Using Glow Plugs to Super tune the engine
#346
11-03-2007, 12:49 AM
Freshman User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: FL
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a bit of history with some problems that plague the IDI's.
GM had introduced the converted 350 CID gas engine diesel in some of it's cars around 1980 or so. (I'm not a big GM fan, so my history here is pretty inacurate). These engines were fair sellers, but the sales were stiffeled by many problems that they had, and they were pulled off the market. GM recognized that they needed an original design, so they turned to Detroit Diesel which they owned at the time, to assist with a design for a replacement. This led to the development of the 6.2L, which was a significant improvement over the 350, but still not real great. GM had pretty much scared the car buying public away from diesels with the 350 fiasco, so the 6.2 was put in pickups in hopes that the commercial arena, which was already intimate with diesels, would pick it up and prove that it would work out. This led to limited sales to the general public. Ford had been watching all this with great interest, and when GM announced a diesel pickup, Ford had no choice but to respond. They knew that they could not field a diesel on their own, and needed to select an engine that had a proven track record. International Harvester had been using a motor developed for their school buses and small dump trucks and utility vehicles, and it was holding up well, so they struck a deal and started selling the IH 6.9L engine in pickups beginning with the aforementioned 1983 model year. The engine would not fit in a pickup as it was, so it was necessary to redesign the oil pan, air cleaner, and right side exhaust manifold, along with the fuel filter bracket and accessories in order to stuff it under the hood of a F-series truck. Because of the weight, you could only get the diesel in an F-250HD or higher. I ordered my F-250HD in April of 1983, and recieved it in July. It was the first Ford Diesel Pickup that my dealer had ever sold. It will turn 22 this year. Sales were light at first, but as the reputation grew, so did the sales. By 1986, there was not an ambulance, tow truck, roll back, or airport shuttle that wasn't 6.9 powered. Since I bought mine with the intent of keeping the milage low, I had an advantage. I got to watch what happened to the other ones. Several problems which would become well known started to spring up. Manual trucks were suffering from throw out bearing galling, causing high pedal effort and a multitude of clutch problems. The big problem though, was head gasket water seepage, caused by the head bolts relaxing and lifting the rear corners of the heads, which were running a little hotter thanks to the CDR valve feeding the back two cylinders a bit of oil. The head gaskets were subsequently redesigned 3 times. The other problem with the 6.9's were the valve stem seals, which allowed the engines to consume a bit of oil. Other than that, they were mechanically sound engines. By 1986, arch rival GM had suffered at the hands of the 6.9, and they positioned themselves to release their new engine, the 6.5L. Ford saw this coming, and IH (now known as Navistar, since selling their farm division to rival Case, in 1985) moved to produce the 7.3. Some of the weaknesses in the 6.9 had been analyzed, and the final year of 6.9L production saw some interesting twists. They began to test the 7.3L glow plug system and drive train on the 6.9's! Consequently, there are a few 6.9's around that have things that are not normally found on them, such as the 7.3L glow plug system, dual mass flywheels, and 5 speed manual transmissions. 1987 was the change over year, and by 88 the 7.3L version was released. IH build this engine by boring out a 6.9, increasing the size of the headbolts, and makeing some other slight changes to address new EPA concerns that were coming out. What Ford didn't realize however, was that by boring out the cylinders, that would open the pandora's box of cylinder cavatation. Those who bought early 7.3's suffered the most, as their trucks began to fail in record numbers in major ways, and talks of class action law suits began. Ford did not address the cavitation issue, until the mid 90's when they began putting in supplimental coolant additive addendums to the users manual, and training their dealers on the issue. By 1994, Ford and Navistar had realized the error of their ways with the 7.3, and pressed for the introduction of the Powerstroke. GM however, had begun to turbo charge the 6.5L, and Ford needed to add turbo power to it's linup right away. This was addressed by getting turbo manufacture ATS, to begin supplying Navistar with turbo kits, that were applied at the Factory. So in 1993, you could get a NA or Turbo version of the 7.3IDI. However, press hype for the PSD was already in motion, and the PSD did not have significantly higher horsepower numbers than what a turbo IDI could produce, so the injection pumps of the turbo IDI's were kept turned down, and an impairing down pipe ensured that anyone who tried to turn one up, would not get good results. This resulted in a sales floor conundrum of trying to sell at turbo equipped engine with a higher cost, and yet only making 10HP more than the NA version. So, when 1994 rolled around, you had the choice of buying a 7.3 NA, 7.3 turbo, or 7.3 PSD. Naturally the new, unproven PSD, had a good 50 HP or so over the IDI's, making them a natural choice and allowing the now cursed 7.3 IDI to fade from the catalog. I suspect you younger guys can pick up the story from there. As a final comment, my model A 6.9L was delievered with 170HP. HP figures would range from 155HP to 175HP depending on model year and altitude calibration. When the truck was delivered it had 3 miles on it. By the time I picked it up, it had 11. Every mechanic had taken a ride in it, and they were all VERY impressed. Most thought the engine was too powerfull for a pickup, and I was warned it would be hard to stop (high brake pedal effort in a panic stop). This was addressed in later years.
