I like that idea. Sounds like a good time.

 

Get me 2 that are exactly equal in HP, Torque, transmission gearing and same rear end ratios. Then you can do a real world comparison.

 

let me see now cat 3412 cummins isnot sure what number but 12 and 16 cyl ) v type engines making 2-3000 hp. no inline options

 

We are talking about trucks not boats and generators etc... Let me know when they squeeze a v12 or 16 in a pickup,tractor, or semi. Read the last phrase in my 1st post.

 

believe you me if it was "more complex/less reliable" they would not be using the V configuration. complex? unreliable? so what was wrong with the 350 gm v8, or the 6.9, or the 7.3 powerstroke all used in pickups and all did pretty good. V type easier to fit in(shorter)easier to balance to have less vibrations particularily as rpm gets higher. no to say that he old 300 or a 5.9 isn't a good motor. personally I think one of Fords big problems is not sticking with one design and developing it. chevy did that with the 350 and look how popular it is and how long the design has lasted. you bring out an all new design every 5 years and your mechanics and aftermarket have to start all over learning how to fix it.

 

just my opinion , but I think it is the GOVERNMENT , EPA that mandates cleaner air and better mileage each year ! they are trying to push every one into the green cars , ole Fred Flintstone car of the future !

 

what do you need a wider powerband for in a truck???? inline engines were built for the same reasons old trucks were. my 300i6 may not be fast by anymeans but it could pull a house down. you dont need to go over the torque and horsepower band of what the 300i6 has i shift at 2000 rpms because it doesnt need much more and you can get more torque out of an inline 6 than a v8 with a whole lot less effort and not to mention im getting 22mpg average out of a 4x4 truck can your v8 of a compareable size and era do that i bet not

 

Why a V-8 with all of the clearance issues and such? Simple. Americans are carefully spoonfed that a car (truck) has to have a V-8 in it to get any sort of performance. Point is the detroit car business was built on the V-8, especially Ford starting way back with the flatheads. The heavy diesel industry was, with exceptions, built on the inline engine.

Look at all of the gufaws that Ford took over the ecoboost in the F150. Why I remember that people were stating that the day that V-8's were no longer offered the world would end (or something equally bad likke having to buy a GM V-8 powered truck)

Personally I will take a inline engine any day for the ease of access. Besides, for a given displacement, fewer cylinders will always get better fuel economy due to less overall heating surface (which wicks away heat that could be otherwise be harnessed to do actual work other than heating air or water).

David

 

We have a couple of Isuzu's at work. A rental and a company truck. They are box trucks, GVWR 16,000+ lbs. They have 5.2 liter FOUR cylinder motors. 215 hp at 2500 rpm, 452 ft/lb at 1850 rpm. 6 speed automatics. They shift at redline, about 3200 rpm, and will run the trucks up to redline (about 80 mph) with ease. These are not loaded heavily, but it's the frontal area that they are fighting for top speed.

V8s are smoother--if they are built to be smooth. And of course you get more power. But clearly not every application requires a V8. Since this thread is about a 300 six based diesel, I would say that the 300 probably would not be a good conversion candidate, but an in line six, five or four diesel certainly could have /could be a good seller.

The rental has 86000 miles and went into limp mode once afaik, back in service in a day or two. (not sure what the problem was, but it wasn't major.) The company truck has 35000 miles, no issues other than I think someone put diesel in the DPF fluid tank. It's not been out of service at all.

Cut and past from the Isuzu site:



<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR><TD>Standard</TD><TD>Aisin A465 6-speed auto with double overdrive and lock-up 2nd-6th gears

</TD><TR><TD>-Optional</TD><TD>Isuzu MZZ 6-speed manual</TD></TR><TR class=gray vAlign=top><TD class=whitetitle>Engine</TD><TD>Isuzu 4HK1-TC turbocharged intercooled diesel</TD></TR><TR vAlign=top><TD>-Displacement</TD><TD colSpan=2>5.2 L (317 in.<SUP>3</SUP>)</TD></TR><TR vAlign=top><TD>-Engine Power</TD><TD>215 HP @ 2,500 rpm (A/T), 195 HP @ 2,650 rpm (M/T)</TD></TR><TR vAlign=top><TD>-Engine Torque</TD><TD>452 lbs./ft. @ 1,850 rpm (A/T), 387 lbs./ft. @ 1,600 rpm (M/T),</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%"><TBODY><TR class=gray vAlign=top><TD class=whitetitle>
</TR></TBODY>

