What's new
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.

What diesels...

8

84gmcjimmy

1 ton status
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Posts
12,836
Reaction score
0
Location
B.C. CANADA
What diesels, besides the newer ones, would be good for towing? I am talking about 80's deisels that wouldn't be hard to find, and wouldn't be hard to get parts for. With the gas prices how they are, I think a diesel would be better for towing, and hauling on long trips. Eventually I will have an offroad rig that probably won't be legal, so I need something to tow it with that won't get bad gas mileage.
I don't really know what I am asking, I don't know anything about diesels...but how much can older diesels tow, weight wise? Will they be able to tow with the "right" setup to pull a gooseneck trailer and all that?
This will be on a dually 4x4 if that matters
I tried to search but I don't really know what I am looking for. Sorry if this is stupid.
Thanks

Steve
 
If you are not up for swapping an engine in a GM truck, your best bet would be a late 80s, early 90s Dodge with a Cummins. They have very similar drivelines to GMs of the era (Dana 60/70, 205 case) and can be had pretty cheap usually.
 
I don't know anything about diesels...but how much can older diesels tow, weight wise? Will they be able to tow with the "right" setup to pull a gooseneck trailer and all that?
Click to expand...

An 80's Ford 6.9 N/A would do just fine. Don't expect to pick up speed quickly loaded but they get decent mileage and will pull a gooseneck and K5 fine. 1989 was the first year for a dodge with a 6bt cummins IIRC and would also pull well. Old diesel trucks like that are slow, smoke a little, and aren't much fun to drive from the lack of a turbo....but they will get the job done just fine.
 
I'll second the '89-93 dodge/cummins. Had a '90 with non-intercooled CTD, was rated stock at 160hp/400tq. Some minor adjustments to the pump it it ran much better. Early cummins are detuned quite a bit.
 
So it looks like what would be good for me is a 89+ dodge cummings or a 80's ford 6.9 ?
How do I know if a diesel has a turbo or not. Do either of these trucks have turbos? What would be my best bet? I am leaning towards the dodge because everyone seems to like the cummings diesel engine. Suggestions? Also, what would be the average price for one of these trucks with the dually rear axle. Thanks for the help!
 
All the dodges have turbos. IMO, look for a CTD. Fords had/have an issue with cavitation on the cylinder liners.
 
Diesel Dan said:
All the dodges have turbos. IMO, look for a CTD. Fords had/have an issue with cavitation on the cylinder liners.
Click to expand...
Deshavue? :screwy: I think we have had one other thread in the past start exactly like this before...

I've got a 6.2L non-turbo motor in my '79 K20 now and it pulls much better than the old 350 gas motor ever did. I'm averaging 17 mpg empty or loaded at highway speeds (when my wheel bearings are not going out :doah: ). I even got 17 MPG the last trip out fourwheeling. I dont have the power of a Cummins but I'm very happy with the 6.2 overall (plus it was 10 times cheaper).

Another bonus is the 6.2L will bolt in place of any small block or big block Chevy V8 easily. So you could pickup any GM 73-87 pickup and put one in it. Even my small block dual exhaust bolted up to the diesel manifolds without modifications :thumb:
 
Last edited:
Wow Kenny...we should really start a club or something. :D I'm going to agree obviously. FWP has a 6.2 pick-up (dually I think) for his tow rig...

And Steve...that 17 mpg Kenny is talking about is per US gallon which is much smaller than our imperial gallon. That's 20.41 mpg here. For the budget minded a 6.2 is a great alternative IMO. My Dad had a 6.9 Ford and it was no screamer either. Stock CTD trucks aren't that impressive either, especially the older they are.

For the big numbers you read about it can take some big money...

Rene
 
Since I am on a budget, a GM 6.2 would be best then... am I following?
Would it be better to find a engine-less truck and put a 6.2 in, or find one with it already in? I will search under FWP to see what he pulls.
Thanks for the help!
 
kennyw said:
Deshavue? :screwy: I think we have had one other thread in the past start exactly like this before...

