Originally Posted by
d_mac
Yes chief you're correct in a sense, but let's not forget that Metallurgy plays an important role on the quality and longevity of parts and components of the whole vehicle. And car manufacturers specify, design and produce (or have some companies do it for them) the components upstream and downstream of the engine based on the forseeable applied force from the powerplant and the overall dynamic load that it will be subjected to by how much factors of safety against failure that they can think of....
A low-stressed engine by virtue of its responsive low-end rpm pull would always result to less-strain on the engine and all driving components overall. It is not only Ford Motors that adopts this approach ----
---- Toyota Motors in its proven range of Landcruisers does this too, where even for as low 1200 rpm their peak pulling-force is already there, and they last a lifetime. The Hilux range are also designed to give out peak pulling-force within that sub-2000 rpm. Also, Isuzu Motors does this too ever since in its D-max range and trucks where within the sub-2000 rpm rev-range they are already at their peak fulling force, and they too last a lifetime. Nissan Motors is also doing this now on its all-new Navara 3.0-litre V6 ST-X (Renault-Nissan built engine) where a hefty peak pulling-force of 550 Nm is already available by 1750 rpm (90% of that grunt available by 1500 rpm).
Moreover, due to the lower rpms on the Ford/Toyota/Isuzu/Nissan examples above, the diesel 4-stroke cycle's lesser sequential pressure combustion results to less-stress and less-strain onto the cylinder walls and onto the pistons.
Daming issue ng SU7:grin:
Xiaomi E-Car