blackandgold51
1/2 ton status
By the way, why not I put in a turbo 7.3 in my half ton 1990 suburban 4x4(v1500)?
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.
Is it possible to put a Cummins in half ton gas operated 1989 to 91 Suburban 4x4?
- Thread starter blackandgold51
- Start date
Is that any easier than a 6BT? It wouldn't have the cool factor (in my book). I like inline engines.
black dawg
1/2 ton status
I started out with a 6.2T burb, then 6.5T ,then was a tbi 350, and currently big block with tbi. The 454 pulls better than all of them (obviously) and driven right, mpg is as good as the 350 when not towing. When towing, the big block does much better on fuel than the 350 did, and only 2 mpg under the diesels. My only complaint with the 454 is that it doesnt get the mpg while running around in the hills that the diesels did.
I will be going back to diesel, for the stupid dependability of a mechanical fuel system, and alternative fuel capability. Most likely ford or gm IDI.
I will be going back to diesel, for the stupid dependability of a mechanical fuel system, and alternative fuel capability. Most likely ford or gm IDI.
blackandgold51
1/2 ton status
Wait.... So you're saying a 454 can get good or decent fuel mileage ? Like a 350? If it's TBI?
black dawg
1/2 ton status
If driven like you want it to get good mpg, yes. But it can burn WAY more fuel than a 350 if you let it. My 454 averages between 10.5 to 13 depending on how much idling around in the hills, but usually closer to 12. All highway, last time I checked was right at 14, driving 65
Which engine are you even talking about? The International IDI 7.3 turbo or the Navistar 7.3 DI powerstroke? The old International IDI7.3 is a slow, under powered glow plug eating turd. The 7.3 Powerstroke is not a bad engine, I have 2 Powerstroke Fords, but it's inferior to the B series Cummins in basically every way. (Say that on a Ford diesel forum and it's hilarious watching them explode) Swapping in a 7.3 Powerstroke is not for the novice mechanic by any stretch, there is some pretty serious electronics involved with the swap. They have 2 computers to start with.
blackandgold51
1/2 ton status
The DI 7.3. And I though international made the DI 7.3
blackandgold51
1/2 ton status
And as for the IDI 7.3 , do those have computers? Also it may be slow but what about if it's turbocharged?
This is going to depend on gearing and loading. For cruising while unloaded, if you have two trucks that are both geared appropriately, the 454 will not keep up with a 350 (mileage-wise). When loaded down, things get a bit more tricky. If you have a 350 geared for towing, it will not be operating at its sweet spot (point where it runs most efficiently). If your gears are not set up for towing, you may find yourself downshifting to maintain speed. A 350 in 3rd gear is not necessarily more efficient than a 454 in 4th. A 454 at its sweet spot may give better economy than a 350 at 3500RPM.
But if you're not towing most of the time, I don't think you should expect to increase your fuel mileage by swapping to a 454. Most folks have the opposite experience.
The older IDI engines have an international sticker on them usually. The Powerstroke has a Navistar sticker for it's numbers. As mentioned, just a name change, same company.
No, 6.9 and 7.3 IDI engines are fully mechanical with no computer that runs the engine. Early 90's Fords do have a computer, but it's a PCM more so for the purpose of operating the E40D automatic, along with some "check engine" functions incorporated into the vehicle.
IIRC, N/A 7.3's had 180HP. Factory turbo'd version in the 93-94 Fords had like 220HP or something. IIRC, they are high compression engines (since they were designed to be N/A) and can't run much boost resulting in poor power numbers, just like the GM 6.2. Now, from there it's all subjective. For someone that is used to driving around in a carb 350 powered K20, or 351 F250, 220HP from a the turbo'd 7.3 isn't bad. For me, I would consider it to be a dog especially considering the weak torque numbers behind that HP. My 7.3 Powerstroke trucks are both set right at 300HP. I think, for the most part they are dogs too, same problem, they lack torque. My Dodges on other hand... not dogs... at all. Once you go Cummins, you're ruined on everything else, with the Dmax being the only exception to that.
