GarKam
 |
|
• St Clair Shores, MI, USA |
|
• Registered on 5/18/2004 |
|
• 7 posts |
• 1 Vehicle
|
|
 Posted:5/18/2004 20:56 |
|
|
WOW! I just got 2004 Excursion Limited with all the toys. This one powerful beast I am so glad I got the 6.0 diesel opts. With only 130 miles on the engine I hoped on the highway set the mpg and drove about 30 miles at about 67 mph. The truck computer showed 21.8 mpg. I was amazed. Due to a head on collision on a two-way highway, and we all survived I decided to get the largest SUV I could find and let me tell you, It sure is a wonderful traveling truck and gives you a sure feeling of being safe. You can keep those pint size cars I’ll take the Excursion any day!
GarKam |
|
JohnBoy
 |
|
• DFW, TX, USA |
|
• Registered on 9/3/2002 |
|
• 972 posts |
• 2 Vehicles
|
|
|
Posted:5/18/2004 21:07 |
|
|
Welcome to the safe side of motoring !
You are right on with the same reasons I got it !
I had had motorhomes and loved that I was "above" most of the fray...
Always liked the idea that me and my family would have foot injuries if involved in a substantial crash .
Love my 8000 lb dragster since I got my diablo predator ---
did a dyno last saturday and 375 HP and 728 ftlbs is noting to shake a stick at !!!
9.x 1/8th and 72 mph when I didn't know WHAT I was doing 
2005 6.0L 4x4 Eddie Bauer Ex
2003 6.0L 4x4 Limited Ex - traded in (BooHoo )
"The Republicans should back off and let men marry men, women marry women, and legalize abortion. In three generations there would be no Democrats." |
|
E. Long
 
 |
• Subscriber since 1/1/2001 |
|
• Atlanta, GA, USA |
|
• Registered on 1/23/2001 |
|
• 2,229 posts |
• 1 Vehicle
|
|
|
Posted:5/20/2004 01:51 |
|
|
| Quote: | Welcome to the safe side of motoring !
You are right on with the same reasons I got it !
I had had motorhomes and loved that I was "above" most of the fray...
Always liked the idea that me and my family would have foot injuries if involved in a substantial crash .
Love my 8000 lb dragster since I got my diablo predator ---
did a dyno last saturday and 375 HP and 728 ftlbs is noting to shake a stick at !!!
9.x 1/8th and 72 mph when I didn't know WHAT I was doing |
JohnBoy,
Wow, those are impressive numbers!! 
Is that with just the chip? Any other mods?
-Eric
'67 Galaxie 500 - 390 FE, .030" over, FE to AOD adapter, disc brake conversion. The Daily Driver.
'00 Excursion - 7.3L PSD, LANDYOT Gen-II Radius Rods, Factory Tech Valve Body, 200K+ miles and going |
|
JohnBoy
|
|
• DFW, TX, USA |
|
• Registered on 9/3/2002 |
|
• 972 posts |
• 2 Vehicles
|
|
|
Posted:5/21/2004 19:47 |
|
|
the Diablo Programmer set on the +100HP mode and a turbo back exhaust...
stock 6-ohs were doing 275 hp so the predator is AT LEAST 100+ RWHP according to our dyno day !
and I was not the Powerstroke winner at the DFW Dyno day...
a bud of mine's 6.0 with the Predator and K&N fipk did 387 even with a 1.5 inch split in his intercooler hose which some say probably cost him 50 HP....
Gotta get me an intake to keep up with him now 
2005 6.0L 4x4 Eddie Bauer Ex
2003 6.0L 4x4 Limited Ex - traded in (BooHoo)
"The Republicans should back off and let men marry men, women marry women, and legalize abortion. In three generations there would be no Democrats." |
|
Boar-Ral
 |
|
• Edmonton, XX, Canada |
|
• Registered on 8/20/2003 |
|
• 56 posts |
|
|
|
|
Posted:6/10/2004 10:18 |
|
|
| Quote: | | Gotta get me an intake to keep up with him now |
This might not be the most appropriate thread for this question, but a friend indicated to me that a diesel engine will take the air it requires while a gasoline engine appreciates the more air that you give it. He is an old-school diesel engine person though, so I do not know if things have changed. With this in mind, would the 6.0L PowerStroke get to a point where giving it more air simply provides less gain in performance? (Obviously, there grows a point where any engine will receive less performance compared to the air you give it, but I hope you understand what I am asking.) |
|
JohnBoy
|
|
• DFW, TX, USA |
|
• Registered on 9/3/2002 |
|
• 972 posts |
• 2 Vehicles
|
|
|
Posted:6/11/2004 15:46 |
|
|
| Quote: | | Quote: | | Gotta get me an intake to keep up with him now |
This might not be the most appropriate thread for this question, but a friend indicated to me that a diesel engine will take the air it requires while a gasoline engine appreciates the more air that you give it. He is an old-school diesel engine person though, so I do not know if things have changed. With this in mind, would the 6.0L PowerStroke get to a point where giving it more air simply provides less gain in performance? (Obviously, there grows a point where any engine will receive less performance compared to the air you give it, but I hope you understand what I am asking.) |
Exactly right....
you can't just dump fuel and air into it and hope it works out... there IS a point of diminishing returns, but I KNOW my Ex is air limited... with the programmer it is dumping MUCH more fuel in and some of isn't being burned because at high throttle it comes out of the exhaust as black smoke meaning it could use more air to burn...