GM had introduced the converted 350 CID gas engine diesel in some of it's cars around 1980 or so. (I'm not a big GM fan, so my history here is pretty inacurate). These engines were fair sellers, but the sales were stiffeled by many problems that they had, and they were pulled off the market. GM recognized that they needed an original design, so they turned to Detroit Diesel which they owned at the time, to assist with a design for a replacement. This led to the development of the 6.2L, which was a significant improvement over the 350, but still not real great. GM had pretty much scared the car buying public away from diesels with the 350 fiasco, so the 6.2 was put in pickups in hopes that the commercial arena, which was already intimate with diesels, would pick it up and prove that it would work out. This led to limited sales to the general public. Ford had been watching all this with great interest, and when GM announced a diesel pickup, Ford had no choice but to respond. They knew that they could not field a diesel on their own, and needed to select an engine that had a proven track record. International Harvester had been using a motor developed for their school buses and small dump trucks and utility vehicles, and it was holding up well, so they struck a deal and started selling the IH 6.9L engine in pickups beginning with the aforementioned 1983 model year. The engine would not fit in a pickup as it was, so it was necessary to redesign the oil pan, air cleaner, and right side exhaust manifold, along with the fuel filter bracket and accessories in order to stuff it under the hood of a F-series truck. Because of the weight, you could only get the diesel in an F-250HD or higher. I ordered my F-250HD in April of 1983, and recieved it in July. It was the first Ford Diesel Pickup that my dealer had ever sold. It will turn 22 this year. Sales were light at first, but as the reputation grew, so did the sales. By 1986, there was not an ambulance, tow truck, roll back, or airport shuttle that wasn't 6.9 powered. Since I bought mine with the intent of keeping the milage low, I had an advantage. I got to watch what happened to the other ones. Several problems which would become well known started to spring up. Manual trucks were suffering from throw out bearing galling, causing high pedal effort and a multitude of clutch problems. The big problem though, was head gasket water seepage, caused by the head bolts relaxing and lifting the rear corners of the heads, which were running a little hotter thanks to the CDR valve feeding the back two cylinders a bit of oil. The head gaskets were subsequently redesigned 3 times. The other problem with the 6.9's were the valve stem seals, which allowed the engines to consume a bit of oil. Other than that, they were mechanically sound engines. By 1986, arch rival GM had suffered at the hands of the 6.9, and they positioned themselves to release their new engine, the 6.5L. Ford saw this coming, and IH (now known as Navistar, since selling their farm division to rival Case, in 1985) moved to produce the 7.3. Some of the weaknesses in the 6.9 had been analyzed, and the final year of 6.9L production saw some interesting twists. They began to test the 7.3L glow plug system and drive train on the 6.9's! Consequently, there are a few 6.9's around that have things that are not normally found on them, such as the 7.3L glow plug system, dual mass flywheels, and 5 speed manual transmissions. 1987 was the change over year, and by 88 the 7.3L version was released. IH build this engine by boring out a 6.9, increasing the size of the headbolts, and makeing some other slight changes to address new EPA concerns that were coming out. What Ford didn't realize however, was that by boring out the cylinders, that would open the pandora's box of cylinder cavatation. Those who bought early 7.3's suffered the most, as their trucks began to fail in record numbers in major ways, and talks of class action law suits began. Ford did not address the cavitation issue, until the mid 90's when they began putting in supplimental coolant additive addendums to the users manual, and training their dealers on the issue. By 1994, Ford and Navistar had realized the error of their ways with the 7.3, and pressed for the introduction of the Powerstroke. GM however, had begun to turbo charge the 6.5L, and Ford needed to add turbo power to it's linup right away. This was addressed by getting turbo manufacture ATS, to begin supplying Navistar with turbo kits, that were applied at the Factory. So in 1993, you could get a NA or Turbo version of the 7.3IDI. However, press hype for the PSD was already in motion, and the PSD did not have significantly higher horsepower numbers than what a turbo IDI could produce, so the injection pumps of the turbo IDI's were kept turned down, and an impairing down pipe ensured that anyone who tried to turn one up, would not get good results. This resulted in a sales floor conundrum of trying to sell at turbo equipped engine with a higher cost, and yet only making 10HP more than the NA version. So, when 1994 rolled around, you had the choice of buying a 7.3 NA, 7.3 turbo, or 7.3 PSD. Naturally the new, unproven PSD, had a good 50 HP or so over the IDI's, making them a natural choice and allowing the now cursed 7.3 IDI to fade from the catalog. I suspect you younger guys can pick up the story from there. As a final comment, my model A 6.9L was delievered with 170HP. HP figures would range from 155HP to 175HP depending on model year and altitude calibration. When the truck was delivered it had 3 miles on it. By the time I picked it up, it had 11. Every mechanic had taken a ride in it, and they were all VERY impressed. Most thought the engine was too powerfull for a pickup, and I was warned it would be hard to stop (high brake pedal effort in a panic stop). This was addressed in later years.
