If you want lots of cheap inches and torque why on earth waste time and serious money on a diesel?
Put in a 472/500 Caddy and TH400 and be done with it. Altho huge in displacement it is less than 100# heavier than a SBC and lighter than a Y Block, 302/332, FT. etc
The 500 has lots of aftermarket support, forums and whatever is needed to make it play.

For a F600 or larger truck the Caddy has adaptors to many tranny patterns so with a little creativity hooking up to the original truck tranny shouldnt be all that much of a chore. Looking at the specs of the larger series gas engines (477, 534) I doubt if the 500 would hurt those trannies.

Im building a vintage wrecker from a F3 cab and nose on a 62 F250 frame. Engine will be a vintage torque monster, a 58 Lincoln 430 MEL. A lot heavier than the Caddy and expensive to rebuild but I like to play outside of the box at times. With 375 HP and 490 Torque out of the box it will be interesting.

 

I think you answered your own question. It isn't like we drive 50 year old trucks because we are practical. We are probably all just a little outside the box.

My friend has 3 vehicles with 460 Lincoln engines. He bought the last one at a swap meet cheap. Got some high compression heads at the same meet and built a really nice motor and it gets pretty good gas milage. But he also drives a diesel, I gues you got to have one of everything.

 

This thread was started as an informative thread for the people interested in installing a diesel engine into a 48-56 or similar year Ford truck. Your 472/500 caddy motor would never even come close to the pulling power of the CAT V-8 sitting in my 53 F-800. Even if I intended on a gasser for that project, the cost in building a small or big block gasoline engine to even attempt to compare to the torque of the CAT that is turning in front of the 5x4 trans and tandem rear drive axles, would be several thousand dollars. I paid $1000 for the donor dump truck, and they delivered it the 28 miles, and it was 100% complete and in running condition. The cost of swapping in a gas motor, versus swapping over my sheetmetal, left me at a no brainer decision. Keep your gas guzzling big block, and your 8-12 miles per gallon, and I'll stick to the 600 plus lb ft of torque out of my 15-18 mpg CAT that has a much greater reliability factor especially when pulling a large load up hill. When your big lbock is grunting at the 26,000 pounds sitting behind it winding up the Rockies, I'll be setting at the top waiting on with twice the load, and no overheating problems. Again, this thread was intended for those with an interest in a diesel conversion.

 

[QUOTE=286merc]If you want lots of cheap inches and torque why on earth waste time and serious money on a diesel?
Put in a 472/500 Caddy and TH400 and be done with it. Altho huge in displacement it is less than 100# heavier than a SBC and lighter than a Y Block, 302/332, FT. etc
[QUOTE]

I am sure your caddy is a nice motor, but if you are going to truck, it takes heavy iron. I have been on both sides of this argument, and until you start up Wolf Creek Pass with a big load you will never understand. If you were to spend an hour pulling your caddy motor hard it would melt - while the heavy duty truck motors wont even break out in a sweat.

There are good reasons why heavy equipment (dozers, motor graders, 18 wheelers, earth movers, and the like) are diesels - and it is not the cheap fuel.

 

Time for me to weigh in again. When I considered using my F1 to pull a travel trailer, I looked at the gas vs. diesel argument. It turns out there is no argument. When you look at the fuel usage vs. torque the diesel wins hands down. The diesel will also generate more torque with less displacement. Yes, there are some trade-offs with a diesel, more engine weight and more operating noise. But, any engine-transmission choice is going to have trade-offs. You need torque to pull the load. A diesel will do that. With the major manufacturer's in the game with their diesel trucks, there are more engine choices. The real killer right now is the EPA and their changing emissions rules every three years. It is putting the diesel truck design cycle in a real tizzie.

I'm with wmjoe. What info do you have that can help someone with the choice of a diesel in an older truck? Where are you going to have problems with the installation of a diesel in an early model truck?

Where can you find operating weights for the currently available diesels? I need the ops weight of a 7.3L Ford Powerestroke diesel. I figure its around 700 pounds maybe slightly less.

Some problems areas for the early trucks are fitting the radiator, intercooler and air conditioning condenser in the front of most early trucks.

Anymore info or ideas?

