I asked Daddy one day when we were hauling a dozer. How does the earth turn? He said there's a brand new Mack truck at the North Pole tied to the pole just makin' laps. I laughed and asked what's at the South Pole? He said an old R model for back up.
Leo Fender you’d be surprised how long it last... had mine in 11 years.. south bend clutch double disc full ceramic unsprung hub... actually destroys the input shaft spline more then anything
Lucas Oil “sponsors” one of my main racing organizations. In exchange for Lucas being plastered everything, we get Lucas swag bag and product samples for podium winners.😅 🤦♂️
@@acettovalens6787.... No, there is not. US engine manufacturers have predominantly stayed with engine design allowing for Crossplane crankshafts. Other than the Ford GT350 Mustang of the 1960s which utilized a Flat-plane crank, Ford was about the only American manufacturer to do so. Anytime a Flat-plane Crankshaft has been utilized (that I know of, anyway) in a V-configured engine, has always been in V8 configurations only. Also, as I'm sure you know.... the Flat-plane only works with 180 degrees between the crank throws, developing a Right-Left-Right-Left-Right-Left, etc. firing order.... which, as a result, is what makes the Flat-planes so susceptible to vibrational issues. Having said all that, there are numerous Gasoline burning automobile engines of the 4 cylinder variety, that Do use a Flat-plane crankshaft.... and which allows them to rev so high, which is about the only real benefit to using a Flat-plane design in the first place. There is no doubt that Europe has been the mainstay of Flat-plane design in their engines, versus the US, which has largely designed all of their engines (gas & diesel) based on utilizing Crossplane crankshafts. Flat-planes are useful in small displacement gasoline engines, especially in racing applications where very high revolutions can be beneficial (show me an engine with very high rev capabilities, and I will show you an engine with "good" hp, but little torque in comparison)... but for engines that develope Lots of torque (like large displacement US truck engines.. especially those that are modified as these are), and horsepower.... they would never work. Also, and just so you know... US Truck engine manufacturers have Not produced a V8 for many years now... and even when they did, which was predominantly between the late 1960's and the early/mid 1980s... the in-line 6 cylinder engines have always been the dominant engine of choice, before and after the "V8 years". The only V8's that were even in "the playing field" of the US (and Canada) heavy (Highway) truck markets, were the Detroit Diesel 2 cycle V8 - 71 and the later V8-92 Series (which had only a .59" increase in bore diameter over the 71 series engines), the Caterpillar Series 3408 (1191.2 ci displacement), and the Mack V8's of which there were several iterations over the years, from the late 1960s and into the early 1990s. Inline 6 cylinder engines (in heavy truck applications) inherently produce more torque per cubic inch displacement than a V configured design.... take up less space, are lighter, easier to work on (or at least they were before the advent of electronics), than any of their V-block counterparts of several decades ago. The Only exception to what I just stated, was Detroit Diesel which produced the 2 cycle diesels (series 71) from 1938 through mid-1995 (August 24th)... and their predominant truck engine was the V8 - Series 71 (71ci per cylinder - with a B&S of 4.25 x 5.0") engine which was first released in 1957 along with a V6 version of the world famous inline 6-71. Detroit Diesel did not have Any "V" block engines until 1957.... they had a high torque inline known as the 6-110 (110ci per cylinder) that they built from 1945 until 1965, but none were ever available from the truck manufacturers for highway use.
Yes are very big,but the camshaft may be upgraded and croos valves may be big too. A 2 strokes diesel locomotive engine with 20 inch turbo go from idle to top speed in 4 seconds (with no load of course). 4 strokes needs 2 seconds more (EMD vs Alco.)
so the built for business truck. the blue k series kenworth. why does it look like the axel is either canted to one side.. or its running super singles. wish by the end of the pull it wasnt. is it narrowed?
to all the people wondering about the difference and meaning of horsepower and torque, watch this closely and you'll understand. you may have a boosted Nissan, Honda or Mitsubishi that boasts equal or even more nominal peak horsepower than one of these trucks showcased, but it certainly cannot do what these trucks do.
That 0.96’ run must be some kind of record! LMAO I know it varies widely, but roughly how much torque do these things versus their factory stock motors?
Theres steam (traction) engines out there that do this without breaking a sweat but they take twice as long hahahaha. An Electric truck setup specifically for this would probably drag that sled all over the parking lot as long as it has enough juice coming in
@@madeuce71 i doubt they could make it to the truck stop down the street to refuel with the kind of fuel burn rate we're dealing with here lol but i get your point
Nothing could drag that load to any longer distance. Each time you move an inch forward, the load bucket dig down more in the dirt... no matter what your engines are. No traction= no movement.
Just add 'tha' to the town name, then you get Shithappensburg,PA, and that will explain the blown engines and the sled driver that can't back up straight....🤣😂👍
It's called the "sled" in a "sport" called "tractor pulling." As they go down the track, the weight moves closer to the truck, and the sled digs into the dirt and gets harder and harder to pull.
@@EEPPULLINGVIDEOS - Then add the word "Pulling" to your titles. I came here for Hot Rods, not pulling. I just Googled the terms "hot rod semis" (without quotation marks) and there is nothing hitting the first page of results about this pulling class. So we must assume that most people would not know that your video is about pulling.
@@johncoops6897 Well John, the tumbnail pic for this video shows a semi hooked to a pulling sled. So it should be assumed that it is a truck pulling video. Quit your crying.
@@slappopotamus1001 - A pulling sled is not apparent in thumbnail pic, even on this 22" PC screen let alone a 4" or 5" mobile device. Anyway, why NOT add a proper title and/or description? It harms absolutely nobody to describe the video properly, and makes it come up in more searches.
Well you just watch and you did it for free and you could have not even bothered so who is the dummy, a person who paid to see something they like or a person who watch something the dnt for free when they do not have too?