Last edited by FTE Ken; 11-03-2007 at 10:08 AM.
#347
11-03-2007, 11:02 AM
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arthurgoboom....your timing is so close you can smell it........I would make a new matching scribe mark on the IP and housing....<big>at this point, I would leave the timing alone</big>..(most likely you are with in 0.015 either side of the mark for cruising speeds,,,,that equals about one half of a degree + or -)
The two readings I am looking hard at are these:
Hot engine no load, 0, 2500, 0.95
Steady cruising, 50, 2000, 1.15
Please report fuel mileage, boost and EGT's, length of intake system to center bolt hole of air cleaner (plus if you can get a estimate of length from bolt hole to longest intake valve).....we will use the center bolt hole for reference point from now on. Have you done any modification to the exhaust?
Ed Hall...I like using the millivolts scale....I can tell by the close readings at idle that the injectors have a close reading which is good (maybe take a look at number six) I can tell more with millivolt readings.....
7.3.......Excellent Information on the engines! Let's try to add more information to this list such as the size of the Intake and Exhaust Valves of the 6.9 and 7.3 Fords and any information about factory port size....it would be very good if someone would compare the physical differences (length of the tip, maybe even a test to see any temperature difference when current applied)between the Beru and Autolite glow plugs.............
Now, in the information that 7.3 posted, there is a "hidden jewel":
"" Head design changes -
6.9 features "centered" glow plugs, while 7.3 are "off-center"
Injection nozzles have been retracted on the 7.3 .060" to facilitate Federal and state emission certs. ""
It is simply this: the thickness of the injector sealing washer can be used to "tune the engine"
Even the position and the depth that the glow plug tip is in the chamber can be used to "tune the engine".......
I know people will be thinking, "man, this is to much work, but if one person does decide to do some of these things and reports the effects and in the future when you have to do maintenance on injectors or glow plugs...........you can take advantage of some of these things "
Gentlemen, we are now getting to the point of applying facts about these engines, math, logic, modern automotive science and more importantly 100 to 150 year old science on how to fuel a Internal Combustion Engine........
crossbones
The two readings I am looking hard at are these:
Hot engine no load, 0, 2500, 0.95
Steady cruising, 50, 2000, 1.15
Please report fuel mileage, boost and EGT's, length of intake system to center bolt hole of air cleaner (plus if you can get a estimate of length from bolt hole to longest intake valve).....we will use the center bolt hole for reference point from now on. Have you done any modification to the exhaust?
Ed Hall...I like using the millivolts scale....I can tell by the close readings at idle that the injectors have a close reading which is good (maybe take a look at number six) I can tell more with millivolt readings.....
7.3.......Excellent Information on the engines! Let's try to add more information to this list such as the size of the Intake and Exhaust Valves of the 6.9 and 7.3 Fords and any information about factory port size....it would be very good if someone would compare the physical differences (length of the tip, maybe even a test to see any temperature difference when current applied)between the Beru and Autolite glow plugs.............
Now, in the information that 7.3 posted, there is a "hidden jewel":
"" Head design changes -
6.9 features "centered" glow plugs, while 7.3 are "off-center"
Injection nozzles have been retracted on the 7.3 .060" to facilitate Federal and state emission certs. ""
It is simply this: the thickness of the injector sealing washer can be used to "tune the engine"
Even the position and the depth that the glow plug tip is in the chamber can be used to "tune the engine".......
I know people will be thinking, "man, this is to much work, but if one person does decide to do some of these things and reports the effects and in the future when you have to do maintenance on injectors or glow plugs...........you can take advantage of some of these things "
Gentlemen, we are now getting to the point of applying facts about these engines, math, logic, modern automotive science and more importantly 100 to 150 year old science on how to fuel a Internal Combustion Engine........
crossbones
#348
11-03-2007, 12:22 PM
Now, in the information that 7.3 posted, there is a "hidden jewel":
"" Head design changes -
6.9 features "centered" glow plugs, while 7.3 are "off-center"
Injection nozzles have been retracted on the 7.3 .060" to facilitate Federal and state emission certs. ""
It is simply this: the thickness of the injector sealing washer can be used to "tune the engine"
Even the position and the depth that the glow plug tip is in the chamber can be used to "tune the engine".......
