I doubt that the Dodge Dakota front suspension will handle the weight of the 7.3 diesel. The 3/4 ton Dodges have a lot of front end trouble with the weight of the V10 and the Cummins. I would guess that they are similar weight to the 7.3 . If you are set on a diesel, a 4BT Cummins would be more practical, and probably have better transmission choices. They would certainly give you a lot more room to work around in a '49 than the Power Stroke. When I decided on an engine for my '49 F4 the only engine choices that I would consider was a flathead V8 or a diesel engine. I have a good 6.9 turbo diesel in my '85 Ford Van that I considered, but I measured it and decided that it would be too tight a fit. If you do you own maintenance like I do, being able to get to everything without having to be a contortionist is a plus. I don't think that would be possible with an engine as big as the Power Stroke shoe horned in there.

 

Dusty Road,
I'm sorry. I did not intend to offend. I was just responding to your comments and your opinion is welcomed by me.

It is hard to compare a 7.3L diesel to a new crate motor because the sources of this diesel are all used, since it is no longer manufactured. I'd have to start with a 7.3L from a salvage yard or used truck along with the wiring harness and transmission. I could then go with a remanufactured engine using that engine as a core if it is not suitable to use.

That all works into the decision process and the cost estimates of the crate motor vs. the used diesel.

With this thread I was looking for input and ideas from this forum to cover the things I might not have thought about.

Thank you for your input.

Phil

 

49fordv8f4,
I've discussed this with Steve, the owner of Industrial Chassis, who has a Dakota IFS under his personal truck, which has a 454 big block Chevy with twin turbochargers. He developed the whole concept of using the Dakota IFS under early pickups and continues on the development of them today. Steve has more experience with installing the Dakota IFS than anybody in the country. He says that the Dakota, with V8 coil springs will handle the 7.3L diesel without a problem.

I've considered a 4BT; however, this engine is too noisy and does not develope the power that I am seeking. Yes, the 7.3L V8 will be a close fit but not any tighter than a big block Ford.

The best choice in diesel would be the new Cummins ISV5.0L V8 that Nissan is installing in the new 2016 Titan; but so far Cummins is not offering that new engine as a crate motor.

Phil

 

Im not sure if youve considered it in you dimensions, but if you leave the turbo in the stock position, you will have to make some room for the down pipe to come down behind the motor as well. I am almost positive that there is a guy on here putting a 7.3 in a 48-50 f1. Ill try and look to see if i can find it. So I guess you arent interested in going with the zf-6 for a transmission?

 

Gicknordon,
The down pipe would have to fit in the space of the exhaust manifold cross connect that feeds the turbo, which extends 3 inches behind the transmission flange.

Who is the guy putting a 7.3L in a 48- 51 besides me?

No, the ZF-6 manual transmission is not what I am looking to install. Most used or salvage yard transmissions behind 7.3L diesels are automatics.

Phil

 

I searched for a while and the closest I could find was a guy putting a 7.3 in a 48-50 COE. I swear i remember seeing someone putting one in a pick-up though. I'll try and keep looking.

 

there is a 7.3 a guy put in a 53-55. dont know who but ive seen pictures. As far as all the debate that was going on...any engine weight can be remedied by stiffer/heavier rated suspension. Ive even seen a 12V cummins in a 54, and that is by far the heaviest diesel engine. There will of course need to be modifications made to the "trans tunnel" and possibly the firewall, but by the looks of the pics you posted you and the shop are more than capable of completing such mods! Go for the 7.tree man.
In a year or two i plan on starting a 55 that i want to drop a 6.0 into, so youre not alone!

 

sorry, the 7.3 was put into a 56
XDP Diesel's East Coast Open House - Diesel Power Magazine

 

OMG, Bob's F-100 did that conversion!!

 

My opinion only, and I sound like my Dad did when I say this, but I don't think either of these engines would be optimal (if there is such a thing).


While heavier springs can manage the extra weight of the diesel, you cannot disobey the laws of physics; what amounts to a SWB truck with 1,000 pounds over the front axel and 500 lb-ft will be more than a little scary (and not the good kind) going around corners. Way more power than you can use to haul or pull in this package.


You could buy or build a 300 horse SBF for half what the crate engine costs (or go used for 1/10th) and have all the power a daily driver work truck needs. (Boy that really sounds like Dad). I question how streetable a $10,000 racing engine might be. I guess if you can afford to build it, you can afford to feed it.


I am often wrong (but never in doubt) and either build could be an awesome little truck but maybe not do what you want this one to do. " I build them to use them as they were intended, a truck. This will be my daily driver. " On the other hand, no one aspires to be average. If you build either of these it will be a great accomplishment so be sure and get back to us and let us know the overall driving impressions and performance you end up with.


Okay, you can go back to your "Who's got the biggest d*" contest (that does not sound at all like my Dad).


*diesel

 

Albuq F-1,
If you read the captions for the pictures at the link, they used a 95 7.3L which is the early version of that engine which is the turbocharged non-intercooled version. The late 98-03 7.3L is the turbocharged, intercooled version which is the best version of the 7.3L diesel.

Its interesting to note that they had to use special inner fender wells and cut them down to get it to fit. My F1-F100 experts tell me that the 48-50 engine bay is larger than the 53-56 engine bay. Are they correct?

Phil

 

My friend Steve Szymanski at Industrial Chassis, suggested I look into this Cummins diesel, the ISF3.8L.

Able Billion Asia Limited » Blog Archive » Vehicle Engine ISF3.8 Series

It is not EPA certified but is certified to Euro III which is close to the current EPA requirements. Bruiser Conversions is importing them and doing a Jeep conversion for off-road only.

The transmission choices are limited to something with a SAE 3. Steve suggested possibly an Allison 1000 six-speed from a 06-07 GM.

Getting one licensed here in the States could be aproblem unless your state allows any engine in a titled vintage vehicle.

Any thoughts?

Phil

 

740 pound 4 banger..for that weight I would put in a BB chevy that would smoke it on HP and torque. In with a TH400 or 4L80E and call it a day. That diesel has a 2950 RPM redline, you would need a 10 speed trans and dual range rear

 

49fordv8f4,
I got some input on the ability of the Dakota IFS to handle the weight of the 7.3L diesel.

The front of a V8 Dakota 131 Wheel base Club Cab carried 3300 pound on the front axle. The 48 F1 carries considerably less weight with a total curb weight under 3500 pounds and nearly 65% of that on the front axle. So you figure that you may be carrying around 2300 on the front with a normal engine weighing in at the 600 pound mark, adding another 400 pounds of engine is not going to overload the front end, not by a long shot. Plus! The engine is considerably back on the axle compared to the stock Dakota or D25/D350 trucks in comparison.
Data on a stock 1996 Dakota V8 truck:
http://www.cars.com/dodge/<wbr>dakota/1996/specifications/?<wbr>acode=USA60DOT073A0



Your truck has a 122" wheel base and with a 1000# engine you will be carrying about 27-2800 pounds on the front end. That ends up being very similar to the long bed standard cab Dakota trucks. I really don't see cause for concern.

I got that input from Steve at Industrial Chassis who knows the Dakota install.

Phil

 

No! The 53-56 engine bay is by far larger then the 48-52!