Phil

 

[QUOTE=WillyB][QUOTE=286merc]If you want lots of cheap inches and torque why on earth waste time and serious money on a diesel?
Put in a 472/500 Caddy and TH400 and be done with it. Altho huge in displacement it is less than 100# heavier than a SBC and lighter than a Y Block, 302/332, FT. etc
WillyB,
I've seen Wolf Creek Pass. I agree. Try Salt River Canyon, before they tried to "fix" it. And there are many more to demonstrate the need for a diesel to pull a heavy load. Go read some of the RV'ers magazines like "Trailer Life". Not too much talk or advertisements about gasoline engine trucks.

Phil

 

Pre 99 PSDs didn't use intercoolers in a space limited area I would not worry about it, they certainly are nice, but the pre 99 PSD owners are not tripping over themselves to add ICs they still get plenty of power with the usual add ons.

Is length or width more of the issue that may be a determining factor in a cummins, vs PSD argument. I would assume length would be the limiting factor.

 

The amount of sheet metal cutting depends not so much on the motor you use, but whether or not you swap a motor, or the sheet metal. If you put your cab on a different chassis that already has the motor and DT installed, then you will end up doing some firewall trimming in order to keep the front wheels in the fender openings correctly. If you put a different motor in you stock chassis, then you can get away with minimal sheetmetal trimming, and have the chance to place the motor where you want it in the chassis. My F-800 body is on a different chassis, and so in order to keep the front wheels of the donor chassis in the stock 53 fenders, I had to move the cab over the rear of the motor by trimming out the center of the firewall to make room for about 3-4 inches of doghouse. With more time and money, a person can relocate the front axle, and can make the body and engine choices fit to their desire. The 5.9 Cummins is not really that much longer than say a 300 cid inline six, and the width is of no concern. The bellhousing and tranmission configuration is where most people will end up dealing with sheet metal work, but believe it or not, the old F-350- through F-600 bellousing is roughly the same size as the bellhousings found on most diesel applications. After a lot of checking, on everything from Isuzu P'ups to Peterbilts, I was amazed by how close in size the diezel engines are to the older gas engines. A 500 Caddy motor is almost the same size as a P-Stroke, a 300 I-6 is almost the same size as a Cummins 5.9, an old 279 or 317 or 391 Ford truck motor is comparable in size to a Detroit 6V71 or even 8V71, and the CAT V-8's like the 1160/3208(T) motors. Weight is an issue for any diesel swap. A diesel motor like the 5.9 Cummins weighs around 1000 pounds, while a 300 I-6 only weighs around 300. This is why I said you will need to box your frame, and it's a good idea to fab an additional crossmember to keep the frame from trying to bow in at the top. There are a crap load of diesel motors available, they outlast the trucks they'r in. If you look at the classifieds for semis, it's not uncommon to find a truck advertising around 500K or even 1,000,000 miles. You will never find a gas motor boasting that, EVER. Diesel engines are longer lasting, provide more torque output, and have a lot of hop ups available. For a towing rig, it would be foolish to go gas instead of diesel. I am still working on measurments, and hopefull this summer, I'll have a long list of measurements, including dry weights for tech info on this subject. Plus, when you have to choose between bio diesel and $6.00 a gallon at the pumps, diesel may be a batter option. You could go grain alcohol on your gas motor, but your usability factor would dang near disappear. Just some food for thought there.

 

WMJoe1953, where are you coming up with the MPG figures you are stating(15-18 MPG for a 1160-3208 Cat) I have run 2 of these engines,one 1160 in an older F7000 got around 9-10 and 3208T in my 78 LN8000 only got around 10-12 MPG. When it swarmed, I replaced it with a 6-71 Detroit and 13 speed and now get around 10-11 MPG. Both of these trucks are service type trucks that weigh around 20-22K.

Jeff

 

Weight and axle ratios provide for better mpg figures. When I bought the truck, I was told that they were avaraging 15 MPG unloaded. The weight has been reduced by nearly half, and that is why I am figuring an increase in economy. My axle ratio is also being changed in favor of more highway type gears such as 3:55 or 3:07 gears, or somewhere near there. Plus, the 53 Ford cab and nose are more more aerodynamic than the L-8000 body. Also, I was comparing figures common to a P-Stroke or Cummins versus a comparable gas motor such as the 454 or 460. After my truck is finished, with the gears ratio changed, and a few other things changed, I would not be surprised to see 16-18 MPG. These are all common factors to increasing economy in what ever vehicle, with whatever motor.

