Engine size/horsepower fuel consumption - Diesel Truck Forum - TheDieselGarage.com
Thread Details Posted by Greyhorse, this thread has received 11 replies and been viewed 3844 times.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 12 (permalink) Old 10-31-2007, 08:36 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Canton, TX
Posts: 249
Points: 21,479
Thanks: 4
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
Engine size/horsepower fuel consumption

I've been thinking about getting a used cab tractor..... most likely an Allis Chalmers from the mid 70's to early 80's. My question is does a higher horsepower tractor use more fuel than a lower horsepower tractor doing the same work (baling hay for example)? I'm talking about the ones that use the same engine and are basically the same size tractor but they have different engine ratings. Seems to me they should use close to the same amount of fuel but I would like to hear from some of you guys that may have experience with them to see if you think that holds true.

1999 IH 4900, DT466E 250hp, MD3060

2000 F350
Greyhorse is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 12 (permalink) Old 10-31-2007, 09:36 PM
Member
 
Cooper443irty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 201
Points: 29,960
Thanks: 6
Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts
I canít give a good answered for AC tractors. But if you look at Deere, other then a different fuel setting they would add turbos and intercoolers. So two tractors with the same engine, same turbo same everything except fuel setting, I would think fuel comsumption under the same load would be similar until you start to work them hard. A good test would be find people who have turned up tractors and ask what the difference in fuel consumption was.
Cooper443irty is offline  
post #3 of 12 (permalink) Old 11-02-2007, 12:36 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
Threadstarter
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Canton, TX
Posts: 249
Points: 21,479
Thanks: 4
Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
That's pretty much what I was thinking..... seems to be true for trucks with different ratings so I can't see why tractors would be too much different.

1999 IH 4900, DT466E 250hp, MD3060

2000 F350
Greyhorse is offline  
post #4 of 12 (permalink) Old 11-03-2007, 12:50 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,754
Points: 40,841
Thanks: 0
Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greyhorse
I've been thinking about getting a used cab tractor..... most likely an Allis Chalmers from the mid 70's to early 80's. My question is does a higher horsepower tractor use more fuel than a lower horsepower tractor doing the same work (baling hay for example)? I'm talking about the ones that use the same engine and are basically the same size tractor but they have different engine ratings. Seems to me they should use close to the same amount of fuel but I would like to hear from some of you guys that may have experience with them to see if you think that holds true.
W/o getting ridiculous ( using a steiger w/an 855 cummins on a sickle mower) for the most pert it only takes x amount of fuel to make x amount of hp. The exception would be as you say bailing hay. You are using a pto application therefore youll want to run it say 1500 rpm. So yes a 4840 jd making that motor and size tractor run at 1500 rpm, vs making a 60 run at that (assuming you dont need the hp of the bigger tractor) yes the 4840 will suck more fuel. Now say your talking about discing and plowing. A bigger tractor wont necessarilily take more fuel. IF you have a big tractor but you can gear up and rev down vs a small tractor you have to reve it wide open and run a slow gear then yeah, the big tractor can be more efficient. A small tractor constantly up against he governor blowing black smoke isnt fuel efficient.

1996 Gmc k2500 4x4 6.5 turbo diesel, with mods Blew the head gasket, put all new heads, valves, injecotrs gaskets etc on the truck only to get it together and find out it had no oil pressure, and sounded horrible (pry a spun bearing). SOLD
2007 chevrolet 2500hd Duramax loaded. GM LEMON BUYBACK
2007 Chevrolet LBZ 1 ton crew cab 8ft box
on star, xm, tow mirrors, 145 amp alt,
#23 Singles Club
thejdman04 is offline  
post #5 of 12 (permalink) Old 11-04-2007, 03:00 AM
Senior Member
 
bmoeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: NW IL
Posts: 4,827
Points: 67,590
Thanks: 158
Thanked 392 Times in 331 Posts
Garage
As A-C goes, if you can swing a 8000 series tractor vs the 7000, you'll be much happier. 8050 or 8070 vs the 7050 or 7060 as an example. They are pretty much identical tractors, but the newer 8000 series has a MUCH better cab. Better layout of the dash and controls, and MUCH easier to get in and out of. Better visibility. Better lighting. If you need front wheel assist, it wasn't available on the 7000 series tractors. More room to put your lunch box.

Been so long since I've run my uncles 7020 (black belly), 7060 (maroon belly) or 8070, I can't give much help on fuel consumption. As I recall, they seemed to be pretty good on fuel. Still smokey, though. The 426 engine is a pretty nice one, but doesn't have quite as much torque as a comparably sized Deere of the same vintage. He has had the engined turned up a bit as well. Around 225hp now, IIRC.

For fuel efficiency, the Nebraska Tractor tests go by hp hours per gallon (the engine hp divided by the number of gallons burnt per hr.).

So, as an example- 200hp tractor burnt 15 gal/hr.= 13.33 hp hrs/gal.

Using that, the 8070 (426CID engine) did 170.72hp and 15.97 hp hrs/gal on the PTO= 10.69 gal/hr.

The 8010 (301 CID engine) did 107.38hp and 14.79= 7.26 gal/hr.

