Is there any benefit or modern use of these?
Go turbo or go home?
Go turbo or go home?
Naturally aspirated four stroke diesels
- Thread starter mjoekingz28
- Start date
- Status
Seems like they could serve well as a Generator depending on size and weight.
Originally Posted By: mjoekingz28
Is there any benefit or modern use of these?
Go turbo or go home?
It works just fine in my tractor, but its a utility tractor, so mostly its a platform to get the loader from place to place, to mow, run a tiller, and to do some work with a rear blade or box blade.
Simplicity and low initial cost trump any benefits of a turbo with how little fuel I put through it.
Improving power density to reduce weight or space is also a waste of money in small tractor too. Its never too heavy and often too light.
Is there any benefit or modern use of these?
Go turbo or go home?
It works just fine in my tractor, but its a utility tractor, so mostly its a platform to get the loader from place to place, to mow, run a tiller, and to do some work with a rear blade or box blade.
Simplicity and low initial cost trump any benefits of a turbo with how little fuel I put through it.
Improving power density to reduce weight or space is also a waste of money in small tractor too. Its never too heavy and often too light.
Sailboats. They need a small, quiet engine that's thrifty on fuel. A small diesel engine often fits the need better than a gasoline engine.
With diesel, Go Turbo or go home.
When I took my college course in IC engines, they showed that turbo's do everything good for the diesel cycle (except maybe increase NOx) and bad for the gas engine.
In gas engines, pressuring up the cylinder aggravates the risk of auto-ignition, i.e. you want the spark to ignite the fuel. Diesels are by definition auto ignition.
When I took my college course in IC engines, they showed that turbo's do everything good for the diesel cycle (except maybe increase NOx) and bad for the gas engine.
In gas engines, pressuring up the cylinder aggravates the risk of auto-ignition, i.e. you want the spark to ignite the fuel. Diesels are by definition auto ignition.
IN General turbo is only a plus in diesel world.
Even on a compact utility tractor. We have one and it will choke with a 5ft finishing deck if the grass gets high. The extra 40% or so HP would be much appreciated.
(JD850)
Yes we could mow more often but its an hour away and you cant always get down there in a timely fashion to mow.
Even on a compact utility tractor. We have one and it will choke with a 5ft finishing deck if the grass gets high. The extra 40% or so HP would be much appreciated.
(JD850)
Yes we could mow more often but its an hour away and you cant always get down there in a timely fashion to mow.
Most small diesels are NA, as they get larger they step up to low pressure turbos for continues duty applications.
In commercial applications engines come in quite a number of power configurations depending on the use. The 6.7 Cummins for example is anywhere from 230BHP to 550 depending on application.
The 230hp one is rated to make 230hp for probably 100% of its operational hours, the 550 is probably only rated to make 550 for 5 minutes out of every hour or something like that.
In commercial applications engines come in quite a number of power configurations depending on the use. The 6.7 Cummins for example is anywhere from 230BHP to 550 depending on application.
The 230hp one is rated to make 230hp for probably 100% of its operational hours, the 550 is probably only rated to make 550 for 5 minutes out of every hour or something like that.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Originally Posted By: mjoekingz28
Is there any benefit or modern use of these?
Go turbo or go home?
It works just fine in my tractor, but its a utility tractor, so mostly its a platform to get the loader from place to place, to mow, run a tiller, and to do some work with a rear blade or box blade.
Simplicity and low initial cost trump any benefits of a turbo with how little fuel I put through it.
Improving power density to reduce weight or space is also a waste of money in small tractor too. Its never too heavy and often too light.
Yep. I can't think of anything a turbo would have added to my Kubota 3710 except cost and complexity.
Originally Posted By: mjoekingz28
Is there any benefit or modern use of these?
Go turbo or go home?
It works just fine in my tractor, but its a utility tractor, so mostly its a platform to get the loader from place to place, to mow, run a tiller, and to do some work with a rear blade or box blade.
Simplicity and low initial cost trump any benefits of a turbo with how little fuel I put through it.
Improving power density to reduce weight or space is also a waste of money in small tractor too. Its never too heavy and often too light.
Yep. I can't think of anything a turbo would have added to my Kubota 3710 except cost and complexity.
My truck is great. it always gets me there.......After every one else has gone home.
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Most small diesels are NA, as they get larger they step up to low pressure turbos for continues duty applications.
In commercial applications engines come in quite a number of power configurations depending on the use. The 6.7 Cummins for example is anywhere from 230BHP to 550 depending on application.
The 230hp one is rated to make 230hp for probably 100% of its operational hours, the 550 is probably only rated to make 550 for 5 minutes out of every hour or something like that.
I'm a UPS semi truck mechanic. Cummins makes a 6.7L rated at 165 HP used in the off-road terminal tractors.
http://www.ottawatrucksna.com
Most small diesels are NA, as they get larger they step up to low pressure turbos for continues duty applications.
In commercial applications engines come in quite a number of power configurations depending on the use. The 6.7 Cummins for example is anywhere from 230BHP to 550 depending on application.
The 230hp one is rated to make 230hp for probably 100% of its operational hours, the 550 is probably only rated to make 550 for 5 minutes out of every hour or something like that.
I'm a UPS semi truck mechanic. Cummins makes a 6.7L rated at 165 HP used in the off-road terminal tractors.
http://www.ottawatrucksna.com
Originally Posted By: totegoat
Your NA Kubota 3710 may be fine for your use at sea level.
Its a different story at altitude.
I wouldn't buy a non-turbo tractor, the performance is dismal.
There were plenty of big(ish) tractors that ran normally aspirated diesel in the 60s and had plenty of pull. I'd love to have an Oliver 1600- one of the smoothest, best-pulling normally aspirated 4-stroke prechamber diesels I've ever experienced. They truly don't make 'em like that anymore.
Your NA Kubota 3710 may be fine for your use at sea level.
Its a different story at altitude.
I wouldn't buy a non-turbo tractor, the performance is dismal.
There were plenty of big(ish) tractors that ran normally aspirated diesel in the 60s and had plenty of pull. I'd love to have an Oliver 1600- one of the smoothest, best-pulling normally aspirated 4-stroke prechamber diesels I've ever experienced. They truly don't make 'em like that anymore.
Originally Posted By: skyactiv
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Most small diesels are NA, as they get larger they step up to low pressure turbos for continues duty applications.
In commercial applications engines come in quite a number of power configurations depending on the use. The 6.7 Cummins for example is anywhere from 230BHP to 550 depending on application.
The 230hp one is rated to make 230hp for probably 100% of its operational hours, the 550 is probably only rated to make 550 for 5 minutes out of every hour or something like that.
I'm a UPS semi truck mechanic. Cummins makes a 6.7L rated at 165 HP used in the off-road terminal tractors.
http://www.ottawatrucksna.com
I didn't realize they went that low, I was looking at the marine versions.
The low power marine ones are the motors that rack up high hour counts, that the slicked back hair salesman says the high HP ones will do. No, sorry buddy the 550hp 6.7 in your Tiara is not going to run 10k hours between rebuilds, not going to happen.
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
Most small diesels are NA, as they get larger they step up to low pressure turbos for continues duty applications.
In commercial applications engines come in quite a number of power configurations depending on the use. The 6.7 Cummins for example is anywhere from 230BHP to 550 depending on application.
The 230hp one is rated to make 230hp for probably 100% of its operational hours, the 550 is probably only rated to make 550 for 5 minutes out of every hour or something like that.
I'm a UPS semi truck mechanic. Cummins makes a 6.7L rated at 165 HP used in the off-road terminal tractors.
http://www.ottawatrucksna.com
I didn't realize they went that low, I was looking at the marine versions.
The low power marine ones are the motors that rack up high hour counts, that the slicked back hair salesman says the high HP ones will do. No, sorry buddy the 550hp 6.7 in your Tiara is not going to run 10k hours between rebuilds, not going to happen.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: totegoat
Your NA Kubota 3710 may be fine for your use at sea level.
Its a different story at altitude.
I wouldn't buy a non-turbo tractor, the performance is dismal.