 

Good luck, I haven't seen these kind of mileage figures from a V8 Cat engine before but your results could be different. I currently run a R600 Mack with EM6-300 engine with a 13 double over tranny and 3:55 gears and don't get close to that mileage empty. Usually run around 9-10 MPG pulling my 37' 5er which only weighs 16K.
Jeff
P.S. Let me know what you get when finished, just curious.

 

You need to consider factors beyond gears, and weight. There are many factors that contribute to economy. Tire size, aerodynamics, environment, atmospheric pressure, etc. , etc. You could take one rig, get 20 MPG at sea level, and get 15 at say 4500 ft in elevation. There are so many factors to consider in measuring fuel economy. Air flow, vehicle size, shape, weight, tire size and inflation pressure, barometric pressure, fuel grade, engine condition, driving conditions, and the list goes on and on. To think a vehicle is incapable of better economy than advertised, is a mistake. My fathers 55 F-350 averaged 8-10 MPG empty, but incredibly, it got 13 loaded. It did not matter how loaded, or what type of conditions, it always got exactly 13 MPG loaded. My father is **** about keeping track of fuel economy. If you take two identical trucks (semis) one a tractor type truck, the other a dump truck, the tractor will average higher economy, due to weight and aerodynamics.

 

I wasnt intending the Cad to go in a F800 up Brokeback Mtn or whatever. Not too many on here using a 50's F800 for regular work anyway.

However since smaller trucks were mentioned several times in the prior threads I offered an alternative and not meaning to start an argument or getting an attempted put down either.

A 472/500, 460, 454/502 or similar will haul or tow anything a 50's F-100 to F-350 will be capable of without major changes to suspension and steering. Ive built several F-100/250's with 460/C6 for customers that tow car trailers, travel trailers and big boats anywhere the owners desire and loaf in the process. With a 2.75 rear the cruising economy is in the 15-19 range with 89 octane when a decent cam, Edelbrock intake and a Holley or Demon carb is used along with headers and a H pipe. The Edelbrock/Carter AFB carb is not as efficient altho easier to set up for the novice.
And at a LOT LESS money, headaches and engineering. With diesel fuel even more $$ than 93 octane around here you would need a few generations of family drivers to show a break even with a big block gas motor considering the fairly low yearly mileage it would be driven.

And as mentioned with the EPA screwing up everything they touch I wouldnt want to put in a huge $$ diesel investment unless it was absolutely necessary as in a working F600 or larger.

For about 5 years my business used a 92 E350 16' box truck with 22K GVW and usually loaded to the max. On car show weekends it also hauled a 7500# trailer all over the North East and Mid Atlantic. Ran a 460/E4OD and steady 65 hwy mileage was 13-15. I sold it with 182K on it when I got out of the show circuit, never a problem with the driveline.

 

Actually, I agree with you. For the purpose of a F-250 or 350 small toy hauler, I would agree with the option of a big block. For the cost and availablility, it is far more cost effective. And for the street machine F-100, no better choice. I was actually hitting the F-4 + owners interested in the diesel engines, and the people wealthy enough to afford one to go into a 3/4 or 1 ton. I lost interest in the F-100 and F-250 trucks, since they are over done. I've focused my hobby around the F-350 and larger, and especially the F-700 +. The engines I checked, will fit into a Big Job truck with out heavy mods, and a smaller truck with only minor mods. I was not attempting to start up an argument either. I guess I could have been more specific in my 48-56 model description. Maybe we could just turn this into a comprehensive thread that covers the non-stock gas or diesel engines that will fit into the F-100 thru F-900 48-56 or later Fords. If anyone is interested in some tech research for the F-100 through F-350 trucks, I will research the F-500 thru F-900. We could use this thread as our brainstorm, and compose a list to input into a tech article. There are good choices for both gas and diesel engines, and it would be beneficial to have a thread available for the people wanting to convert to a non stock engine.

 

Actually, I also agree with you - except I sure want to point out Brokeback Mountain was about a couple of sheep herders (not cowmen) - and they likely drive Dodges.

When I was driving you had to keep the engine between 1950 and 2600 RPM - that is why trucks have so many gears. I guess the new diesels have a wider RPM range or they couldn't sell them to the general public - I can just see some of these guys shifting a 5 and a 4 - or even a 13 speed.

I wouldn't want to use one as a daily driver myself.