Torque Monster Dodge V10

[BLSTIC]

Probably depends on the overlap. I've got an engine on my sims with basically zero overlap and headers don't do much for mid range unless I increase the overlap.

Sad thing is that overlap *and vacuum* isn't that nice of a combination for efficiency.

The V10 is going to have a non-trivial amount of blowdown interference too. Dunno how to calculate the length required for that though at the moment.

[Fusion Works]

"Long tubes should make a stupid amount of torque over the OE manifolds."

Your results may vary, haven't been there with a V10, but through the full exhaust and mufflers, my dyno didn't show long tubes, stock cam and intake, making stupid torque.

What did you see? I am not against the stock manifold. Its a solid hunk of cast iron that doesn't crack. There could be some clean up there and let it ride. Shorty headers would probably be easier to package. Its probably a trade off in how much work to make long tubes vs just cleaning up the OE manifolds and sending it.

Lets say you increased the engine efficiency 40%, at what point do the OE manifolds become a restriction down low? On the odd fire V10 you get one firing per bank, so the engine is pretty well divided. Maybe long tubes won't make as big a difference because of the odd fire nature? You won't actually get that pairing like you would get on a V8 where you could achieve some manner of suction in the collector.

Does more compression get me less exhaust volume? Lets say I achieve a 40% increase in airflow going into the engine and compression goes up 1.5pts how much more exhaust volume do I generate?

[Fusion Works]

These are the Pipemax calcs.

Bore=4.06000 Stroke=3.88000 502.31213965 Cubic Inches @ 4200 RPM Intake System= 147.54708 VE%
Complete Intake System Flow @28in.= 240.1865 -to- 257.2056 CFM @ 0.555000 Lift (0.00000 VE% Loss)
Cylinder Head Intake Port Flow @28in.= 240.1865 -to- 257.2056 CFM @ 0.555000 Lift (147.54708 VE%)
Cylinder Head Exhaust Port Flow @28in.= 180.0000 -to- 192.7544 CFM @ 0.539000 Lift (no Flow Pipe)

Dyno HP Weather Correction Equation = 8• SAE J607 (June1974) • STP • SuperFlow-FTQ • (Default)
Air Correction=1.00000000 Station Barometer=29.92000000 Air DegF=60.00 Vapor Pressure=0.000
HP Correction Factor= 1.000000000 Fuel Type= Gasoline • Pump Gas • ( 91 to 93 Octane Premium )
Fuel BTU=19000.0 Air/Fuel Ratio=13.200000 BSFC=0.610175 Mixture Distribution= 90.0 Quality= 90.0
Step Oil Pan • Regular Oil • 0.0 inHg • 0.0 kPa Vacuum • Harmonic Damper Efficiency= 90.0 %
Engine Application = Hi-Perf Engine • Idle-to-Mid-RPM Hi-Plenum Vacuum
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Camshaft = Hydraulic Roller Lifter
600 RPM/Sec Dyno Test Level=2 Level=3 Level=4 Level=5 Piston FPM
Peak HorsePower @ 4200 RPM 493.0 499.2 505.6 511.9 2716.00
Peak Torque Lbs-Ft @ 2900 RPM 677.8 686.4 695.1 703.9 1875.33

HorsePower per CID 0.981 0.994 1.006 1.019 Peak HP Fuel
Torque per Cubic Inch 1.349 1.366 1.384 1.401 consumed in
Peak Torque BMEP in psi 203.5 206.1 208.7 211.3 Lbs./ Hour
Throttle Plate CFM @ 1.5 inHg. 901 1002 1053 1103 312.4
--------------------------------- Recommended Camshaft Specs at 0.050” inch Lobe Lift ---------------
Cam Lobe Separation Angle (LSA) 111.363 111.363 111.363 111.363
Intake Minimum Valve Lift 0.41681 0.43399 0.45189 0.47052
Exhaust Minimum Valve Lift 0.39233 0.40850 0.42535 0.44289
Intake Minimum Duration 206.284 207.738 207.738 207.738
Exhaust Minimum Duration 209.140 210.614 210.614 210.614
Overlap Minimum Duration -15.015 -13.551 -13.551 -13.551