I've got a 6.2L non-turbo motor in my '79 K20 now and it pulls much better than the old 350 gas motor ever did. I'm averaging 17 mpg empty or loaded at highway speeds (when my wheel bearings are not going out :doah: ). I even got 17 MPG the last trip out fourwheeling. I dont have the power of a Cummins but I'm very happy with the 6.2 overall (plus it was 10 times cheaper).

Another bonus is the 6.2L will bolt in place of any small block or big block Chevy V8 easily. So you could pickup any GM 73-87 pickup and put one in it. Even my small block dual exhaust bolted up to the diesel manifolds without modifications :thumb:
Click to expand...
It will bolt right in? Without changing motor mounts or anything? Woah!

A little off topic but...
Kenny, so you did end up putting the diesel in then hey? (You were talking about that in September while you were at my house) How did it go?

Thanks for the help!
 
I swapped a 6.2 into my Jimmy as well. Pretty easy swap, motor mounts are the same, tranny bolts right up (although if you have an auto it needs the diesel specific TC)

It's a good weekend project if you have a donor truck. Probably easier to just buy a 6.2 truck although sometimes you can't find the truck you want with the motor you want. We picked up a running driving one ton 2WD pick-up with a 6.2 for $500 cdn and robbed the great majority of parts from that, then sold the rest.

Rene
 
Oh, I thought your Jimmy oringinally had a 6.2? My mistake, sorry.
I looked on ebay: crewcab dually... some were pretty expensive. I personally think it would be best for me to find a complete truck, then sell the engine to pay for part of the 6.2?
Also, what manual tranny can I swap in instead of an auto that I am finding in a lot of these trucks?
Thanks!
 
I like my SM 465 behind the 6.2 Seems to get more of the power to the ground. I sold my 355 to pay for most of the 6.2 I got. The 6.2 i got was complete from pulley's to clutch and came with all accessories including the rad, starter, alt etc etc.

A week later my friend helped me buy the C30 donor truck. I used all the wiring harness's and knick knack bracketry that amde the swap very clean looking. You'd be hard pressed to tell it from a factory 6.2 truck.

Rene
 
89-93 Dodges can be had as cheap if not cheaper than a comparable Chevy, they have 400 ft lbs or torque stock (much more than a 6.2), and if you free up the exhaust a little, and turn a screw on the injector pump, you can easily push past that. Of course, the best thing would be to swap a Cummins into a Chevy, but if you are on a budget that isnt happening, so next best thing is to get a rig with a Cummins in it already. My turbod 6.2 is pretty powerful in the crew cab, but I will probably be disappointed with much of a load in the back, not enough grunt below 2000 rpm which is right where the Cummins likes to run.
 
id say a 6.2 is yer best bet. they were putting out 335-355 ft lb tq so its not that bad. and they are almost a direct bolt in. and a sm465 manual would be good also. you can haul anything with them with a tiny motor. a 350 can haul massive loads due top the nice 1st gear in them. :waytogo: im considering putting a 6.2 in one of my rigs. cant decide if i wanna put it in my 84 with the stick and put the 454 in my 82 auto when i convert that to 4x4 or if i wanna leave the 454 in the standrd and put a 6.2 in my auto. LOL decisions sometimes. :thinking:
 
Actually, IIRC the C code is 240 ft lbs and the J code is 270 ft lbs.
 
whats IIRC stand for? and when i was first looking at 6.2's for the first time i had asked on specs and searched. i had found 335 ft lb tq as a reliable answer. :dunno:
 
IIRC = if I remember correctly, I just did some quick research and the highest # I found was 285 ft lbs for a military hummer and I confirmed the 240 for C code and 270 for J codes.
 
Those are estimated ratings Tyler. A chassis dyno is a better indicator of power than GM's literature. Last dyno sheet I found showed 336 lb/ft to the ground for a healthy unmodified 'J' code (no turned up fuel or turbo). That was in an auto equipped truck with 4.56's and 35's.

Regardless, CTD trucks here are not as cheap or cheaper than the 6.2 trucks. We don't have a huge selection of rotted out late model trucks dragging the values down.

Rene
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom