In general, the 6spd. The 47RE was barely adequate for the Cummins (and
caused the engine to be de-tuned accordingly), and the NV4500 (5spd), while
a decent transmission, had issues with 5th gear going away due to the
vibrations that the engine could induce. The NV5600 (6spd) was a better
match, gear-wise, to the narrower RPM range of the Cummins, as well as being
capable of holding more torque.
Nope... not unless some transmission upgrades were a part of the package.
In stock form, behind a stock engine, the 47RE will hold it's own, as long
as it's not asked to tow heavy and often. Start turning up the power to the
engine, and not proportionally upgrading the transmission, is asking for
Or - if you think $15K for that truck is a good deal, and can absorb a
$2,500-$3,000 transmission re-build (with better-than-stock parts), then go
Thanks for the quick reply
Here is the banks web site for the engine addons:
I think the system was professionaly installed.
Did dodge sell trucks with the Banks?
It seems to have the total package
I am not sure if it does have the torque converted, but I would assume it
The previous owner had a fifth wheel and towed a lot. I do not think someone
would go to all that trouble and expense to not have the torque converter
added with the package.
There are a couple of switches added under the dash I am not sure what they
are. I think they are the brake add ons. I switched one on and the engine
started sounding different like exhaust was being diverted.
Nope - never. Some dealerships may have chosen to, but they assume the same
responsibility as a customer - ie. DC denying a warranty claim because of
Sounds like you're talking yourself into it. That's fine - but just go into
it with the presumption that you may need to put some $$$ into the
It probably has an exhaust brake on it... that's also an issue with the
automatic. DC didn't certify an auto trans for use with an exhaust brake
until '06. In addition to the potential for having the exhaust brake engage
without the TC being locked (which will just heat the fluid, and not really
provide much engine braking), there was component wear due to the force
being applied in the opposite direction.
What about transmission cooler? There is one on it. Does that not help? In
addition I saw I fan attached to the bottom of the truck adding more cooling
to something. I guess I need to look underneath.
Maybe better to not use the exhause brake at all? One would think that Banks
would engineer their products to not do abnormal wear and tear on the
vehicle to help prevent legal action taken against them,.
Any tips for transmission fluid better than ATF 3? Synthetic?
Here is a FAQ on their exhaust brake:
Is the Banks Brake compatible with a Banks PowerPack on a turbo-diesel?
The PowerPack components are completely compatible with the Banks exhaust
brake, and in fact, many customers install both a power system and Banks
Brake at the same time.
Will exhaust backpressure from a Banks Brake hurt my engine?
No. Diesel engines, in particular, are designed and built to withstand
extremely high cylinder pressures under load-that is, when the fuel/air
charge is firing and pushing the piston down under full throttle. As opposed
to backpressure, you could call this "frontpressure." In this mode, the
piston, rod, and bearing withstand a load of as much as 2000 PSI, or more.
The Banks Brake, when fully applied, exerts a backpressure of 38 PSI on the
Ford Power Stroke, or 60 PSI on the Dodge Cummins, or 55 PSI on the
Chevy/GMC Duramax-infinitesimal compared to the power load (plus the power
load is applied with extreme heat, while the brake applies no heat to the
cylinder). So it should be very apparent that the Banks Brake causes no
measurable wear on the engine.
The real answer to this question is that a turbo-diesel engine is built to
withstand huge pressure loads; it is lubricated against wear; and it is
cooled by a radiator. Your brakes aren't. Every time they are applied, they
heat and they wear. They're designed that way-to be replaced. Using the
engine to slow your truck is much more practical and efficient. It also
saves brake wear and extends brake life between brake jobs.
It does not seem they address the compoent wear you mention due to reverse
force being applied. I guess I need to call them about that.
Thanks again for your time in helping me out and educating me on this stuff.
In some circumstances - but it's not going to do a bit of good when the
torque of the engine overcomes the ability of the clutches (particularly the
TCC) to hold against that torque.
The number one concern about operating an exhaust brake with an automatic is
keeping the torque converter locked while the brake is engaged. If they
don't have a separate lock-up controller, then yes, I'd be concerned about
it's use. It's fine to use, but you need to pay attention to your
drivetrain, and know when your torque converter unlocks, so that you
disengage the brake. (And the problem is, with a stock vehicle, the TCC
unlocks the instant you touch the brake pedal).
Not really... sure, a synthetic fluid (ATF+4, or Amsoil) won't break down
as quickly when subjected to high temps, but it won't do anything for the
transmission's holding ability, which will be taxed when you romp on it with
all the extra torque.
Think about it this way... Banks is claiming a 288ft.lb. increase (and
they're usually fairly accurate with their numbers). That year engine, with
an AT, made 460ft.lbs. (I think) - so you're talking over a 50% increase in
torque. Given that this isn't the 60's anymore, is it reasonable to assume
that a particular component will withstand 150% of it's rated capacity?