I can't wait to put my cummins in something. It's a 190 stock, not quite 500 torque. With a 100 horse plate, BHAF, free flow exhaust and tuning, be roughly 300 horse and 750 torque. Lets a Ferd do that!!!
blackandgold51
1/2 ton status
If that is the case of the IDI 7.3 being a "dog" and the the DI 7.3 having so much computers to deal with in putting my Suburban . I might as well get a turbo 6.2 diesel . since i don't tow much and is looking for good fuel economy.
That's a fine course of action, and you should get pretty good mileage (if it's geared properly). But if you're into engine swapping, and you want more power, why not start with a 6.5TD (mechanical, of course
)? Should be an easier job than swapping in a 6.2 and then adding a turbine. The lower compression means that you won't get as high of an efficiency out of it, but it also means that you can crank up the boost higher (if you're looking for power). Might be a good compromise, and it should be easier to find than a 6.2 and a turbine kit. Probably cheaper, too.Or you can just rock the 6.2. I think it would fit your purpose just fine. With or without turbine.
blackandgold51
1/2 ton status
Its best to get the 6.5? Also is it hard o convert from gas engine to diesel with the 6.5 or 6.2?That's a fine course of action, and you should get pretty good mileage (if it's geared properly). But if you're into engine swapping, and you want more power, why not start with a 6.5TD (mechanical, of course
Or you can just rock the 6.2. I think it would fit your purpose just fine. With or without turbine.
Sorry if I'm asking a lot questions I just think its interesting to learn. Plus I would sell my suburban for a diesel but I'm too attached to it Plus I put money into it. Also the trans from my suburban came with a high gear ratio wear it can accelerate quick off the line and were the engine's rpm goes higher in first second and third gear before it goes into overdrive (4th gear) . My transmission is a rebuilt 700r4.
I had a 90 f250 with that motor is was lackluster for sure but truck got great mileage and was just as slow pulling as it was empty. Later on I had the 7.3 turbocharged version it was a little bit better but not great .
Questions are good. That's what keeps this site going. Don't be afraid to ask.
First off, GM's 6.5TD is essentially an overbored 6.2 with a lower compression ratio and a turbocharger. The castings are very similar (though not completely identical),and the accessories are the same as a late-model 6.2 (serpentine setup wasn't introduced until 1/2-way through the 6.2 production run). For the first 2 years of production, the 6.5 engines used the same Stanadyne injector pump as the 6.2. If you get one of these engines, swapping it in will be no extra work vs. installing a 6.2*, and you'll automatically have a turbine rather than having to track down a kit for the 6.2.
*Unless you have the factory AC box on the firewall. The 6.5 turbine makes that a tight squeeze (at least one of those systems will require some modification to fit).
Starting in 1994, the 6.5 engines used an electronic injection pump. The rest of the engine is the same, so one of these engines can be fitted with a mechanical pump from an earlier engine.
As to whether the 6.2 or 6.5 is best, ask yourself what your intended purpose is. If you want mileage, and you're happy with stock amounts of power, a normal 6.2 is probably as good as you can easily get in these rigs. If you want to cheaply have a lot of power, a 6.5 will not disappoint. If you want somewhere in the middle, adding a turbine to a 6.2 is a fine idea. The 6.2's higher compression ratio (that gives it higher efficiency) means that you can't turn the boost up as high before you run the risk of blowing out the head gasket. Also, turbine kits are typically expensive. And 6.5 engines come with their turbines for free.
That's why I recommended a 6.5 if you want power. Otherwise, a 6.2 will be fine.When pushed hard, 6.5 engines tend to overheat and crack heads. This should not surprise you when you consider that it is a beefed up version of a previous engine. That engine was never designed to have 180HP run through it. It's fine for stock use. But if you want to build a hotrod, you'll never be able to beat on it like you can beat on a Cummins. But they sell for $300 instead of the $1800 that a 6BT often fetches.
As far as ease of conversion, the 6.x series will be (by far) easier and cheaper than swapping in a non-GM engine. The bell housing will match (though you'll need a diesel flywheel if you run a manual tranny). The accessories are compatible with what your small block already has. There is a small vacuum pump on most engines, but it does not produce enough to operate a vacuum brake booster. An upgrade to hydo-assist brakes is the typical solution. This takes hydraulic fluid from your power steering pump (so all GM diesels from this era have P/S) You will have to add either a switch or a controller to activate glow plugs. If you keep your 700R4, it would be a good idea to install a set of diesel weights in the governor (so it shifts at low engine speed rather than waiting until >2500RPM to shift). While not absolutely required, this will keep the engine happy.