There is a difference of 3.43 gal/hr, but how much more work was done in the same amount of time? The 8070 also made a bit more power per gal (1.18 more hp hrs /gal), so on a per hp comparison, the 8070 is more fuel efficient.

I use gal/acre doing tillage work. We used to have a Deere 8300 w/ MFWD and a Deere 9100 4wd tractors. Pulling the same implements (faster with the 91), the 91 usually used about .25- .5 gal/ac LESS than the 83. The 9100 was rated at 280hp, and the 83 at 200hp.

"Some people are educated beyond their intelligence."

'93 W350 CC, LE, 5spd, HTT modded H1C, 4" DE

Sold- '99 3500 Q/C, SO CTD, 4x4, 5spd.

Traded off- '97 3500 C/C, 4x4, CTD

'92 W250, LE, CC, CTD w/ tweaked pump (SOLD)


"Obama = Hoax and Chains"

If Obama is the answer, it must have been a stupid question.
bmoeller is offline  
post #6 of 12 (permalink) Old 12-05-2007, 12:31 PM
JakeBrakeIH
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 88
Points: 31,170
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to jakebrakeIH
[QUOTE=bmoeller]As A-C goes, if you can swing a 8000 series tractor vs the 7000, you'll be much happier. 8050 or 8070 vs the 7050 or 7060 as an example. They are pretty much identical tractors, but the newer 8000 series has a MUCH better cab. Better layout of the dash and controls, and MUCH easier to get in and out of. Better visibility. Better lighting. If you need front wheel assist, it wasn't available on the 7000 series tractors. More room to put your lunch box.

:agreed: if you can...get the 8000 series and instead of the 7000...Im certainly not taken anything away from these tractors but the 7000 is a little crud compared the the 8000...now I dont know how much power your looking for because the smaller 7000, 7010, and 7020 all have a 301 powerplant same goes for the 8010. The rest all have 426s and I know a lot of people that has these tractors and they all love them...none complain about fuel. I would make sure you get extra power rather than kickin yourself in the tail needing more...I hope this helps some...

2000 Silverado 1500 4.8L 5 speed 4x4

Go:K&N FIPK, Dual Flowmasters,
2002 PCM, Custom Tunes

Show:5% tint, Debadged, xeon blue HL,
clear parking lights, color matched grille, billet grille & bowtie
AR 20"s wheels, Kenwood HU, Kicker L7, Sirius, Blue LEDs in cluster:
jakebrakeIH is offline  
post #7 of 12 (permalink) Old 01-30-2008, 03:39 PM
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 110
Points: 1,662
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
:iagree My grandfather has a 7030, 2 7060's an 8010mfwd and a 8070 mfwd. the 8010 is rated at 105 hp, dyno's 108, but it will out pull one of the 7060's that dyno's at 204 hp. The mfwd really helps and the 8010 is balanced as good as any mfwd tractor that I have ran.
dirtmovr is offline  
post #8 of 12 (permalink) Old 02-04-2008, 04:43 AM
Senior Member
 
Dodgefarmer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Northern California
Posts: 1,224
Points: 95,980
Thanks: 162
Thanked 222 Times in 156 Posts
Angry

The 7060 I had in the past used almost 10 gallons per hr when pulling hard. With a 60 gal tank, had to refuel after 6 hrs of hard pulling.
Dodgefarmer is offline  
post #9 of 12 (permalink) Old 02-04-2008, 06:08 PM
Diesel freak
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 102
Points: 175
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Send a message via AIM to deerezilla
I know my jd8100 does use less fuel than my 8410 pulling the same 24ft disk.
then on the other hand my 4240 drinks more fuel than the 8410. Wanna see something use some fuel put a 7 shank willcox ripper on a jd 9630 250gal a day easey sometimes more. I know the 6950 choppers we had, had to be filled 2 times a day

00 CClb drw 4x4 black smokes some.

97 CCSB green 4x4 TW turnes te bb turbo and more

07 dodge 2500 ctd ccsb 6 speed man,sbc, air dog 150, flux 3.5 mpi twins, II cp3 ,studs b&w hitch MBRP ,centerline rims ,afe stage II proguard 7 and more:snipersmilie:
deerezilla is offline  
post #10 of 12 (permalink) Old 02-06-2008, 12:22 AM
Senior Member
 
bmoeller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: NW IL
Posts: 4,827
Points: 67,590
Thanks: 158
Thanked 392 Times in 331 Posts
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by deerezilla
I know my jd8100 does use less fuel than my 8410 pulling the same 24ft disk.
How many more acres/day did you cover, though?

The Deere 4840 I used to run, pulling a 24' Deere 726 finisher with, burnt about 150 gallons/day. Did OK on the grain cart. Just needed MFWD to help in the hills.

"Some people are educated beyond their intelligence."

'93 W350 CC, LE, 5spd, HTT modded H1C, 4" DE

Sold- '99 3500 Q/C, SO CTD, 4x4, 5spd.

Traded off- '97 3500 C/C, 4x4, CTD

'92 W250, LE, CC, CTD w/ tweaked pump (SOLD)


"Obama = Hoax and Chains"

If Obama is the answer, it must have been a stupid question.
bmoeller is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Diesel Truck Forum - TheDieselGarage.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome