747400sp
Topic Author
Posts: 3833
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

Why No V8 Version Of The DD Diesel 60?

Sun Oct 08, 2006 3:09 am

I do not know if anybody here knows anything about diesel engines, but I going to post this anyway. Detroit Diesel has built diesel engines for boats, buses and trucks for years. During the 1950's they had a inline 6 called the 6-71, then GMC built the Senicruiser for Greyhound and DD made a V8 version of the 6-71 called the V8-71. Now the Diesel 60 is very powerful inline 6, more powerful than the V8-71 or it enlarged sister the V8-92, but a V8 version of the Diesel 60 could be use in high speed cabin cruisers or other larger high speed boats, or it could give trucks and buses a little more get up and go, on the highway. So why don't they try it out?
 
Go3Team
Posts: 3156
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 1:19 am

RE: Why No V8 Version Of The DD Diesel 60?

Sun Oct 08, 2006 3:31 am

For highway applications, a V8 model would be too heavy. The inline 6 is more than powerful enough to handle its job. There may also not be enough demand to spend the money in R&D costs. Caterpillar has a V12 that is used in generator applications. It is huge. If I remember right, its rated HP was around 850. I'm sure it's capable of more, as there are 6 cyl models that get over 1000. The 60 series is/was an extremely popular truck engine, but outside of that, they really don't have much going for them. Maybe if someone else took over (they've had plenty of owners over the years) they could expand a bit. I've driven trucks powered by the 60 series, but they don't seem to have the power that other powerplants have at the same rated power. The 460 Cummins I drive now, has more pulling power than the 470 Detroit I've driven in the past.
Yay Pudding!
 
747400sp
Topic Author
Posts: 3833
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

RE: Why No V8 Version Of The DD Diesel 60?

Sun Oct 08, 2006 4:51 am

Quoting Go3Team (Reply 1):
The 60 series is/was an extremely popular truck engine, but outside of that, they really don't have much going for them.

I believe Greyhound and most Tour and long distance operator still use the Diesel 60 in there buses. I know It is slandered in MCI and Prevost buses also.

Quoting Go3Team (Reply 1):
The 460 Cummins I drive now, has more pulling power than the 470 Detroit I've driven in the past.

I believe Cummins always had stronger engines than Detroit. I know the Cummins N 855T an inline 6 use in truck and Crown Supercoach ( an large school buses built in California for California school districts) had just as much HP as the V8-71 and had a lot more torque.
 
GuitrThree
Posts: 1940
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2004 12:54 pm

RE: Why No V8 Version Of The DD Diesel 60?

Sun Oct 08, 2006 6:46 am

Aren't In-lines generally more naturally "Torque" powerful than "V" style Engines? I might be wrong, but its torque that gets things moving, especially slow and heavy stuff...

So why go with the heavier, less fuel efficient "V" when a smaller in-line will do basically the same, and besides that, easier to work on, with less parts?
As Seen On FlightRadar24! Radar ==> F-KBNA5
 
747400sp
Topic Author
Posts: 3833
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

RE: Why No V8 Version Of The DD Diesel 60?

Sun Oct 08, 2006 10:34 am

Quoting GuitrThree (Reply 3):
Aren't In-lines generally more naturally "Torque" powerful than "V" style Engines? I might be wrong, but its torque that gets things moving, especially slow and heavy stuff...

So why go with the heavier, less fuel efficient "V" when a smaller in-line will do basically the same, and besides that, easier to work on, with less parts?


I did not know in-line engines was more torque powerful. You learn something new every day?

Thank you Go3Team and GuitrThree
 
checkraiser
Posts: 814
Joined: Mon Mar 14, 2005 1:35 am

RE: Why No V8 Version Of The DD Diesel 60?

Sun Oct 08, 2006 1:40 pm

Quoting GuitrThree (Reply 3):
Aren't In-lines generally more naturally "Torque" powerful than "V" style Engines?

 checkmark  The main advantage to a V configuration is that they're smoother, especially at idle.

I doubt you'll see another V design in a heavy truck. Torque is the name of the game.

The old 6V & 8V-71's the OP talks about are actually two strokes IIRC, hence what gives them that distinct loud humming sound under acceleration.

Quoting Go3Team (Reply 1):
The 60 series is/was an extremely popular truck engine, but outside of that, they really don't have much going for them.

For many years running they've been the most spec'd truck engine. Mostly due to the fact that they've been the MPG king for about two decades now. At present my fleet has 22 Series 60's running. Ours are set at 455 HP and 1550 lb./ft of torque. The current Series 60's are available with settings from 425 HP to 515 HP but pre emission days they were available, IIRC, from 360 - 550 HP. We like them because they're stingy on fuel, have the best electronics management and I'd say tie with Mack for cold weather startability and performance.

Quoting Go3Team (Reply 1):
The 460 Cummins I drive now, has more pulling power than the 470 Detroit I've driven in the past.

Really? I've always thought that the DD's pulled better at low rev's than Cummins. Cummins power band always felt like it was at higher revs than DD. Is yours an ISX or an N14?

If up front purchase price and fuel economy didn't play into my purchasing decisions I'd have to say that CAT would be my choice. Rock solid reliability.
N1120A is a camel-fucking terrorist.
 
Go3Team
Posts: 3156
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 1:19 am

RE: Why No V8 Version Of The DD Diesel 60?

Sun Oct 08, 2006 11:34 pm

Quoting Checkraiser (Reply 5):
Really? I've always thought that the DD's pulled better at low rev's than Cummins. Cummins power band always felt like it was at higher revs than DD. Is yours an ISX or an N14?

The 3 I have driven, never really felt like they had the power they were rated for. 2 out of the 3 got great fuel mileage, one was in the 7 range. Another was mated to a transmission where the top 2 gears were automatic. I really couldn't get a feel for the pulling power in this one, as it would not, under any circumstance come out of 9th until around 25-30mph.

Quoting Checkraiser (Reply 5):
If up front purchase price and fuel economy didn't play into my purchasing decisions I'd have to say that CAT would be my choice. Rock solid reliability.

The ones I have driven have been alright. The biggest problem I've had with one was losing 3 injectors in an area of mountains. That was pretty much the fault of someone filling our fuel tank at the terminal with a tanker that had a lot of water in it. I was the only victim of that, and ended up pumping around 50 gals of water into the fuel tank of the truck. The result wasn't pretty. The fuel injectors went the next day.
Yay Pudding!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], BartSimpson, Kiwirob, OMP777X, tommy1808 and 41 guests