Intake Maximum Valve Lift 0.43399 0.45189 0.47052 0.48992
Exhaust Maximum Valve Lift 0.40850 0.42535 0.44289 0.46115
Intake Maximum Duration 207.738 207.738 207.738 209.202
Exhaust Maximum Duration 210.614 210.614 210.614 212.099
Overlap Maximum Duration -13.551 -13.551 -13.551 -12.077
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* above Specs adjusted for ValveTrain Deflection= 0.0000 Intake Lash= 0.0000 Exhaust Lash= 0.0000
* User's current Camshaft Specs : OverLap Duration = -18.00000
Lobe Separation Angle (LSA)= 114.00000 Camshaft Retarded = 0.50000 degrees
Intake Lobe CenterLine = 114.50000 Exhaust Lobe CenterLine = 113.50000
Intake Duration = 208.00000 @ 0.05000” Exhaust Duration = 212.00000 @ 0.05000”
Intake Open = -10.50000 ATDC Exhaust Open = 39.50000 BBDC
Intake Close= 38.50000 ABDC Exhaust Close= -7.50000 BTDC
Intake Rocker Ratio = 1.70000:1 Exhaust Rocker Ratio = 1.70000:1
Intake Lobe Lift = 0.326471 Exhaust Lobe Lift = 0.317059
Intake Valve Lift = 0.555000 Exhaust Valve Lift = 0.539000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Intake Pumping Choke Valve Lift= 0.450681 Exhaust Pumping Choke Valve Lift= 0.419289
Intake Time Area TQ Valve Lift = 0.567939 Exhaust Time Area TQ Valve Lift = 0.527217
Intake Time Area HP Valve Lift = 0.651259 Exhaust Time Area HP Valve Lift = 0.590662
Intake System Flow Valve Lift = 0.718653 Exhaust System Flow Valve Lift = 0.653129
Intake Port Flow Valve Lift = 0.669878 Exhaust Port Flow Valve Lift = 0.625973
Intake Curtain Flow Valve Lift = 0.707298 Exhaust Curtain Flow Valve Lift = 0.666421
Intake Z-Factor Valve Lift = 0.492236 Exhaust Z-Factor Valve Lift = 0.441935

0.250 L/D Ratio Int Valve Lift = 0.505000 0.250 L/D Ratio Exh Valve Lift = 0.405000
Note : the Valve Curtain Area will equal the Valve Area @ 0.250 Valve Lift/Diameter Ratio
Intake Mach Z-Factor = 39.4144 % SOS Exhaust Mach Z-Factor = 50.6052 % SOS
Mach Z-Factor definition = PerCent % of the Speed of Sound ( SOS ) at the Valve's Curtain Area
Mach Z-Factor Valve Lift = Level=10 Cam calculated Speed of Sound velocity thru Valve Curtain Areas
Pumping Choke Valve Lift = Level=10 Cam calculated Intake and Exhaust Valve Diameters and RPM Range
Time Area Valve Lifts = Level=10 Cam calculated User's Camshaft Durations, Curtain Areas, RPM Range
System Flow Valve Lift = Level=10 Cam calculated Intake and Exhaust System Flow and Valve Diameters
Port Flow Valve Lift = Level=10 Cam calculated Intake and Exhaust Port's Flow and Valve Diameters
Curtain Flow Valve Lifts = Level=10 Cam calculated Flow thru Intake and Exhaust Valve Curtain Areas