"" Head design changes -
6.9 features "centered" glow plugs, while 7.3 are "off-center"
Injection nozzles have been retracted on the 7.3 .060" to facilitate Federal and state emission certs. ""
It is simply this: the thickness of the injector sealing washer can be used to "tune the engine"
Even the position and the depth that the glow plug tip is in the chamber can be used to "tune the engine".......
So what could be the effect of say, placing a second copper seal under each injector? What about removing the glow plugs alltogether? these engines can be fired up with hot air as well (at least for testing purposes).
Could this be something that could increace combustion performance(completion)?
Pulling the injector slightly further out from the combustion chamber should also have a slight impact on CR, not sure how much though....
Last edited by David85; 11-03-2007 at 12:25 PM.
#349
11-03-2007, 02:20 PM
New User
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CB,
I should have some MPG, EGT, boost data after next weekend when the truck goes out again. The air intake system is kind of a mess, it has the old Banks aluminum airbox that has lots of twists and turns, but it's all fairly large cross-section (at least 2x the area of the turbo inlet). I have a rather long cold air hose feeding the inlet of the airbox, I'd say we're looking at a healthy 50-60" of intake travel between where I pick up cold air (inside left fenderwell near radiator core support mount) to the centerbolt of the intake.
I have another engine that's disassembled that I can measure the distance from the center bolt to the intake valves. I presume you are looking at reversion wave tuning here?
As for the exhaust, it uses the Banks Y-pipe that joins the left and right bank near the transmission, then curves up along the top of the trans to the turbo pedestal. The joint is a fabricated Y-joint that merges at about 15 degrees. Each pipe that connects to the exhaust manifolds is 2" I believe, and the pipe going up is 2.5". Turbo outlet is 3" tubing, with just a couple bends to get it down to the frame. No muffler. Everything from the front of the cab to the exit is mandrel bends.
The next thing I'm going to look at is perhaps the turbocharger isn't performing as intended...I'll have to check the boost numbers out on the open road on that trip next weekend.
I should have some MPG, EGT, boost data after next weekend when the truck goes out again. The air intake system is kind of a mess, it has the old Banks aluminum airbox that has lots of twists and turns, but it's all fairly large cross-section (at least 2x the area of the turbo inlet). I have a rather long cold air hose feeding the inlet of the airbox, I'd say we're looking at a healthy 50-60" of intake travel between where I pick up cold air (inside left fenderwell near radiator core support mount) to the centerbolt of the intake.
I have another engine that's disassembled that I can measure the distance from the center bolt to the intake valves. I presume you are looking at reversion wave tuning here?
As for the exhaust, it uses the Banks Y-pipe that joins the left and right bank near the transmission, then curves up along the top of the trans to the turbo pedestal. The joint is a fabricated Y-joint that merges at about 15 degrees. Each pipe that connects to the exhaust manifolds is 2" I believe, and the pipe going up is 2.5". Turbo outlet is 3" tubing, with just a couple bends to get it down to the frame. No muffler. Everything from the front of the cab to the exit is mandrel bends.
The next thing I'm going to look at is perhaps the turbocharger isn't performing as intended...I'll have to check the boost numbers out on the open road on that trip next weekend.
#350
11-03-2007, 04:47 PM
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JNKDad and forum members: The information that follows is more or less restricted to the IDI's used in Fords and depending on engine design could differ some to other engines.................The glow plug is a dual function part. Yes, first it helps start a cold engine and they are needed on a IDI. The second function of which is so important to us is that it is very important heat source for the 5 to 10% of "atomized" fuel once the engine is Hot. Getting this 5 to 10% atomized fuel starting a very small flame front is very important in providing the additional heat and currents in mixing the available oxygen with the 90 to 95% of the fuel that has been sprayed onto the chamber walls and has been pyrolised into it's more basic gases such as hydrogen..................we want to "combust" hydrogen.......Not Burn Raw Diesel Fuel..........there is 6 times more energy in hydrogen than raw diesel fuel.................
Changing the thickness of the injector sealing washer changes the pattern and amount of raw fuel that hits the chamber walls of which changes the amount of hydrogen produced...................
Arthurgoboom has mentioned reversion wave tuning or sound wave tuning...............sound wave convergence is extremely important to the production of hydrogen under certain conditions............
It's all about "old science" not "modern information that you have been lead to believe is "science"........they had Internal Combustion Engines running on hydrogen a 150 years ago.........
crossbones
Changing the thickness of the injector sealing washer changes the pattern and amount of raw fuel that hits the chamber walls of which changes the amount of hydrogen produced...................