They don't mention transmission issues at all... nor do they mention
anything about it in their PowerPack kits. Oh, I guarantee when you call
them, they'll offer you all kinds of goodie$$$ for your transmission. They
just recently entered into the torque converter world, so I'm sure they'd
love to sell you one of their billet converters.... won't do anything for
the rest of the clutches in the stock 47RE, but it'll at least make sure the
TCC isn't the one to start slipping first (nah - that'll be the OD clutch)
Of course - this is all based on the assumption that the previous owner
didn't touch the transmission. If he did, then it's a different story.
Just one of the things to look forward to when buying someone else's
I called the company and they do implement a device that call "SmartLock"
that is suppose to control whent he torque converter locks up.
I would assume the truck has one since the seems to have a whole package
I had a word with the previous owner today.
He said he put these goodies put on from DTT
exhaust brake controller and smart lock controller.
Also their torque converter.
From their web site:
a.. 30-40 percent more power transfer
b.. 100 degrees less heat
c.. 1-2 MPG Fuel economy improvement
d.. Unsurpassed torque multiplication and fluid coupling
e.. Increased transmission life
He also said he put on a Banks Power Pack, Automin chip, and BD Exhaust
Also change the rear end to 3.73 gears.
Says it now puts out 340HP and 600 ft lbs of torque
I found this concerning warranty claims
Federal law sets forth requirements for warranties and contains a number of
provisions to prevent vehicle manufacturers, dealers and others from
unjustly denying warranty coverage. With regard to aftermarket parts, the
spirit of the law is that warranty coverage cannot be denied simply because
such parts are present on the vehicle, or have been used.The warranty
coverage can be denied only if the aftermarket part caused the malfunction
or damage for which warranty coverage is sought. Disputes in this area
usually boil down to arguments over facts and technical opinions, rather
than arguments over interpretations of the law.
Federal Warranty Laws
1.The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. 2302(C))
This federal law regulates warranties for the protection of consumers. The
essence of the law concerning aftermarket auto parts is that a vehicle
manufacturer may not condition a written or implied warranty on the
consumers using parts or services which are identified by brand, trade, or
corporate name (such as the vehicle maker's brand) unless the parts or
service are provided free of charge. The law means that the use of an
aftermarket part alone is not cause for denying the warranty. However, the
law's protection does not extend to aftermarket parts in situations where
such parts actually caused the damage being claimed under the warranty.
Further, consumers are advised to be aware of any specific terms or
conditions stated in the warranty which may result in its being voided. The
law states in relevant part:
"No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied
warranty of such product on the consumers using, in connection with such
product, any article or service (other than article or service provided
without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by
brand, trade or corporate name..." (15 U.S.C. 2302(C)).
Yep. And when DC says, "Your aftermarket performance devices caused too
much stress on the drivetrain, and that's the reason for the failure, so no
warranty" - you can wipe the tears away with the paper you printed the M-M
But you are also failing to see the spirit of the law yourself. The purpose
for the law was to protect the consumer while not directly hurting the
manufacturer. What it basically says is that you can use an aftermarket
REPLACEMENT part without it affecting your warranty (unless the aftermarket
part caused the failure) but it really offers no protection to those that
choose to MODIFY their vehicle with parts that cause changes in operation
from factory specifications or didn't exist at all. As Tom said, if you add
parts that change fueling from factory specs, you have modified the engine
beyond DC specifications and they cannot be held responsible for your
If at first you don't succeed, you're not cut out for skydiving
"GeekBoy" < firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
And just to add to what Tom said (for the OP's digestion):
It (in theory, anyway) places the responsibility on the warranty provider to
demonstrate that the aftermarket part caused the failure. Now, that's a
pretty gray area, subject to a lot of interpretation.
The example I give is one that happened to me some time back... I had my
'99 (under warranty at the time) in at the dealer for a suspected rear main
seal leak. They informed me that it wasn't the rear main, but the oil pan
gasket that was leaking - then told me it was $160 or so to replace it.
They "claimed" that since I put a lift kit on the truck, the warranty was
void. A quick mention of, "Well, according to M-M, that's illegal for you
do to" cleared the issue right up. After a bit of backpedalling, they
quickly agreed to cover the repair under warranty.
That's a clear-cut example of an aftermarket part having nothing to do with
a failure. Had I experienced a failed ball joint, for example - the
conversation would have been much different. And in the end, does anyone
have the time/patience/money to hire a lawyer and go to court? In most
cases, no... (although some with complete engine failure, leading to
thousands of dollars in repairs, have gone the legal route - with mixed
The point is - in practical terms, the dealership has a pretty good leg to
stand on if they refuse a powertrain-related warranty claim on a powertrain
that's been modified from original specs. Note, too, that this isn't the
same as "voiding" or "cancelling" a warranty. Only DC can do that, and only
after inspecting the vehicle and determining either abuse, emissions
tampering, or odometer fraud. What a dealership CAN do, is place
restrictions on parts of your warranty - which is nothing more than a
red-flag in the dealer system telling other dealers, "hey - before
proceeding with a warranty claim on this vehicle, check into x, y, and z".
The end result isn't much different, but a restriction on your powertrain
means your A/C system is still covered (for example) - just like my oil pan
gasket was covered, even though I'm fairly certain my vehicle was "flagged"
for any kind of suspension work (as if the 38" tires weren't enough of a
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.