Can i get 400hp in my 94 idi TD? I just want to see what i would have to get in order to achieve or surpass my goal.. Thanks.

 

Probably can be done, but it will cost a bunch and probably be so close the the edge it would not be worth it.

The rest of the drive train would need some serious mods to stand 400 HP.
I was able to twist driveshafts and explode U joints with a NA 6.9 at about 220 HP.

 

I dont think these IDIs have the bottom end like a powerstroke to handle 400 HP.
You would most likely create viewports in the engine block w/ 400 hp.

If you want to see crazy things done to a IDI look at Halen Lowman's gallery of his 89 F250 Diesel.
Yes that is a Holset turbo on an IDI.

 

I have always gone the other way, rather than look for power I look for ways to improve my milage, and longevity.

I am glad I bought my truck before my wife and three girls came around. There no chance now for finding $50k to $60k for one of those new powerstrokes.

Given my current milage and seeing how long these truck have lasted for others, I figure I will drive my 93 turbo right into retirement.

 

i never made no 400 hp out of my truck, it was more to the tune of 250 and it would slip the clutch all day long. i did make a few viewports in the side of my block like dieseldan says, but that motor had over 330,000 miles on it, time to go?? maybe.. theres a possibility. i had lots of fun with that truck. i still have it, all sad lookin sittin up there with the motor and transmission sittin in the bed, i will get around to gettin a nother block and puttin some low compression pistons, twin turbos, and nitrous in it. but till then, i'll be driving an old dodge i found.... i know, traitor, but its not to say i hate that ol goat with a purple passion, that cummins is making 320 hp and 820 ft lbs at the rear wheels. i carry the dyno sheet in my back pocket to prove it...lol

 

the funnest mod i ever did to my truck was to install a 4,000 rpm governor spring in the pump and turn the screw 1/2 turn.

 

WOW 4000 RPMS on a diesel that sounds crazy, I thought that it wasnt good to even run it at 3000 rpms?
Jeremy

 

I bet there isn't that great a difference in the bottom end between the generations. I think the biggest sticking point to a big power IDI is the compression ratio. You guys have something like 24:1 pistons and the PSD's are down around 17:1, so your cylinder pressures can get out of control with a lot less fuel that the older brothers can take.

Just a thought.

 

The bottom end will hold up. FOr how long I don't know but it's just as strong as a powerstroke. Headgaskets might be a problem but a set of studs can help fix that. These engines run about 21:1 compression. You can lower the compression on them and run unreal amounts of boost but it makes them rather hard to start.

 

i disagree with the "low compression makes it hard to start" problem i could be wrong on this, but it seems to me the real reason these engines are hard to start w/o glowplugs is the injection timing. what is it, 5-8* idling and even less when you mash the throttle? my theory on this is the 21-1 comp ratio is why this timing # is so low. and that if you switch to lower compression pistons, 14-1 or 17-1 then you can bump your timing up to about 12-15* or more in really hot motors, and that in itself would make it start better. i could be all wrong about this whole theory, but it sounds right to me, on paper anyways.
i know my dodge 5.9 cummins will fire up at 30*F without even the air heater thingy hooked up, and they don't even have glowplugs. i am running about 16* timing in it.

 

All good thoughts above but don't forget one of the fundamentals of thermodynamics which is the higher the compression ratio the higher the fuel efficiency, the more mpg you are going to get. (You probably figured out by now that I am an engineer)

I consider myself lucky to have a 93 IDI which was one of the last engines before Ford lowered the compression ratio from 21:1 to 17:1.

Ever wonder why in the 7.3l Powerstrokes never really improved on milage? Sure they got more power, but these days anybody looking at diesel must be thinking mpg right?

I found it kind of dis-heartening that the powerstrokes you could buy ten years after my 93' IDI had come out had not improved in fuel economy.

Anybody got some figures on the 05 powerstroke milage? Seeing that they reduced engine size to 6.0l they may actually get a little better milage now.

 

People have milled the pistons to get a lower compression ratio. The owner of www.dps-performance.com has 400+ hp coming out of his 6.9... as someone said, it makes a cold start really hard, but once its runnin...damn.
anyways, if you want to do that you had better get a new turbo housing and downpipe, preferably 4", which are really really hard to find btw-not to mention the serious firewall modding youll have to do, and a propane injection setup. get Stage I injectors and turn up one of DPS's performance IP's and then add an intercooler. Adjust wastegate so you get about 15 psi with original compression and intercooler and 18-20 if you lower it and add the intercooler. Without the intercooler 11psi is hte maximum effecient level because there is a large temperature jump between 11-13 psi which causes hot air, which in turn means less dense air. You dont want that. If you are planning on numbers like that, you need to get copper crush-sleeve head gaskets from International as well as head studs from DPS-performance.com ...

Hope that helps, and I hope you do it too. You could also add NOS for high RPM's horsepower... oh, and dont go above 3000 rpm, its bad after a while...

 

This is a subject that I've had harsh feelings about for a LOOOONNNGGG time. My problem with this is WHY do people think they need to run an engine fast (high RPM)?


My motorcycle makes peak torque at 7500 RPM. Given this information, it is found that peak HP is generated at 9500-9700 RPM. The redline (and subsequent rev-limiter) are set at 11,500 RPM. Why rev it up higher than about 1500 RPM higher than torque peak? The ratios in the transmission are so close that dropping 1500 RPM per shift is impossible. There is no need to go any higer RPM since the torque falls off like a lead balloon after about 8000 RPM. It's the same with ANY engine. Eventually ( on ANY build) you are hitting a volumetric efficiency (torque) wall.....and your numbers fall off. Diesel engines are no exception....ESPECIALLY DIESELS!!

My point is this:
Why in the world do people (with diesel engines especially) think that they need to run 4000+ RPM on a low RPM diesel (read: anything besides a 6.0L and 6.6L)? The torque curve on these things is so peaky that they are DEAD after 3000 RPM anyway. Sure, change the cam, the head porting, etc. and you might change the curve slightly, but come on.

My 94 CTD was dead in the water after 1800 RPM (I LOVED IT) but that means that at any speed above that there was no acceleration, no power, and fuel mileage went down the toilet. The fact that it had 4.10 gears also sucked because that limited my top speed (if I wished to keep it at 1800 RPM) was approximately 54 MPH. Can you imagine how much (or little) power would be produced at 4000 RPM with these things? Not much. It would be no different with a 7.3L.

Cody

 

yes, this was the funnest mod i ever did to my ford AND my dodge, i run my 5.9 cummins past 4,000 every day, and if you read a little more into detail, you see this
now, i said the mod was FUN..... not smart. i would suggest this to anyone who is CRAZY about diesels and will take full responsibility of their "blown up diesel engine" on themselves. instead of saying, "i did what he said and it blew my motor up". i ran that motor for about 2 years up to 3600 every day, many times a day before it blew up. shattered a piston and pieces were laying in the bottom of the oil pan. and she shure starts bellowing the smoke above 3,000! and they sound good with 2-1/2 in. true duals with glasspacks

 

I dont know about the old 12 valve cummins but the 24 valve cummins peak torque at 1400 rpms and run flat across the graph until like 2800 or something.