Arthurgoboom has mentioned reversion wave tuning or sound wave tuning...............sound wave convergence is extremely important to the production of hydrogen under certain conditions............
It's all about "old science" not "modern information that you have been lead to believe is "science"........they had Internal Combustion Engines running on hydrogen a 150 years ago.........
crossbones
#351
11-04-2007, 09:27 AM
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Basically, it will be some trail and error of a thicker or thinner injector sealing ring. There are several factors to consider of which some will be a contradiction of "modern thought" verses "old science"..
Again, we are discussing a IDI engine with a center pintel nozzle and NOT a DI engine or multi port nozzle.
The Ford 6.9 and 7.3 diesels use the basic design of the Ricardo "Comet" pre chamber with center pintel nozzles.
The lab tests done at Langley in the early 1900-1920's and the design features of the Ricardo "Comet" chamber are basically where this information comes from.
This is more or less a over view of the thousands of lab test and patent's I have read and studied of the times put into my own words.
This style IDI chamber and center pintel nozzle has several distinct functions in the combustion of the fuel charge. The first function is for the injector to atomize a small amount of fuel (5 to 10%). This atomized fuel is mostly in the center and upper part of the chamber where the glow plug is located. This area is where the pre flame starts and produces more heat and mixing currents. Since the mixing currents in the center of the chamber are less predictable there is less predictable combustion of the fuel.
The next function of the nozzle is to form a very tight core charge (pattern) with the intent of this core charge hitting the very bottom wall of the chamber (the hottest part of the chamber). Then to spread out on the chamber walls into a very thin layer of fuel. There are several positive and more predictable key factors with this. These are some of them:
Very easy to test film layer thickness compared to injector pressure, quantity of fuel injected and design of the walls and predict the penetration of the core charge with different pressures in the chamber.(think N/A verses turbo and injector pop off of each)
The temperature of the walls are more consistent and controllable by controlling water jacket temperature.
The mixing currents coming through the small passage between the chamber and the cylinder can by design of the passage be more predictable and directed along the chamber walls for more effecient mixing of the available oxygen and fuel.
The "old science" focused on "proper penetration" of the fuel core charge hitting the bottom chamber wall of which then formed the proper "film layer".
If we assume the chamber walls are so designed to achieve the proper film layer with the proper penetration of the fuel core charge, then our thoughts should be directed on the variables that affect penetration.
Variables:
a clean injector (does not drip)
pop off pressure set in relationship to cylinder pressures expected (N/A or turbo)
sealing washer thickness
fuel quantity
fuel density
In the pre flame period burning the atomized fuel we are restricted to working with the depth of the glow plug into the center of the chamber once the above penetration variables are fixed.
crossbones
Again, we are discussing a IDI engine with a center pintel nozzle and NOT a DI engine or multi port nozzle.
The Ford 6.9 and 7.3 diesels use the basic design of the Ricardo "Comet" pre chamber with center pintel nozzles.
The lab tests done at Langley in the early 1900-1920's and the design features of the Ricardo "Comet" chamber are basically where this information comes from.
This is more or less a over view of the thousands of lab test and patent's I have read and studied of the times put into my own words.
This style IDI chamber and center pintel nozzle has several distinct functions in the combustion of the fuel charge. The first function is for the injector to atomize a small amount of fuel (5 to 10%). This atomized fuel is mostly in the center and upper part of the chamber where the glow plug is located. This area is where the pre flame starts and produces more heat and mixing currents. Since the mixing currents in the center of the chamber are less predictable there is less predictable combustion of the fuel.
The next function of the nozzle is to form a very tight core charge (pattern) with the intent of this core charge hitting the very bottom wall of the chamber (the hottest part of the chamber). Then to spread out on the chamber walls into a very thin layer of fuel. There are several positive and more predictable key factors with this. These are some of them:
Very easy to test film layer thickness compared to injector pressure, quantity of fuel injected and design of the walls and predict the penetration of the core charge with different pressures in the chamber.(think N/A verses turbo and injector pop off of each)
The temperature of the walls are more consistent and controllable by controlling water jacket temperature.
The mixing currents coming through the small passage between the chamber and the cylinder can by design of the passage be more predictable and directed along the chamber walls for more effecient mixing of the available oxygen and fuel.
The "old science" focused on "proper penetration" of the fuel core charge hitting the bottom chamber wall of which then formed the proper "film layer".
If we assume the chamber walls are so designed to achieve the proper film layer with the proper penetration of the fuel core charge, then our thoughts should be directed on the variables that affect penetration.
