When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I just wanted to say “thank you”. I had an extremely rough day but seeing how you went out of your way to thank each person for their reply to your original post, your politeness was extremely nice to see. You actually helped my attitude after reading this thread.
You are a true gentleman. I hope your project is a fulfilling challenge and light on the wallet.
I just wanted to say “thank you”. I had an extremely rough day but seeing how you went out of your way to thank each person for their reply to your original post, your politeness was extremely nice to see. You actually helped my attitude after reading this thread.
You are a true gentleman. I hope your project is a fulfilling challenge and light on the wallet.
Sorry for going off-topic, everyone.
Best Regards.
— Dave
Hello Djosbun, Thanks for your reply and no apology needed. This Forum a nice resource and tool to have with friendly members who are knowledgeable and willing to jump in and help others with their questions. I too enjoy reading other members posts and will jump in with my .02 cents worth of info if it can help others. I am a welder and mechanic by trade so these types of projects I find enjoyable even if it's not all the practical and light on the wallet is the bonus.
When we're talking about vehicles that don't use sophisticated electronic engine controls, or other electronic controls for other systems of the vehicle for that matter, like on vehicles of the 80s and earlier, yes I agree it can be fun. But sadly, those days are LONG gone.
BTW, did you know that on Chrysler cars that came originally equipped with the 225 slant six, you can't swap in a 318/340 or 360 without changing the subframe?
I agree with you on all the electrical BS these newer vehicles have attached to the engine to make them run. Unlike the old days these newer engines are designed to run down the road based on emissions and not performance. Not trying to start am argument, but you know who we have to thank for this.
I wasn't much of a Mopar guy back in the day so I didn't know this about Chrysler. I did know Chevy was engineered in the same way. Pull out the old 250 6 cylinder and bolt in a 454 BB, not all that difficult. FoMoCo on the other hand, what a nightmare if you wanted to swap an engine. It seemed like nothing would bolt together easy like GM without having to change the bell housing and motor mounts.
Hello oot44e, Thanks for your reply. I have 350k on the old 7.3, its just tired. I am guess the low compression is why it has become so hard to start.
A 7.3 can still be in good shape and have good compression at 350K. There are many things that can cause hard starts on a 7.3. I think you would be better off properly diagnosing what's wrong with you engine before you start thinking about swapping.
A 7.3 can still be in good shape and have good compression at 350K. There are many things that can cause hard starts on a 7.3. I think you would be better off properly diagnosing what's wrong with you engine before you start thinking about swapping.
I agree with you 100% on diagnostics first. I know the history on this 7.3 and it has not had a very easy life, it has always had a loaded trailer hooked to it. I can't complain on how dependable it has been for me over the years with very little money spent on parts aside from regular maintenance. That 7.3 owes me nothing for the years of great service I have received from it. I do understand the different issues that will cause a hard start condition, I am past that point and just not interested in spending the money to rebuild it. That 1997 is just like a good old horse, you don't get rid of it, you put it out to pasture. In my case I will trans plant that 5.8L into it and keep it around the farm for miscellaneous use.
A 7.3 can still be in good shape and have good compression at 350K. There are many things that can cause hard starts on a 7.3. I think you would be better off properly diagnosing what's wrong with you engine before you start thinking about swapping.
I tend to agree. Glow plug relays tended to go bad on 7.3s of that vintage if I recall correctly. As far as the glow plugs themselves, if you ohm test each plug and you're getting any readings greater than 0.5 to 2 ohms, they're due for replacement. Heck on one of that vintage, it wouldn't be a bad idea just to throw in a new set anyways. And while they're out would be a good time to do a compression test. All you need is a compression gauge with the appropriate range along with fitting that will thread into the glow plug hole. 350 to 400 psi readings will indicate good compression.
I wasn't much of a Mopar guy back in the day so I didn't know this about Chrysler. I did know Chevy was engineered in the same way. Pull out the old 250 6 cylinder and bolt in a 454 BB, not all that difficult. FoMoCo on the other hand, what a nightmare if you wanted to swap an engine. It seemed like nothing would bolt together easy like GM without having to change the bell housing and motor mounts.
Ahhhh the good old Chevys. Yes, almost every Chevy engine in existence from the 250 straight six, to the 305/350 small blocks, along with the 454 and YES the 366/427 tall deck big blocks used in the vintage medium duty trucks too, ALL share the same familiar "pointy" bellhousing bolt pattern. Heck, even the Duramax diesels and the newer generation of LS engines STILL use the same Chevy bellhousing bolt pattern! GM always has done things simpler.
Rezvani's Latest Post-Apocalyptic Monster Is a Ford F-150 Raptor Underneath
Slideshow: Called the Fortress, the 850-horsepower pickup combines Raptor underpinnings with military-inspired features, survival equipment, and a starting price of $285,000.