this. All engines are same stroke and bore, same engines basically just different fuel application. All numbers are peak torque and horsepower results from test records.


Oliver Super 88 (Both 265 CID Bore-Stroke 3.75/4.00")

Gas: Nebraska Test #525
Peak Torque- 347.7 Ft/lbs @ 1096 RPM
Peak Horsepower- 55.77 HP @ 1061 RPM

Diesel: Nebraska Test #527
Peak Torque- 367.5 Ft/lbs @ 1101 RPM
Peak Horsepower- 54.88 HP @ 1600 RPM

Oliver Super 77 (Both 216 CID Bore-Stroke 3.50/3.75")

Gas: Nebraska Test #542
Peak Torque- 269.9 Ft/lbs @ 899 RPM
Peak Horsepower- 43.98 HP @ 1600 RPM

Diesel: Nebraska Test #543
Peak Torque- 294.9 Ft/lbs @ 1215 RPM
Peak Horsepower- 44.05 HP @ 1600 RPM

Mike
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Gas versus diesel RE svcummins question
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
buickanddeere
B
guido
Re: Diesel torque gas vers diesel attempt II
Replies
10
Views
2K
buickanddeere
B
L
Gas versus diesel in torque?
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
RodinNS
R
P
Two Cycle
Replies
9
Views
3K
PopinJohn
P
W
How To Buy That First Homestead Tractor
Replies
1
Views
869
Anonymous-0
A
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top