Variables:
a clean injector (does not drip)
pop off pressure set in relationship to cylinder pressures expected (N/A or turbo)
sealing washer thickness
fuel quantity
fuel density
In the pre flame period burning the atomized fuel we are restricted to working with the depth of the glow plug into the center of the chamber once the above penetration variables are fixed.
crossbones
#352
11-05-2007, 02:01 PM
Freshman User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: FL
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is some valva specs for the 6.9 adjustments:
CYLINDER HEAD SPECIFICATIONS FOR 6.9L DIESEL
Cylinder Head Specifications On
Navistar International 6.9L Engines
Due to the extremely close running clearances between the pistons and valves and the pistons and cylinder head, it is extremely important to maintain the proper specifications on this engine when performing cylinder head rebuilding operations.
The cylinder head thickness should be maintained between 4.795 and 4.805. Figure 1 shows that this measurement is taken from the deck surface to the valve cover rail.
Figure 2 shows the valve angles for the Navistar 6.9L engine. Notice that the exhaust valve angle is 37 1/2° while the intake valve angle is 30°. The valve seats have the same angles as the valves.
Again, due to very close running clearances, proper valve recession must be maintained. There is only .009 running clearance between the exhaust valve and the piston when the exhaust valve is fully open. The recession specifications are as follows:
Intake: .042-.054 (1.06mm-1.37mm) A and B models
Exhaust: .043-.055 (1.09mm-1.40mm) A models *
Exhaust: .046-.058 (1.17mm-1.47mm) B models *
* All exhaust valves serviced through Navistar are the B valves only, Navistar part #1 805 917 C1. Use the B specification with all new exhaust valves and the A specification on reused valves where applicable.
When reassembling the Navistar 6.9L cylinder heads, you must snap the valve stem seal onto the bottom of the valve spring retainer. Failure to do so may create coil bind.
CYLINDER HEAD SPECIFICATIONS FOR 6.9L DIESEL
Cylinder Head Specifications On
Navistar International 6.9L Engines
Due to the extremely close running clearances between the pistons and valves and the pistons and cylinder head, it is extremely important to maintain the proper specifications on this engine when performing cylinder head rebuilding operations.
The cylinder head thickness should be maintained between 4.795 and 4.805. Figure 1 shows that this measurement is taken from the deck surface to the valve cover rail.
Figure 2 shows the valve angles for the Navistar 6.9L engine. Notice that the exhaust valve angle is 37 1/2° while the intake valve angle is 30°. The valve seats have the same angles as the valves.
Again, due to very close running clearances, proper valve recession must be maintained. There is only .009 running clearance between the exhaust valve and the piston when the exhaust valve is fully open. The recession specifications are as follows:
Intake: .042-.054 (1.06mm-1.37mm) A and B models
Exhaust: .043-.055 (1.09mm-1.40mm) A models *
Exhaust: .046-.058 (1.17mm-1.47mm) B models *
* All exhaust valves serviced through Navistar are the B valves only, Navistar part #1 805 917 C1. Use the B specification with all new exhaust valves and the A specification on reused valves where applicable.
When reassembling the Navistar 6.9L cylinder heads, you must snap the valve stem seal onto the bottom of the valve spring retainer. Failure to do so may create coil bind.
#353
11-07-2007, 05:38 PM
Freshman User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: FL
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This what I found for the valve specs:
Sealed Power V-2302 Exhaust Valves (1.5950" head diameter, .3719" stem diameter, 5.6700" OAL
Sealed Power V-2303 Intake Valves (1.8770" head diameter, .3719" stem diameter, 5.6880" OAL)
Part # Details
Part # : V1998 Part Desc : Valve, Intake (Std. Stem)
DIMENSION
Std Stem Diameter : 3/8" ET Stem Diameter : 0.3719"
Std Head Diameter : 1.877" ET Head Diameter : 1.877"
Valve Length : 5.687" Notes : Chrome Stem
Reamer : N/R Bushing : N/R
COMPETITIVE INTERCHANGE
Brand Name Brand Part #
Clevite 211-2561
Elgin I-1998
Fed. Mogul V-2303
Manley S1998
Melling V1543
SBI 01543
ALSO FITS
Engine Details Notes
FORD TRUCK/VAN 420/6.9 OHV V-8 Navistar Diesel 4.000'' Bore '83-87 .3719" stem. 1.877" head. +.010" margin.
FORD TRUCK/VAN 445/7.3 Diesel V-8 Navistar IDI 4.111'' Bore '88-95 .3719" stem. 1.877" head. +.010" margin. Turbo & non-turbo.
IHC/NAVISTAR TRUCK/VAN 420/6.9 OHV V-8 Diesel 4.000'' Bore '83-87 .3719" stem. 1.877" head. +.010" margin.
IHC/NAVISTAR TRUCK/VAN 445/7.3 OHV V-8 IDI Diesel 4.110'' Bore '88-95 .3719" stem. 1.877" head. +.010" margin. Turbo & non-turbo.
