I'm surprised they don't offer the L5P (vs the detuned L5D) as an option on these trucks. If I was a fleet manager I'd probably order L5Ds for longevity and reduced maintenance, but if it was for personal use I'd definitely want the higher HP/torque tune of the L5P. They could also offer re-tuning at dealerships if the truck's use profile is going to change. Seems like obvious "value added" at negligible manufacturer cost.
I won't say that I have read everything / watched every youtube video on this, but I have searched on what I can find.I'm surprised they don't offer the L5P (vs the detuned L5D) as an option on these trucks. If I was a fleet manager I'd probably order L5Ds for longevity and reduced maintenance, but if it was for personal use I'd definitely want the higher HP/torque tune of the L5P. They could also offer re-tuning at dealerships if the truck's use profile is going to change. Seems like obvious "value added" at negligible manufacturer cost.
That seems reasonable. And while it's possible to achieve whatever torque is desired via gear reduction, the engine is probably more thermodynamically efficient at lower RPMs, so a smaller/lighter turbo that makes the power curve steeper would be optimal (thermodynamically and, therefore, financially), even if the engine's maximum power is somewhat reduced. This has the additional benefit (to the fleet manager) of keeping the engine away from its maximum design power, thus increasing longevity.I won't say that I have read everything / watched every youtube video on this, but I have searched on what I can find.
It appears that the turbo on the L5D and some tuning are the largest differences - at least to me.
My perception is that the L5D setup is more focused on providing more torque "off the line" and at lower rpms vs. the L5P has more torque at higher rpms. It sort of makes sense - imagine a truck with these higher GVWRs (example a cement truck or heavy duty tow truck). They aren't going to go 90 mph up a hill, but definitely need as much torque as possible at a stop light.
Are you thinking of the USMC 7-ton?I have to admit to being a bit disappointed in the cab of these new 4500 / 500 series.
It looks very small - similar to the size of the 2500 / 3500, in some ways even smaller since my main interest is in having a lot of height in the door opening, interior height, and a lot of room for people to be in the back seat.
I am starting to think that I will end up with one of the older kodiaks instead of a new 4500.
What a waste to make a truck like this, and then make the cab and front axle width so narrow.
Perhaps worse - they cannot figure out how to move away from a straight axle design? Army trucks with much higher weight ratings have 4x4 and independent suspensions.
Hopefully I am missing something but it seems like a bunch of body molding is going into making the cab short and narrow, and nearly 100 year old straight axle technology going into the suspension to save a few bucks.
Regarding the bolded part of the quote, that's probably what you'd expect from an unloaded SRW truck (about 1,000 miles per gallon of DEF). I just finished a 9,200-mile road trip with my L5P at a GCW of just over 19,000 lbs, and my DEF consumption was approximately 500 miles per gallon. A 4500 or 5500 pulling a large toy hauler is going to have a GCW in the 25,000 to 30,000 lb range (and with more frontal area than my SRW truck pulling my travel trailer, thus poorer aerodynamics), and I'd expect such a vehicle to be getting more like 300-400 miles per gallon of DEF, as DEF consumption is directly proportional to fuel consumption.Well, considering the DEF only needs to be filled every 5000 miles or so, and at 100 000 miles the warranty is up and I'd delete, then I'd only have to fill the thing 19 times. So honestly, I wouldn't care at all where they put it. No matter where it goes, somebody's going to be complaining.
From the perspective of a fleet manager (who's opinions matter way more than ours) they wouldn't want it where it's likely to get filled with diesel or gas. They have a lot of different drivers, and they know that they're going to get someone putting fuel into the DEF if it's anywhere near the fuel fill. And they'd rather just have their mechanics fill the DEF at each oil change.
But anyway, this is a sharp-looking truck. I'd love to have one as an RV hauler. Or a motorhome - hopefully the RV companies make Super C motorhomes out of them.
Honestly I have looked at so many trucks lately it is hard to keep them all straight.Are you thinking of the USMC 7-ton?
Having operated a wide range of military vehicles over an even wider range of operating conditions, I say definitively that I would not want to own personally any vehicle whose design was the result of (or influenced by) the military/government procurement process. Even if I had any confidence in those vehicles, getting parts and service for them would be somewhere between difficult and impossible.Honestly I have looked at so many trucks lately it is hard to keep them all straight.
The cab over version of the 4500 appears to be a re-labelled Isuzu import, which is sort of against my goal of trying to purchaser a domestic / North America built product.
As an example though, Navistar makes a number of products and platforms in their military group that could have been the basis for a product like this:
I didn't try, but I doubt that Navistar defense would sell something to a normal citizen like me.