Converting from a TBI rig to a 6.2/6.5 engine is easier than converting from a carb (fuel return line is already present). You can run either a mechanical or electric fuel pump (or both!). Fuel filter should be swapped out to a unit with a water separator (water is not kind to mechanical injection pumps).
That's all that I can think of. Should not take too much effort, and there are folks around here that can walk you through each step. Getting a non-GM engine to work gets into custom bell housings, shafts, engine mounts, etc. Fine if you wanna go that way, but recognize that you'll be treading much less traveled territory.
Also, if you're geared for leaping off the starting line with a gasoline engine, that will only be worse with a diesel engine. They like to spin slowly (I pull about 1400RPM on the highway). Get one up at 3,000RPM and you will see a loss of efficiency and longevity as well. So consider that you will be hurting for a gear swap if you do this conversion.
black dawg
1/2 ton status
The reason the ford idi got the reputation of "eating" glow plugs is that aftermarket glowplugs are junk. Stick with the beru/motorcraft (same cost as aftermarket) plugs and they are trouble free. As far as being gutless, they will never be a modern diesel, but turbod and intercooled are pretty respectable. My old ford has been turbod and intercooled for a long time now, power feels similar to my friends 2000 powerstroke with a small tow progam.
I agree for heavy towing, inline diesel power just gets it done better, but we are talking about suburbans here?
Also, the vacuum pump on a 6.2/6.5 will run a brake booster, lots of the ford diesels used vac. boosters, with the same vacuum pod on the pump.
I agree for heavy towing, inline diesel power just gets it done better, but we are talking about suburbans here?
Also, the vacuum pump on a 6.2/6.5 will run a brake booster, lots of the ford diesels used vac. boosters, with the same vacuum pod on the pump.
I have owned and put extensive time on all of the following:
Out of all of them, I have settled on the diesel Burb setup as my preference for drivability, fuel economy, reliability, and power/torque. My usage is: I go offroad, I take long highway trips, I DD around town, and I tow things. I've also applied basic reliability mods (Fluidampr, aftermarket oil cooler fittings/hoses, relocated PMD, HD engine fan and clutch, etc.). A GM trans will typically heat up before you run into engine limitations (but you'll only know that if you have a trans temp sensor and gauge).
As stated before, the TBI 350 and TBI 454 were virtual (shitty) mileage twins unladen. Throw a load on and the 454 shone through.
A Cummins in a square-bodied Burb is asking for long-term trouble unless some serious frame work is done first. Those C-channel frames are not NEARLY as strong as the '92-up Burb frames (which are "boxed").
- '83 GMC with 6.2l diesel and a Banks non-wastegated turbo
- '94 3/4-ton Suburban with a TBI 454 and Whipple Supercharger
- '94 3/4-ton Suburban with a 6.5l factory turbo and mechanical wastegate controller
- '86 Blazer with a naturally aspirated 6.2l
- '91 Blazer with a TBI 350
- '86 Safari van with TBI 4.3l V6
- A bunch of carbed nonsense
Out of all of them, I have settled on the diesel Burb setup as my preference for drivability, fuel economy, reliability, and power/torque. My usage is: I go offroad, I take long highway trips, I DD around town, and I tow things. I've also applied basic reliability mods (Fluidampr, aftermarket oil cooler fittings/hoses, relocated PMD, HD engine fan and clutch, etc.). A GM trans will typically heat up before you run into engine limitations (but you'll only know that if you have a trans temp sensor and gauge).
As stated before, the TBI 350 and TBI 454 were virtual (shitty) mileage twins unladen. Throw a load on and the 454 shone through.
A Cummins in a square-bodied Burb is asking for long-term trouble unless some serious frame work is done first. Those C-channel frames are not NEARLY as strong as the '92-up Burb frames (which are "boxed").
Have you (or anybody) actually seen frame failures due to a Cummins swap? I've seen my fair share of frame issues on the square body Chevy's but never one directly because of a Cummins swap, mine has ~200K on the swap (first swapped in '97) and the frame is all stock, no issues (although it is a K30 frame).