DCR Cylinder Volume CC = 759.178931 Dynamic Compression Ratio = 9.070071:1
DCR Effective Stroke = 3.5785 inches Valve Lash Compression Ratio = 7.625925:1
Static Compression Ratio = 9.750000:1 Ve% + Lash Compression Ratio = 11.251830:1
Cranking Psi @ 150 RPM = 155.6 Psi -to- 179.1 Psi @ 260 RPM (depending on Ring seal + Piston Rock)

Station Barometer NOAA= 29.92885898 Pressure Altitude Feet= 1.2 Z•Elevation Feet= 0.0
Density Altitude Feet = 67.2 Relative Humidity % = 0.00 Dew Point DegF = -263.39
Virtual Temperature DegF = 60.00 Water Grains = 0.00 Wet Bulb DegF = 38.73

[PackardV8]

Lets say you increased the engine efficiency 40%

A 40% increase in engine efficiency, while retaining truck durability, low end torque, meeting emissions, with good fuel economy, at a reasonable cost, would tell us the Mopar factory engineers were totally clueless. Do we believe that?

[Fusion Works]

Lets say you increased the engine efficiency 40%

A 40% increase in engine efficiency, while retaining truck durability, low end torque, meeting emissions, with good fuel economy, at a reasonable cost, would tell us the Mopar factory engineers were totally clueless. Do we believe that?

I think the manufacture was highly restricted by limitations involved in the design and production areas. The V10 was the cheapest option Dodge could create with the biggest bang for the buck. The V10 was a very inexpensive option (yes they kinda created a new engine), based on the V8s. It let Dodge compete with the Big Block from GM and the 460/V10 from Ferd. There was no way to bring the 440 into the next century. It was not the Cummins and it was priced accordingly. This engine did a fantastic job at the time, and in my opinion is still a strong contender today compared to the GM and Ford Big Gas engines. (the Dodge engine is kind of a joke comparatively). Over the run of the 94-01 Ram the V10 received no meaningful updates power wise, the Cummins received two or three significant boosts in power and a 6spd transmission. Dodge never saw fit to put that same 6spd behind the V10, why not? Chrysler was collecting profit on what they built and struggling through the mid 90s and into the 2000s, the Trucks were one of the few things making them money, no need to do anything to the V10, it ran for 10 years and that was that. Imagine if they continued developing the V10 with as much energy as Ferd put into the 7.3 Godzilla?

I think were this engine to be designed today, it would make 400+hp and 600+ lb-ft through the use of "advanced" technology. This engine didn't have any knock sensing capability from the factory. That required setting the compression low and assuming worse case scenario. The engine's combustion chamber was a hold over from the 80s at best. Its 80ccs of big open mess with minimal quench area. The valve sizes are decent, but the valve lifts are pretty tame compared to modern engine designs, no cam phasing, etc. I would expect they were at the limitations of their transmissions as well. The Autotragics were never world class or reliable, the NV4500 was a pretty old design updated with a 5th gear. (not unreliable), but the 6spd is better in every way and easily rated to hold the power. Plus the gear drops were significantly better in the 6spd than the 5 or auto.

Lets face it today's engines have benefited from some SERIOUS computer modeling time and that has benefited them tremendously. Its lowered emissions and increased efficiency. Imagine this same V10 with 10:1-11:1 compression, aluminum heads, direct injection, modern knock control, possibly some dynamic cam phasing and its possible that this engine is still king of the production gas truck engines today. As much as I think it a gimmick, what if Dodge's big gas engine was a DI, "hemi" headed version of the V10. You think it wouldn't be SUBSTANTIALLY better? (Although I think a compact wedge chamber would work better the marketing department loves them some dual plug "Hemi") Stick it in front of a modern 7spd manual or that 10spd Ferd and GM are using and magic happens.

[PackardV8]

Ford had an OHC V10, but ditched it for an old-school pushrod OHV8 with inline valves.

[Fusion Works]

And that pushrod engine is a perfect example of what modern engine design can accomplish when a manufacture puts real development money and modern engineering into a heavy duty engine. Lets be real, the V10 is a solid effort using the pinnacle of 1980s capabilities and technology, with a struggling Chrysler's budget. It was the best of what the Americans offered back then.