 

Good thoughts, but generaly it turns out bad not to start with a clean slate to start with. International tried this with there line of V-8 diesels (not the 6.9/7.3/6.0's) only to end in failure. Oldsmobile tried this with there 5.7 / 4.3 V-8 diesels and ended up in failure (the 4.3 V-6 with extra head bolts was ok) Actually, the last of the Olds 5.7 were ok, but by then there reputation was ruined and even if they had lasted 1 million miles they could not outlive the bad press.

One thought - the Olds diesel was designed to only replace a gas engine, providing the same engine life as a gas engine (100k - but providing up to 50% greater economy) and was only a $400 option over the gas engine. That does not buy much of a diesel engine! How would a 100k designed cheap diesel go over nowdays, could people understand the difference between a expensive 500k diesel and a cheap 100k diesel and not complain about the short service life of the cheap diesel, even though that is what it was designed and sold for?

Really, give that some thought, if a 6.7 diesel on a new F250 is a $8k option, and people expect 300k + miles, how many would opt for a $2k cheaper diesel option that say only lasted 100k, and then not complain about the short service life? Even though you could put in 4 of the cheaper diesels and theoreticly get a longer overall life than a sigle more expensive diesel?

How many would complain even though they made that desicion and how would it affect Ford's reputation, much like it did (rightfully so at first, not so in the later years) of the Olds diesel reputation?

We tend to accept this cheaper / shorter life span tradeoff when it comes to gas vrs diesel, but how about diesel vrs diesel?

Anyways, just some thoughts....

You would be suprised at how fast moving from a 8:1 compression ratio to a 20:1 reveals weakneses though. And then add a Turbo which packs even more air in to be compressed.... yeaowwww

Another thought would be to make the engine a linered engine. It costs more initially but pays dividends if kept long enough. That would be tough to do within the current 300's bore spacing / head bolt spacing. Ypou can also get did of the troublesome head gasket as well by a machined lip on the liner and a corrosponding recess in the head (or visa / versa) and using O/R's for the coolant and oil passages.

Still a interesting thought

David

 

More like the new engines that Cat Trucks will use are Maxx Force Engines painted yellow. Navistar and Cat are in bed these days. Check out the joint venture: Cat CT660 - the Class 8 Vocational Truck from Caterpillar

The Maxx Force engine program are all highway engines. Cat only builds off-highway engines for off-road equipment in house.

 

Sounds like a cool idea. I have a 300 inline 6 that I had built for a turbo charger and it is hard enough finding head gaskets and studs strong enough to hold up to 15 psi of boost and 8.7 :1 cr.

How about converting a gas engine into the texaco engine? It's pretty much what all of these ecoboost engines are, just a direct injected, spark ignition engine. I have a 84 nissan datsun pickup that has a 4 cylinder gas motor with two spark plugs per cylinder. I think it would be a perfect candidate I just need to research where to find an injection pump and injectors that would work.

I also have a 4 cylinder diesel datsun that I plan to run on propane and just have it diesel ignition. Maybe I'll have enough time and money some day to experiment with both of these ideas and see which one does better.

 

Inline six engines have a few advantages like not having balancing issues, easy access, etc, but thats pretty much it.
The power characteristics of the engine depend on the bore and stroke, not cylinder configuration.
In recent years, electronic diesels with variable turbo's can have whatever power curve you want, so there little advantage there.



To the OP, the 300cid inline 6 might have a reliable reputation, but that would end shortly after you're conversion.
Take a 6.0 diesel, remove forced induction, and lower compression, and convert it to gas, and it would last a lot longer than any inline 6 gas motor. Diesels use a lot heavier of parts.

 

Hmmmm pure propane in a diesel? How do you control the timing? Just hope that the detonation occurs at TDC?

 

There are diesels that run with propane, and they still require an injection to ignite the propane.
Why would you want to run a diesel on pure propane when a gas engine will run it no problem?