Well, I doubt I'm going to take my tractor on a road trip to Pikes Peak...
Funny enough though, the NA diesel tend to have maximum torque ratings far far below the PTO speeds, so they lug much better. A turbo diesel tractor has max torque at 1600 rpm with a PTO speed of 2100. The same Hp in NA would have a peak torque at maybe 1100 rpm.
A neighbor was testing a newer Kubota turbo 80hp tractor to replace the old NA 75hp one, and liked it except for hauling wagons down the road. The old 3 cyl perkins would lug down in a gear but keep pulling down to 1100-1200rpm. It had 11000 hours on it as well, so who knows how much hp it still making. The Kubota needed lots of down shifting to keep it from falling off its peak torque and even the new fancy trans didn't seem to enjoy that. He found that down shifting your tractor with it bogging up a hill with a couple wagons on it wasn't his idea of fun, and didn't end up getting it.
I'm sure the turbo Kubota would win the race up Pikes Peak though, especially near the top...
Your NA Kubota 3710 may be fine for your use at sea level.
Its a different story at altitude.
I wouldn't buy a non-turbo tractor, the performance is dismal.
Well, I doubt I'm going to take my tractor on a road trip to Pikes Peak...
Funny enough though, the NA diesel tend to have maximum torque ratings far far below the PTO speeds, so they lug much better. A turbo diesel tractor has max torque at 1600 rpm with a PTO speed of 2100. The same Hp in NA would have a peak torque at maybe 1100 rpm.
A neighbor was testing a newer Kubota turbo 80hp tractor to replace the old NA 75hp one, and liked it except for hauling wagons down the road. The old 3 cyl perkins would lug down in a gear but keep pulling down to 1100-1200rpm. It had 11000 hours on it as well, so who knows how much hp it still making. The Kubota needed lots of down shifting to keep it from falling off its peak torque and even the new fancy trans didn't seem to enjoy that. He found that down shifting your tractor with it bogging up a hill with a couple wagons on it wasn't his idea of fun, and didn't end up getting it.
I'm sure the turbo Kubota would win the race up Pikes Peak though, especially near the top...
The last NA diesels in passenger cars you could buy new here in Europe were Euro3 emmisions level, so over 10 years ago.
Most were indirect ijection, I only know of Volkswagen selling a NA direct injection diesel
Most were indirect ijection, I only know of Volkswagen selling a NA direct injection diesel
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
A neighbor was testing a newer Kubota turbo 80hp tractor to replace the old NA 75hp one, and liked it except for hauling wagons down the road.
Wow, that seems like a lot of (rated) horsepower for a tractor like a Kubota. That old Oliver 1600 I'd love to have is rated at 58 PTO horsepower (Waukesha-Oliver 4.3L inline 6 N/A diesel), but the rig weighs close to 8000 lbs by itself and I have a feeling it could just about drag a Kubota around the field backwards... though maybe not very quickly. The biggest Oliver of that era was the 1900 and it had a 93-hp pto rated Detroit Diesel 4-53, and that was considered a pretty darn huge tractor for the day. Of course that was way before big center-articulated tractors like the Case/Steiger with Cummins N-14 power were the upper end, too.
A neighbor was testing a newer Kubota turbo 80hp tractor to replace the old NA 75hp one, and liked it except for hauling wagons down the road.
Wow, that seems like a lot of (rated) horsepower for a tractor like a Kubota. That old Oliver 1600 I'd love to have is rated at 58 PTO horsepower (Waukesha-Oliver 4.3L inline 6 N/A diesel), but the rig weighs close to 8000 lbs by itself and I have a feeling it could just about drag a Kubota around the field backwards... though maybe not very quickly. The biggest Oliver of that era was the 1900 and it had a 93-hp pto rated Detroit Diesel 4-53, and that was considered a pretty darn huge tractor for the day. Of course that was way before big center-articulated tractors like the Case/Steiger with Cummins N-14 power were the upper end, too.
Always was fond of the Oliver tractors that the family used when I was growing up on the farm.
- Status
Similar threads