Part # Details
Part # : V403 Part Desc : Valve, Exhaust (Std. Stem)
DIMENSION
Std Stem Diameter : 3/8" ET Stem Diameter : 0.3720"
Std Head Diameter : 1.595" ET Head Diameter : 1.595"
Valve Length : 5.670" Notes : Chrome Stem
Reamer : N/R Bushing : N/R
COMPETITIVE INTERCHANGE
Brand Name Brand Part #
Clevite 211-2562
Elgin E-403
Fed. Mogul V-2302
Manley A2001
Melling V1542
SBI 01542
ALSO FITS
Engine Details Notes
FORD TRUCK/VAN 420/6.9 OHV V-8 Navistar Diesel 4.000'' Bore '83-87 .3720" tapered stem. 1.595" head. Non-Turbo. +.010" margin.
FORD TRUCK/VAN 445/7.3 Diesel V-8 Navistar IDI 4.111'' Bore '88-95 .3720" tapered stem. 1.595" head. Non-Turbo. +.010" margin.
IHC/NAVISTAR TRUCK/VAN 420/6.9 OHV V-8 Diesel 4.000'' Bore '83-87 .3720" tapered stem. 1.595" head. Non-turbo. +.010" margin.
IHC/NAVISTAR TRUCK/VAN 445/7.3 OHV V-8 IDI Diesel 4.110'' Bore '88-95 .3720" tapered stem. 1.595" head. Non-turbo. +.010" margin.
Sealed Power V-2302 Exhaust Valves (1.5950" head diameter, .3719" stem diameter, 5.6700" OAL
Sealed Power V-2303 Intake Valves (1.8770" head diameter, .3719" stem diameter, 5.6880" OAL)
Part # Details
Part # : V1998 Part Desc : Valve, Intake (Std. Stem)
DIMENSION
Std Stem Diameter : 3/8" ET Stem Diameter : 0.3719"
Std Head Diameter : 1.877" ET Head Diameter : 1.877"
Valve Length : 5.687" Notes : Chrome Stem
Reamer : N/R Bushing : N/R
COMPETITIVE INTERCHANGE
Brand Name Brand Part #
Clevite 211-2561
Elgin I-1998
Fed. Mogul V-2303
Manley S1998
Melling V1543
SBI 01543
ALSO FITS
Engine Details Notes
FORD TRUCK/VAN 420/6.9 OHV V-8 Navistar Diesel 4.000'' Bore '83-87 .3719" stem. 1.877" head. +.010" margin.
FORD TRUCK/VAN 445/7.3 Diesel V-8 Navistar IDI 4.111'' Bore '88-95 .3719" stem. 1.877" head. +.010" margin. Turbo & non-turbo.
IHC/NAVISTAR TRUCK/VAN 420/6.9 OHV V-8 Diesel 4.000'' Bore '83-87 .3719" stem. 1.877" head. +.010" margin.
IHC/NAVISTAR TRUCK/VAN 445/7.3 OHV V-8 IDI Diesel 4.110'' Bore '88-95 .3719" stem. 1.877" head. +.010" margin. Turbo & non-turbo.
Part # Details
Part # : V403 Part Desc : Valve, Exhaust (Std. Stem)
DIMENSION
Std Stem Diameter : 3/8" ET Stem Diameter : 0.3720"
Std Head Diameter : 1.595" ET Head Diameter : 1.595"
Valve Length : 5.670" Notes : Chrome Stem
Reamer : N/R Bushing : N/R
COMPETITIVE INTERCHANGE
Brand Name Brand Part #
Clevite 211-2562
Elgin E-403
Fed. Mogul V-2302
Manley A2001
Melling V1542
SBI 01542
ALSO FITS
Engine Details Notes
FORD TRUCK/VAN 420/6.9 OHV V-8 Navistar Diesel 4.000'' Bore '83-87 .3720" tapered stem. 1.595" head. Non-Turbo. +.010" margin.
FORD TRUCK/VAN 445/7.3 Diesel V-8 Navistar IDI 4.111'' Bore '88-95 .3720" tapered stem. 1.595" head. Non-Turbo. +.010" margin.
IHC/NAVISTAR TRUCK/VAN 420/6.9 OHV V-8 Diesel 4.000'' Bore '83-87 .3720" tapered stem. 1.595" head. Non-turbo. +.010" margin.
IHC/NAVISTAR TRUCK/VAN 445/7.3 OHV V-8 IDI Diesel 4.110'' Bore '88-95 .3720" tapered stem. 1.595" head. Non-turbo. +.010" margin.
