Posted: Jun 24 2004 at 9:08am | IP Logged

syntrix wrote: Only 11.7% drivetrain loss? Do you have other info, such as: Type of dyno Input correction factor Temp Humidity Altitude Just very curious as it would seem like you are putting out more than 305/375. That's not a bad thing!

Here is a link to my dyno. curves answering your questions:

http://www.cardomain.com/memberpage/608759/3

Also, the Titan's hp and tq is obviously underrated.

Posted: Jun 24 2004 at 4:41pm | IP Logged

Thats not bad just adding intake and exhaust and you gained 20 hp and 21 ft. lbs.

Did you add just the can or a whole exhaust system?It seems like just the can but I just wanna make sure I'm not reading it wrong...

Posted: Jul 19 2004 at 3:35pm | IP Logged

which rear-end, 2.92 or 3.43 was in the truck?

Posted: Dec 15 2004 at 2:49pm | IP Logged

ok heres what i dont understand.if the titan has all these big rwhp #s then why is it tenths ahead of a ram hemi in 0-60 and 1/4 ect.?the titan is 200lbs lighter than a ram. the ram on most dynos stock makes 260ish at the rear wheels.how is the titan so much more powerful yet suffers so much in times? also 12% drivetrain loss is like super good when all the other manufactures are around 28%.also wht about that dodge ad that stated the hemi out ran the titan and othe 1/2 tons in the "races" on flat and 6%. i just dont understand here.

Posted: Dec 19 2004 at 2:13am | IP Logged

Thats it 200 lbs!

 Whats the rams mpg? I have a ram dully with a cummins. Pullin son of a bitch. Don't think mutch of the rest of the truck. Current ram looks better than the titan ( my opinion) sept there are so many around. Still I remember the test driving. Trying to see what each had in the traffic gave the Titan the nod.  The ram didn't seem that nimble or powerful in the low end. Mabey it was the 5 speed trans. If it's only 200 lbs less it's suspension is BS.

          BIG TIME.