Get ahold of some, people don't respect them anymore

A lot of people talk shit about these engines. They are fantastic for stationary or marine. They burned more fuel than 4 strokes on highway trucks, that's because their power band is more narrow than a 4 stroke, that's why truckers rev the high while they shifted. But on stationary use, they will run hard all day and not miss a beat. And nothing else sounds like them. When I was in the Army back in the 80's pretty much every vehicle in our unit had a Detroit in them. I drove a Gamagoat with a 353 and a M977 HEMTT with a 8V92.

@@rbagel55 in stationary use, ie generators a 12v 149 used 30% more fuel at full load per hour than a hideous rolls Royce/Perkins 3012 of the same rating at 50hz synced. would be worse at 60hz

@@JimLahey21 Well anyway many people liked the Detroit's because they were reliable and fairly easy to service. Where did you read these statistics from?

@@rbagel55 I witnessed the fuel usage during a ups failure at a data centre, we had the gens running on bypass for 4 days

Power to weight issue..theory of diminishing returns may apply to this engines real job..

The 149s were the dirtiest of the Detroits. The 16V-92TA was a much cleaner engine and could make the same power. With less fuel.

@@billmoran3812..... Where did you Ever get that idea... about our 16-92T/TA producing "the same power, with less fuel"? The 16-92TA is pretty well maxxed out at 1100 hp...... unless, you're going to "build" it for some special application. The 149 engines were only "dirty" when going to full throttle from idle, under full throttle they ran just as clean as most other engines.

16V149 could charge many EVs at one time

Yeah, well you can sit in it

@@craigkopcho7394what an insult that would be to that beastly Engine 🇦🇺

"and thats how electric cars are worse for the environment than ice cars"

It isn't about what the American truck market wants, It is about what EPA wants. Unfortunately those 2 strokers are a thing of the past. Within 20 to 30 years, they will probably phase out diesel engines altogether.

Trycking fleets don't like 3.0 to 3.5 mpg. One my employers contracts say it needs to see mo less then 5.0 mpg because they pay the bill not us.

@@BeingMe23 8V71Ts were better on fuel in Australia compared to a 350 Cummins getting 6.5 mpg against 5.2. hauling livestock.

@@andrewking4885 better working environment for those engines, they like running flat out at 1800 rpm or so, for long stretches, on flat ground.. These conditions do exist in the USA, but not all over, more in the mid west I suppose, or prairies in Canada.. not saying a Detroit can't go up hill, but when you gotta slow for stop and go traffic, or the gutless truck in front of you, it's moot, your just making noise and smoke going up and down the gears.. THey are preferred in harsh working conditions, as genny's as their simplicity and reliability outweigh another plants better consumption.. any mechanic can diagnose and fix a Detroit usually in chassis, or in place, trying to find a MAN certified mechanic, at 3:00 am in northern Alberta.. there's a lot to be said for the right-to-repair movement, plus Detroits, once properly re built don't break.. I'll take the few extra bucks in gas over extended down time and 150 hr service fee , for a software update, or a simple repair I can't do for warranty reasons.. We need only to see how man Glider chassis were sold, or the law suites John Deere is eating ( Tractors encountering software problems just before harvest? ), no wonder the price of older re furbished tractors is through the roof..

Yeah totally clueless, that's why the DD15 and Cascadia are the best selling on-highway trucks for the past decade

2000 kw = ~2680 hp

A 1065kW alternator at 230/400V has Cat D arc fault rating, from memory around the 60cal/cm2 + mark which even in Cat 4 PPE you more than likely won't survive the fault. Must say though, the simplicity of that diesel generators controller makes me a little jealous. The gas engines I work on are a very different beast.