#354
11-08-2007, 09:31 AM
Freshman User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: FL
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CB,
I have gained possession of washers that are about 1/64" thick and plan to stack them in order to create the different depths of the injector. I figure that starting thin and working thicker would be best for not deforming the washers too much. I am planning to use a thin oil to secure the washers to the injectors and each other as the count increases. I will run each setting for two tanks and record all the data. I have to install a pyrometer and track that as well. Have I missed anything important or do you have any data that you would like me to include? This will take some time to get started, but hopefully yield good information.
I have gained possession of washers that are about 1/64" thick and plan to stack them in order to create the different depths of the injector. I figure that starting thin and working thicker would be best for not deforming the washers too much. I am planning to use a thin oil to secure the washers to the injectors and each other as the count increases. I will run each setting for two tanks and record all the data. I have to install a pyrometer and track that as well. Have I missed anything important or do you have any data that you would like me to include? This will take some time to get started, but hopefully yield good information.
#355
11-08-2007, 01:41 PM
Freshman User
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: FL
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
here is a link for info to mostly powerstroke links, but there is one on the IDI turbo 93-94. It is full of technical supplements. http://www.forddoctorsdts.com/articl...icle-06-08.php
Last edited by 7.3 force; 11-08-2007 at 01:42 PM. Reason: incorrect link
#356
11-10-2007, 10:18 PM
New User
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Indiana
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alright, just got back from my trip. I haven't actually topped off the fuel tanks yet to know how much fuel I consumed, but by estimating based on where the gauges are and the mileage run, we are still looking at around 12.25mpg. Here is my data from running under load (approx 3000 pounds of trailer and cargo), after engine has been fully warmed up by about 60 miles of driving before taking the readings.
Steady cruise at 60mph: 2400 RPM, 500 EGT, 1psi boost, 1.5-1.6mv GP
Hot Idle after trip: 700 RPM, 250 EGT, 0 boost, 1.05mv GP
I am now wondering if the turbo isn't working at full efficiency and is hurting my economy. Max boost I have ever seen is 5psi, wide open up a hill at about 2600 RPM, with EGT not much over 600. I know the turbo wheels (both sides) have some chipping/wear on the outer edge, perhaps this is making the engine work harder to injest the required amount of air. I can't really see any smoke in the daylight, but with headlights behind me at night I can see it smoking more than I like.
Steady cruise at 60mph: 2400 RPM, 500 EGT, 1psi boost, 1.5-1.6mv GP
Hot Idle after trip: 700 RPM, 250 EGT, 0 boost, 1.05mv GP
I am now wondering if the turbo isn't working at full efficiency and is hurting my economy. Max boost I have ever seen is 5psi, wide open up a hill at about 2600 RPM, with EGT not much over 600. I know the turbo wheels (both sides) have some chipping/wear on the outer edge, perhaps this is making the engine work harder to injest the required amount of air. I can't really see any smoke in the daylight, but with headlights behind me at night I can see it smoking more than I like.
#357
12-11-2007, 08:54 PM
Originally Posted by crossbones2
Kevin...............I can adjust the temperature in each cylinder .....several ways...........please do not call what you are not informed about stupid............this is not new......it has been used by very professional diesel people for at least 80 years.......even the glow plug manufactures and diesel engine manufactures are using a version of this method on the engines coming in the future.................
If you can not see the Practical point of this, then Do Not Use It.........
And for me, I can spend my time doing something else.............
crossbones
If you can not see the Practical point of this, then Do Not Use It.........
And for me, I can spend my time doing something else.............
crossbones
Higher compression - more complete burn - better fuel usage
higher temp (within reason) better timing - longer fuel burn - better usage
better air/fuel ratio - better fuel useage
VERY useful info, but I'm not a diesel wrench (know a bunch though), so I'm having to strain the grey cells to get to what I suspect is a KISS answer.
Baseline data will allow for optimum tuning for average conditions. Non turbo, non common rail makes dynamic changes for immediate conditions impossible, but optimum tune for average improves fuel usage and reduces overall engine wear.
Right?
#358
12-18-2007, 07:42 PM
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello list. The reason I have not been around is I took a few weeks off for a vacation. While away I received a email about a developing thread that may be of interest to some people.....
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/6...002-7-3-a.html
crossbones
https://www.ford-trucks.com/forums/6...002-7-3-a.html
crossbones
#359
12-18-2007, 10:02 PM
#360
12-26-2007, 10:59 AM
Freshman User
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Moody Texas
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We dont need no stinking instructions
Originally Posted by wgerson
Just wondering................................ if i read throught all 33 pages of this post will I be able to super tune my truck using my glow plugs .................................................. ......................... I've made it to about page 7 so far and still not quite sure how anthing useful has be devulged,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, but then again I'm no diesel rocket scientist.