I am kind of new on this site, and I see the talk about the good, bad,and the ugly of the different light truck diesels on the market. Why does it seem we only have I-H, Cummins, and Isuzu to choose from? So, just to kick it around, does anyone Know why Caterpillar doesn't jump in this market? No engine that would fit? Pollution regulations? They are a reputable engine maker. They had the 3208 V-8 in farm tractors, med- trucks, ect, for a time. We have one in a tractor that was bought new in '79. The only thing done to the motor was, the water pump and injector pump was replaced, and is still going strong. Years ago I heard of a guy around here that shoe-horned one in an old chevy {heard about it never saw it}. I do remember they called it a throw-away motor, when it wears out, just replace it with another!

 

They don't currently make anything that will fit, and Ford, GM, and Chevy all have current contracts with Navistar International (no longer called I-H), Isuzu, and Cummins. They do build a 7.2L I-6 that Ford offers in it's commercial trucks, but it won't fit under the hood of a pickup.

 

3208 good motor, but to heavy for commuter type of truck.

 

how will a 7.2L not fit in a superduty if a 7.3L will?

 

quote
__________________________________________________ __

how will a 7.2L not fit in a superduty if a 7.3L will?
__________________________________________________ __

The liter displacement (7.3L-6.0L-7.2L) is determined by the actual displacement(volume) in the cylinders, it has nothing to do with actual engine size, although engines with more displacement tend to be larger.

Also the 7.3L PSD achieves its displacement with 8 cylinders in a V configuration.
The Cat gets 7.2L with 6 cylinders in an inline configuration.
These 6 cylinders in the Caterpillar are going to be considerably larger than the 8 cylinders in the PSD.
The engine will weigh more and it's my guess that it would be too long to fit under the hood.
The Cummins ISB is about the longest inline that will fit under the hood of a pickup. It is a large engine about the same size as the 7.3L PSD even though it's displacement is much smaller-5.9L vs 7.3L.
Now imagine the Cat inline at 7.2L......


Regards.

 

Somebody over on the Expediter website was posting something about a 4 cylinder , wet-sleve , turboed , overhead cammed diesel that Detroit diesel is making that is supposed to have Big Nads and get really good fuel milage that they are putting in medium duty trucks. Does anybody know anything about this particular engine???fd

 

It is called a series 50 and is just a series 60 with two cylinders cut off. Available up to 350 HP IIRC but that is pushing it I think. I don't know if it would fit in a pickup but I had not thought about it before. It sounds like it might be ideal. One guy did put an ISC which is a medium size 6 cylinder Cummins into his 95 F truck, and I remember saying to myself if they made a 4 cylinder C engine that would be perfect. But this 4 cylinder Detroit completely slipped my mind.

One thing to note is the C cummins gets better economy than a B cummins in a similar application. This is a common theme among truck engines, the bigger ones seem to burn a bit less fuel as they loaf along, just that they cost more.

I may feel a project coming on with this S50. Now all I need to find is a receptor truck.

Birken

 

Well , I just put Detroit's website on my favorites list....that 50 series ...4 cylinder engine Weighs.....2,230...pounds. Man...it displaces something like 1130 cubic inches!!!!!!Just a tad bit heavy for a 3\4 ton pickup......fd

 

Oh hey I knew there must have been a reason.. How much does a 6CTA weigh I wonder?

Birken

 

I spoke to a CAT rep about this very thing and he told me that it had been looked at before but that the CAt engines just cost to much for this market. That was how he understood it anyway.

 

If I remember right, it took CAT a long time just to get into the heavy truck market with the pre cup engines, the 1675 and 1693 series. They were so heavy the trucks had to be redesigned to carry that weight.
After the initial experience with those engines CAT went to different style precup engines and then to direct injection.
I wouldnt know for sure if CAT makes a small enough block to put into even a heavy pickup truck. I do know there is lots of cast iron in one of the CAT engines.
As stated above, it is not just the displacement that counts, but the size of the block the displacement is in.
If I made sense out of this, send it back because I think I just got lost.
Take pride in your ride and stay alert.

 

Part of the issue is the upcoming emission regulations. I've read it's going to be costly, and difficult, but not impossible, to meet the proposed 2007 standards.

Cat isn't likely going to put many millions into designing a motor for light-duty pickups without a committment from a customer.

It's not going to be Ford, they're buying (and seemingly happy with) Navistar/I-H. Chrysler, if anything, is going to use more of their European and Mercedes-designed diesels. I think GM owns a big chunk of Isuzu, a company with lots of light-duty diesel experience, so they aren't likely to be a customer for a new Cat diesel, either.

Who knows, maybe Toyota will put Cat diesels in their Tundra pickups- LOL!

Me, I couldn't be happier with that International school bus engine in my superduty!

 

I remember a conversation with a CASE tractor sales guy...He said that the 4 cylinder diesel that they currently install in their 470 and 570 tractors is actually the 6 cyl. that is in the Dodge trucks ...minus 2 cylinders........I'm just wondering if 4 cylinders would be enough for a 3\4 ton truck...???????fd

 

I was looking at little diesels also, one problem with four cylinder diesels is the same thing thats wrong with four cylinder gassers they have lousy dynamics, and just like gassers the bigger the rougher. I read once that someone was working on a four cylinder with a counter shaft to smoothe it out, probably Isuzu.
I new a guy he is gone now(Coors and a honda) who aquired a V6 aluminum block Detroit and installed it in an F250 it pulled great but it was evil and noisy as well as sluggish, even empty. And, I'm sure some of you will remember these if you were in the Army or the Corps, I knew a guy in the Army who aquired a Gama Goat that had a wrecked cargo box and was useless so was sent to DRMO for sale, he bought it and installed the three cylinder Detroit aluminum engine and transmission in a Ford F250 it sounded just like crap but it did pull well and again it wasn't going to win any sprints.
I understand that Detriot diesel has discontinued two stroke diesels as they cannot be effectivly built to meet the new standards for emissions, they may have been light and powerfull but I never drove anything with one in it that wasn't noisy as hell, I was kinda looking at the possibility of a Perkins six (British) they have a small six and there is allways the Koreans or MAN even Continental has a small diesel, I think there is even some small White diesels around.

 

Other than being a bit slow, there was nothing wrong with the 4-cylinder Mazda diesel engines Ford put in the late-1980s Rangers, they even had a turbo model toward the end, and they did have a rotating balance shaft. 100 HP out of a 2.3L (?) 4-cyl turbodiesel in 1988. That would translate to maybe 250 HP out of a 6.0L diesel engine of the same general archaic design. Not too shabby.
So, how far have we advanced over the last two decades?

When fuel got cheap, the public lost interest in diesels and so did the manufacturers.