JN210;294095 wrote:
lol, chill dude, Im just playin haha, I just said "real job" because people always complain and whatnot about their jobs...and so forth...

After today if you know any sandblasters, and hear them bitch and moan about their job, go grab them a beer. Because their job really sucks ass.

JN210;294059 wrote:
when he finds a REAL job lol

welcome to the OP btw.

My job isnt real? weird.

DelSlow;294060 wrote:
But the FM area's economy is absolutely horrible.

Ya im sorry im not in you line of work, I guess dick sucking hasnt slowed down any.

JN210;294065 wrote:
and if its said on the internet and the internet is always right then I guess youre right!

Get a life kid. You to delfag.

DelSlow;294063 wrote:
Well that's what BP says...so must be true?

and if its said on the internet and the internet is always right then I guess youre right!

DelSlow;294060 wrote:
But the FM area's economy is absolutely horrible.

ya dont say?

JN210;294059 wrote:
when he finds a REAL job lol

But the FM area's economy is absolutely horrible.

DelSlow;294058 wrote:
When will you kill yourself?

when he finds a REAL job lol

welcome to the OP btw.

Bp-08;294005 wrote:
You mean the dmax looks like a gasser? /the PSD has the beefiest rods.

When will you kill yourself?

Bp-08;294010 wrote:
I really wish dodge would make a better truck to fit around its powerplant.

They did, finally. Took them long enough, but the new trucks are finally nice. Most guys who come through here do say "I bought a Cummins, not a Dodge."

Oh, and welcome Mr. 9th Ave Circle.

XJHEAD;294011 wrote:
How many rod failures have you heard of from any of these engines??

I know the powdered rods in the first 7.3 PSD's (94-97) break like toothpicks with any fuel

And i thought that a 6.0 PSD had to run long enough to break??

XJHEAD;294011 wrote:
How many rod failures have you heard of from any of these engines??

True lol, im really not having a good day. Excuse my stupid.

DrifterExtreme;294007 wrote:
Bp your retarded.

retarded maybe, not paying attention to the picture, yes oh well. I really wish dodge would make a better truck to fit around its powerplant.

zbrown;294006 wrote:
Considering the orginal 12 valve 5.9 B series used in the 1st and half of the 2nd gen dodges is an industrial engine....... hell the same 5.9 B series is used in marine applications where it is rated at 370hp.... guess what? It designed to run at rated power and rpm for 100% duty cycle if you want it to

It was designed to be flogged and beaten and not break, so a little extra mass never hurt anyone, especially in the rack

Bingo. They put the B series Cummins in a ton of shit...buses, dump trucks, etc. Plus, that doesn't even count the "heavy" diesel versions that Cummins builds that "competes" with the Cats. M11, ISL, C8.3, etc

DrifterExtreme;294007 wrote:
Bp your retarded.

Thank you.

thrash;293997 wrote:
To play devils advocate: any extra strength in the rotating parts is extra design cost, extra manufacturing cost, and if it comes via extra mass, then also extra power wasted, and extra fuel used.

Of course, having 10% too much durability is better than having 10% too little

I thought all diesel engines were toys until you are talking about Caterpillar?

Considering the orginal 12 valve 5.9 B series used in the 1st and half of the 2nd gen dodges is an industrial engine....... hell the same 5.9 B series is used in marine applications where it is rated at 370hp.... guess what? It designed to run at rated power and rpm for 100% duty cycle if you want it to

It was designed to be flogged and beaten and not break, so a little extra mass never hurt anyone, especially in the rack

Bp-08;294005 wrote:
You mean the dmax looks like a gasser? /the PSD has the beefiest rods.

are you smoking??

if there was a picture that displayed the thickness of the rods you would feel stupid......... just look at the depth of the bearing at the wrist pin...

I was more getting at the PSD piston..... ridiculous.......

Just look a the wrist pin size of the cummins vs the others

I guess when 100% stock and untouched B series bottom ends do 1k+hp/1.5k+ TO there has to be a design flaw....

zbrown;293986 wrote:
Why.... let him spend $$$ on an Izuzu engine, when he would have to spend a percentage of that on a cummins for the same amount of power and still be more reliable...

I think this amazing pic tells enough of the story.... wouldn't you say??

even though i admit I would take a Dmax over a PSD...... the PSD looks ridiculous..... like gasser parts in a diesel

You mean the dmax looks like a gasser? /the PSD has the beefiest rods.

Of course, having 10% too much durability is better than having 10% too little

I thought all diesel engines were toys until you are talking about Caterpillar?

zbrown;293986 wrote:
Why.... let him spend $$$ on an Izuzu engine, when he would have to spend a percentage of that on a cummins for the same amount of power and still be more reliable...

I think this amazing pic tells enough of the story.... wouldn't you say??

even though i admit I would take a Dmax over a PSD...... the PSD looks ridiculous..... like gasser parts in a diesel

Just to be fair the Duramax spreads the stress over eight rods instead of the Cummins six:icon_rr:. I'd still pick a Cummins though.