Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Cat C13 vs Cat C15: why pay more?

  1. #1
    60363 is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Cambridge, ON Canada
    Posts
    40

    Default Cat C13 vs Cat C15: why pay more?

    Can someone help me figure this out?

    According to the Cat web site, they recommend to speck axle ratios and tire sizes like this:

    Cat C13, Multi-torque

    80,000 lb GVW
    430-hp, 1550/1750 lb-ft
    1325 rpm @ 65 mph

    Cat C15, Multi-Torque

    80,000 lb GVW
    435-hp, 1550/1750 lb-ft
    1325 rpm @ 65 mph

    So, basically both of these engines are OK for full truck loads and will run at the same rpm with the same horse power and same torque...

    But why should someone pay more for Cat C15 (I assume it costs more money!) when C13 can do the job cheaper, and it weighs almost 800 lbs less? Both engines are designed to run 1,000,000 mi to overhaul and have 30,000 mi maintenance intervals.

    Any ideas?

    And another question: 2 fully loaded trucks run with the same load on the same road at the same speed, let's say 65 mph. One has a C13, another C15. Both have the same HP, same Torque, and turn at 1325 rpm at 65 mph... same axle ratios ...

    Will fuel mileage be any different?

    Thanks to everyone for input on this confusing topic
    Life is not a sprint, it's a marathon.

  2.  
  3. #2
    Overloaded is offline Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    West Virginia
    Posts
    80

    Default

    They may say both are good for 1,000,000 miles before an overhaul, but I'm willing to bet the C-15 would outlast the C-13. That is a very low hp setting for the C-15 therefor it isn't working it's self to death, whereas that is about the max for a C-13. Plus, the truck will be worth more at resale time with a C-15 since it can be turned up to 550+ hp.

  4. #3
    solo379's Avatar
    solo379 is offline Senior Board Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,774

    Default

    Well, the way you put it, it seems that C-13, would be the better choice! :roll:

    If that would be 475-1850 C-15, specsed to run, at the same RPM/speed, there would be benefit of extra power, and torque, and engine is not working that high of % of total power, therefore should last longer... , or you'd simply got some extra, in case you need it...

    As of to your second question, i'm pretty much sure, it will be about the same, may be 0.1-.2 gpm difference.
    Pessimist,- is just well informed optimist!

  5. #4
    marylandkw's Avatar
    marylandkw is offline Senior Board Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    733

    Default

    Hopefully I don't get flammed for this one but here goes....

    Bigger Motors get BETTER fuel economy.

    That C-13 will be working it's exhaust pipe off to make those numbers.

    The C-15 set that low will barely be working.

    Now I drive conservatively with a C-15 rated at 550hp with 4.11 rears and an 18speed and get 7mpg all day and night.

    I don't know how much a C-13 costs now a days but the spec sheet in front of me for my new truck (should have it in a week or two) says the C-15 weighs 941 pounds and the line item cost is $12,874

  6. #5
    solo379's Avatar
    solo379 is offline Senior Board Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marylandkw
    Now I drive conservatively with a C-15 rated at 550hp with 4.11 rears and an 18speed and get 7mpg all day and night.
    Wow! How conservative you are, to get that mileage, at those rears?

    Also, didn't want to look at my truck specs sheet, but i believe, you are about 10 grand short, on C-15 price. :wink:
    Pessimist,- is just well informed optimist!

  7. #6
    yoopr is offline Board Icon
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    12,865

    Default

    Both engines are designed to run 1,000,000 mi to overhaul and have 30,000 mi maintenance intervals.

    That's quite a claim

  8. #7
    solo379's Avatar
    solo379 is offline Senior Board Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,774

    Default

    Ok! You've got me curious , and i did pull out my specs sheet.

    C-15 475 ACERT 475@2100 1850@1200 $9,951 860LB.

    That was in 2004, gain some weight and $$$ since than! :sad:

    That $$$ number you see, is not represents the whole price of the engine, just an extra, for that particular option.
    For example, if you look on your specs sheet, a lot of things(radiator...) is $0. :wink:
    Pessimist,- is just well informed optimist!

  9. #8
    marylandkw's Avatar
    marylandkw is offline Senior Board Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by solo379
    Also, didn't want to look at my truck specs sheet, but i believe, you are about 10 grand short, on C-15 price. :wink:
    Well my spec sheet says $12,874, but it also says that the total price of the truck is $186,955, But I did not pay even close to that.

    I would love to grab a couple of those $0 radiators :lol:

    Lets not forget spec sheets come from dealers, and well, you should not trust dealers.


  10. #9
    Bobby's Avatar
    Bobby is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ca.
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Another thing to consider is what the truck/engine application will be.
    If your doing most of your hauling on flat land with lighter loads the smaller engine might be your best option.
    Where if your hauling heavy loads in areas with Long grades or in the steep mountains, the extra power of the bigger engine would be the the better option, IMO.
    This would also apply to starting and stopping power. The bigger engine will hold the truck back better on grades, and also get a heavy load rolling from a dead stop better, especially if your headed up hill.