All I know is that my bud with JUST an intake produced 13 more HP than mine and his had a split intercooler hose that was screaming like a banshee at the diesel dyno day... his dyno curves flattened out tremendously when the hose let go.. his guesstimate was that it probably robbed him of HP.... 
2005 6.0L 4x4 Eddie Bauer Ex
2003 6.0L 4x4 Limited Ex - traded in (BooHoo)
"The Republicans should back off and let men marry men, women marry women, and legalize abortion. In three generations there would be no Democrats." |
|
Dave Sullivan
 |
|
• Kitchener, XX, Canada |
|
• Registered on 2/27/2003 |
|
• 199 posts |
|
|
|
|
Posted:6/13/2004 00:00 |
|
|
I hate to spoil the safe feelings but you are still subject to all the same impact forces ect as a smaller vehicle.
I hope I never see an EX opened up in a crash. Ive seen some explorers and they aint pretty. Minivans are scarry.
Dave S.
|
|
GarKam
|
|
• St Clair Shores, MI, USA |
|
• Registered on 5/18/2004 |
|
• 7 posts |
• 1 Vehicle
|
|
|
Posted:6/14/2004 22:33 |
|
|
| Quote: | I hate to spoil the safe feelings but you are still subject to all the same impact forces ect as a smaller vehicle.
I hope I never see an EX opened up in a crash. Ive seen some explorers and they aint pretty. Minivans are scarry.
Dave S.
|
Sorry Dave,
The sheer mass of an Excursion over all other vehicles is what sold me. You can say what you think about “being subject to all the same impact forces ect as a smaller vehicle” My family and I survived head on collision on a two lane highway with both vehicles go 60+ mph on Impact. Because I was driving and Expedition & pulling a large pop-up (@9000 lbs total weight) and be hit by a “smaller car (2600 lbs) it’s not rocket science why we lived thru the crash and the poor man who made the fatal error died upon impact. A larger vehicle is not subject to the forces. The first rule of safety is the vehicle with the larger mass will generally win and can absorb more impact energy than a smaller vehicle.
Gary
GarKam |
|
GarKam
|
|
• St Clair Shores, MI, USA |
|
• Registered on 5/18/2004 |
|
• 7 posts |
• 1 Vehicle
|
|
|
Posted:6/16/2004 23:13 |
|
|
| Quote: | | Quote: | I hate to spoil the safe feelings but you are still subject to all the same impact forces ect as a smaller vehicle.
I hope I never see an EX opened up in a crash. Ive seen some explorers and they aint pretty. Minivans are scarry.
Dave S.
|
Sorry Dave,
The sheer mass of an Excursion over all other vehicles is what sold me. You can say what you think about “being subject to all the same impact forces ect as a smaller vehicle” My family and I survived head on collision on a two lane highway with both vehicles go 60+ mph on Impact. Because I was driving and Expedition & pulling a large pop-up (@9000 lbs total weight) and be hit by a “smaller car (2600 lbs) it’s not rocket science why we lived thru the crash and the poor man who made the fatal error died upon impact. A larger vehicle is not subject to the forces. The first rule of safety is the vehicle with the larger mass will generally win and can absorb more impact energy than a smaller vehicle.
Gary
|
Amy I Right: or Wrong ? Please reply
Thanks
Gary
GarKam |
|
Orf
 |
|
• Pittsburgh, PA, USA |
|
• Registered on 8/29/2003 |
|
• 143 posts |
• 1 Vehicle
|
|
|
Posted:6/17/2004 12:17 |
|
|
Technically, at the instant of impact both vehicles experience equal and opposite forces. What the heavier vehicle has going fo it is its inertia. In an inelastic collision, the smaller object will suffer more damage, assuming both are constructed of similar materials. and traveling at similar speeds. Again, technically, both vehicles will absorb equal amounts of energy which will be partially counteracted by inertia.
While you are correct that a larger vehicle will "win", it isn't only because of the sheer mass. The location of your center of mass with respect to the point of impact (you sat higher up), and the volume of your vehicle's crumple zone compared to the other vehicle are two characteristics that have nothing to do with mass.
So, you are right about the saftey aspect, but not quite as right about the physics. |
|
