The only thing GM did their homework on was figuring out where that little turbo on the Ford would be way out of it's area. Notice the elevation at which the test was conducted...

If you ran those two trucks at sea level you can bet your butt they'd be a lot closer.

Honestly how do you think two trucks with nearly identical power ratings and weight were so far apart?

Lets not forget both trucks were provided by GM (not sure if it matters or not, but it certainly throws a flag up).

I can applaud GM for doing their homework in that aspect. The turbo on the Ford was just not "at home" at that elevation.


Yes they're all junk, I'll admit it! No one makes a perfect truck, this has been said already. If they did we would all own it...

 

small turbo's spool better at higher elevations, relatively invalid point, chevy provided both vehicles due to the fact that ford wouldn't provide a test one, that's a flag up in my opinion, who was the lone driver of the trucks throughout the testing? an ex-ford towing engineer, he even admitted he was going to be biased towards the ford, and what's the point in testing at sea level? they wanted to do a test of one of the hardest tows in america, I give props to diesel power for doing a tow test that was virtually equal and the Chevy won, I'm not saying Chevy is better than Ford as a whole, but in the scenario here it dominated completely, turbo vs turbo the Ford's sounds way more impressive on paper where as GM's is pretty much the same one they've been using with a few tweaks, I'm not brand bashing here, dodge is so pathetic at the moment compared to these two that they didn't even bother testing it, so my point is Ford lost admit it, Chevy won, good for them, maybe Ford will go out there and try to make it better and beat the Chevy in the same tests, competition is what keeps the world turning, just admit that Ford lost this round and maybe they'll win a round here soon, as far as I'm concerned the test was completely fair due to the Ford making 65 ft lbs more than the chevy at the same RPM and making 3 more horsepower 200 RPM sooner than the chevy, my rant is over, I like em and hate em all

 

Why does stock power matter so much? Its what happens when you put a programmer on that matters

 

We currently believe that the difference between the two trucks' power output may be related to the amount of air each of their Garrett turbos makes available to the different engines at high-elevations. It is possible that the Ford (Garrett) turbo is not optimized for such high-ellevation testing. That's not to say the Ford (Garrett) turbo is bad--it's just that it may not have been the ideal conditions (elevation) for that turbo.

That is directly from David Kennedy from Diesel Power Mag.



I believe the line of thought was that the stock turbo on the 6.7 Ford had to run a ridiculously high RPM to make max boost, so as elevation went up and air thinned out, the turbo was supposed to spin faster to get more air in, but could not as it was already dangerously high. I think that GM knew this. Why else would a test like this be run at 11,000 feet?

Lets look at it logically, do you think as close to power and weight those two trucks are that the Chevy could finish a full 2 MINUTES ahead? 2 minutes is a LONG time....

 

GM had nothing to do with where the test was being conducted, maybe Ford needs to stop focusing on throwing new parts at their engines and work with what they have and do some proper tuning, if the SST turbo the Ford uses is anything like they claim which I'm sure it is it should have dominated.Ford is notoriously terrible at tuning, look at the 6.0, chevy changed nothing besides tuning and tweaked a few minor things, your Ford lost, that is all I want to hear, like I said in other posts I'd have a 6.4 in a heart beat, but i won't defend a loser, end of story

"Once again, the Chevy proved to be the superior performer when it comes to acceleration testing. In every towing test we ran on I-70, the Silverado 3500 outperformed the Super Duty F-350. The Silverado made it through the quarter-mile more than 2 seconds quicker, achieved a top speed that was nearly 10 mph faster, and finished the entire climb more than 2 minutes ahead of the Ford. The Duramax performed significantly better at 11,000 feet of elevation as well, pulling the 18,900-pound load at 47 mph, while the Ford slowed to 35 mph. Check out our acceleration testing sidebars for the full results"

 

Cool you read the lie-o-meter. I've only ever seen like 2 or 3 that were actually correct. If he hand calculated his miles then i could see you having a valid point. Go on powerstroke.org or PSN and look at real numbers.

 

Oh the Chevy won this test no doubt. Again, they knew they were going to win going into this. They certainly didn't finish a 1/4 mile run 2 seconds ahead though... that is a huge power difference. They never did a drag strip run. Read it... this was the first 1/4 mile section of the hill they drove up with 18,900 lbs behind each truck. It's not like the Chevy went out and ran a 13 second run at the local drag strip bone stock hahaha.


I'm not sure why this is such a big deal anyways. This is Ford's first attempt at a diesel motor and this is Chevy's 10th or 11th year running on the same design...

You obviously didn't watch the videos either with the Ford's traction control kicking on and slowing the truck down. You can hear the test drivers saying this in the vids...

Chevy won this free and clear, no questions asked. I think Ford put a good attempt at it for their first shot. Chevy is running out of stuff to do with their ancient design at this point.

Where is Dodge?



---AutoMerged DoublePost---

Agreed, the 6.7's are actually getting some very good mileage readings stock and now with tunes and deletes as well.

 

So your saying that all lie-o-meters read low?? Boy then his mileage really sucks
Its what they get towing that matters to some of us. Sure it is nice if it gets 20 just driving

 

it doesn't matter who won in my opinion and if you read my full posts you'd see what i said about dodge, what I'm saying is you are a Ford owner and you still can't fully admit that they lost without an excuse, and the 2 second thing was on the hill yes i understand that, I copied that direct from dieselpowermag.com as far as mileage goes i don't really care, i read the lie-o-meter sometimes to just make me feel better at heart, i don't really even wanna know but i won't get on here and claim i get 23-30mpg either

 

I have to say on my 2010 the mileage reader is always within .2 of hand calculated. All my other trucks they always read 2 or 3 high.