I am surprised they didn't direct inject it, but maybe that was a fair bit more money?

[1996V10]

I think the reason Chrysler let go of the V10 was they couldn't see how they could get more fuel mileage out of it say up to 15 mpg while adding more HP, they had the diesel that was a winner and able to shut down the line for this engine to save some money.

They went to the crowd that wanted a daily driver with the Hemi and better fuel mileage. I have talked to those who have the Hemi pulling a lesser travel trailer than mine, they have to get up in the RPMs to tow the trailer. Even to this day with the Hemi in a 2500 it is no match for our V10s other than fuel mileage. If you want to pull heavy loads with a Ram the only option these days is a diesel.

Emissions may have been another problem.

[Fusion Works]

A minor update on this as 2023 has been wasted on a home reno and little truck engine development. However, late in 2022 I swapped in a G56 six speed transmission as the mainshaft nut backed off and 5th gear fell off while towing with the original NV4500. Apparently this is a common NV4500 problem.

Let me say, DAYUM, this is the transmission this truck should have come with from Dodge. The gearing is LIGHT years better than the NV4500, no huge holes between the gear shifts.

NV4500 drops between gears
-45.81%
-45.07%
-40.12%
-25.00%

G56 drops between gears
-44.67%
-39.66%
-34.29%
-27.54%
-21.00%

After throwing some plugs at wires at the 225K motor, I have been pulling a constant 10.8mpg in strict around town driving and I measured 13 on the highway the other day, cruising at 75-80 without the camper shell on.. That is phenomenal for the ownership of the truck. With the old transmission the truck was doing its best to get 12 on the highway with a camper shell. This trans is a great addition to the future engine build. Seem like my cruising rpm is much closer to peak torque now, so efficiency should be higher and potentially less likely hood for lugging. Was thinking it would make sense to raise the 70mph cruise rpm closer to peak torque, but not sure that's the best move. Would help with lugging on a heavy trailer though.

[1996V10]

Hey, Fusion works it has been a while.

I never did get the newer brakes on my 2500 it got too complicated for my liking. At any rate, most likely I won't be towing my travel trailer anymore my wife doesn't want to go on trips anymore. I'm putting the trailer up for sale this spring, When my wife told me she didn't want to travel with the trailer I bought a bass boat to get back to fishing, I'm not going to sit around doing nothing so in my spare time it is off to the lakes, so I won't be needing more front braking power. Before she told me no more trips I reholstered the inside of the trailer and didn't get a chance to check out the shocker hitch on a trip, lots of $$ spent without enjoying the upgrades.

When you posted pictures of your exhaust I noticed your transmission with the new crossmember. I wondered if the G56 would bolt up to the V10, you have answered that question. I'm guessing you now have a hydraulic clutch?

I get the same gas mileage on the HWY as you but pulling the trailer the best I have noticed is almost 9 mpg running 65 mph, at 65 mph my V10 is turning 2250 RPMs right at the peak of the torque curve with the 4:10 rear gear. I sure would've liked the extra 2 gears when towing. The problem with the 4 speed automatic while pulling the trailer it doesn't take much more throttle on hills where it loves to drop out of OD even knowing there is a lot more power to be had to pull the trailer up hills in OD. When coming up on hills I let off the throttle a bit and hit the tow button that drops the tranny in 3rd and locks the torque converter, at my elevation of around 700 ft I can pull a 7% grade and gain speed if I want to. When we were in the mountains and the truck in 3rd with the tow mode the engine was way down in HP and with the throttle to the floor the tranny would stay in 3rd until I got under 45 mph. On one trip while in the mountains an older Duramax with a lesser trailer tried to keep up with me but on one hill we were pulling while I was in 3rd tow mode my transmission temp was happy but the Duramax must have overheated at the peak of the long hill and I didn't see him anymore.