  11. #10
    GMAN's Avatar
    GMAN is offline Administrator Board Icon
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    16,285

    Default

    That engine price is hard to believe. It can easily cost more than that for an in-frame. If that is all they cost, then it would be better to just throw the old engine away and buy a new one to drop in when you need a new engine. :shock:

  12. #11
    Bobby's Avatar
    Bobby is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ca.
    Posts
    169

    Default

    The way those spec sheets work is you start with a base truck with no upgrades, with it's price and weight.

    As you ad upgrades like the bigger engine... it ads cost and weight to the base or generic truck. That's the figures your seeing, Cost and weight over a stock engine.

    edit: The zero's represent a standard part included with the base truck, with no increase in weight or price.

    My C-15 was 719 lbs over for an 01 model...pre Acert. My sheet doesn't show the cost, but they have gone way up it looks like.

  13. #12
    marylandkw's Avatar
    marylandkw is offline Senior Board Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    733

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bobby
    The way those spec sheets work is you start with a base truck with no upgrades, with it's price and weight.
    That makes sense. That's the good thing about these boards, You can learn something.

    Quote Originally Posted by GMAN
    That engine price is hard to believe. It can easily cost more than that for an in-frame. If that is all they cost, then it would be better to just throw the old engine away and buy a new one to drop in when you need a new engine.
    Kinda like those new free radiators Solo379 and I are looking for :lol: :lol:

  14. #13
    Bobby's Avatar
    Bobby is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ca.
    Posts
    169

    Default

    It will also show a savings in weigh. Aluminum wheels on my sheet (24.5's) showed a minus 46lbs front and minus 184lbs rear over the standard steel wheels for example.

  15. #14
    Ian Williams is offline Senior Board Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Northern NV
    Posts
    708

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marylandkw
    Hopefully I don't get flammed for this one but here goes....

    Bigger Motors get BETTER fuel economy.

    That C-13 will be working it's exhaust pipe off to make those numbers.

    The C-15 set that low will barely be working.

    Now I drive conservatively with a C-15 rated at 550hp with 4.11 rears and an 18speed and get 7mpg all day and night.

    I don't know how much a C-13 costs now a days but the spec sheet in front of me for my new truck (should have it in a week or two) says the C-15 weighs 941 pounds and the line item cost is $12,874
    At my work about 3 months ago they turned up the power on our tractors and we actually get better fuel mileage. Here in Reno most of our line runs are going over mountains 80 & 395 or pulling heavy sets of triples.

    Now coming home from Sacramento I just get passed by most other rather than all.

  16. #15
    RostyC is offline Senior Board Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    2,302

    Default

    I was getting exited there for a moment, I was gonna order one for my lawn tractor :lol: :lol: :lol:

  17. #16
    60363 is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Cambridge, ON Canada
    Posts
    40

    Default

    According to Cat's web site these 2 engines weigh:

    Cat C13 Cat C15
    2270 lbs. 2890 lbs.

    Some posts here referred to much smaller numbers.
    Life is not a sprint, it's a marathon.

  18. #17
    solo379's Avatar
    solo379 is offline Senior Board Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Posts
    3,774

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 60363
    According to Cat's web site these 2 engines weigh:

    Cat C13 Cat C15
    2270 lbs. 2890 lbs.

    Some posts here referred to much smaller numbers.
    Once again, neighbor , it was just the difference, between "base" and "optinal"! :wink:
    Pessimist,- is just well informed optimist!

  19. #18
    allan5oh is offline Senior Board Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    jackassville (winnipeg, mb)
    Posts
    3,298

    Default Re: Cat C13 vs Cat C15: why pay more?

    Quote Originally Posted by 60363
    Cat C13, Multi-torque

    80,000 lb GVW
    430-hp, 1550/1750 lb-ft
    1325 rpm @ 65 mph

    Cat C15, Multi-Torque

    80,000 lb GVW
    435-hp, 1550/1750 lb-ft
    1325 rpm @ 65 mph
    What's missing is the RPM of the HP and TQ peaks. Also, the c13 might have the same tq and hp, but they may be more "peaky". The c15 will have what drag racers call "more power under the curve".

  20. #19
    60363 is offline Rookie
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Cambridge, ON Canada
    Posts
    40

    Default

    allan5oh

    Peak torque for both C13 and C15 in these configurations is the same: 1,200 rpm.

    BUT: C13 with 430 hp and 1550/1750 lb-ft of torque shows TORQUE RISE as 44%/63%; its maximum HP is 445; while C15 with 435 hp shows TORQUE RISE as 43%/61% and its maximum HP is 450.

    Cat C13 with 470 hp 1,650 lb-ft of torque has 40% TORQUE RISE.
    Cat C15 with 475 hp 1,650 lb-ft of torque has 39% TORQUE RISE.

    As you can see there's no big difference still.

    But:

    Cat C15 500 hp 1850 lb-ft of torque has ... 56% TORQUE RISE.
    Life is not a sprint, it's a marathon.

  21. #20
    NascarFan is offline Board Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    307

    Default

    A buddy of mine used to own a truck with the C13 @ 430HP and said he constantlly got around 5.5 to 6mpg now he has the same truck just with a C15 @ 435HP and gets 6 to 7mpg.

  22. This ad will disappear if you login

 




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1