What diesels...

[tRustyK5]

anyone know the peak rpm for tq on the 6.2?

A ton lower than a 350, and the curve is close to dead flat unlike a sbc. I've had both, and torque wise there is no comparison.

Rene

 

[big_truxx]

i'm seeing the peak at 2000 rpm on the dyno for gassers... was curious how much lower the 6.2 peaked for torque. id really like to see a curve for hp and tq on the 6.2

 

[Diesel Dan]

Must be a regional thing on the CTD prices. Couple years back I bought a '90 dodge/cummins reg cab auto 4x4 that had light front end damage, fender bumper, totally drivable for $3300.

I've towed with n/a 6.2s, 6.5TDs and CTDs. For a couple of years I had a '88 V30 crewcab 4x4 with 6.2/Th400 and 4.10s. We towed a 35' jayco 5th wheel, medium top with slanted roof for aerodynamics. While on flat ground running thru Ohio into a ~20mph head wind the truck could only due 55mph, limited by EGTs. Had a modified air cleaner and dual exhaust, trailer weight around 7K. Last year used the truck again, brother owns it now, to get my unimog. Truck now has new 6.2 in it and a gear vendors. Mog weights around 5K+ 18' trailer, it was all I could do to maintain 50mph on I-75 while splitting gears.

Now the '90 dodge had 160/400 rating. With a couple twists of some screws on the VE rotary pump, and no $$, it really woke the truck up. Even with 3.07 gears it pulled hard. Yes I'm somewhat partial to the CTD and 1st gen dodge drivelines.

That being said notice my tow rig currently is a 6.5TD. Look around, deals are out there. Salvage yard in detroit wanted $1600 for a takeout n/a 6.5 from a van or $1650 for a takeout '93 CTD and $2800 for a takeout 6.5TD .

The 6.2 n/a will tow, albeit slowly. Weak spots:main webs crack, balancers fail and break cranks, head gaskets.
Pluses: essentially bolt in swap. I did a conversion in one weekend, pulled 427 gasser out and installed 6.2L.

If you don't have a truck in mind or on hand currently I'd look long and hard for a CTD truck, or even a decent F350 crewcab ford TURBO.

 

[rjfguitar]

Im gonna agree with RJF (eek!)

What? I usually have decent advise, I guess.

.

about the early fords. The 6.9's cavitation has been blown out of proportion more than the "Killer dowel pin" in the dodges tranny's. Head issues are just like the 6.2's, if you reuse the head bolts, you are gonna have major problems. The 6.9's are good motors, and put out a decent ammount of power for being a N/A diesel.

As for the 6.2's towing, i have towed with mine, and while it is a dog, it still gets the job done. I loose a lot of power with my tranny and gearing, but it still tows. No, it will never be a D-max, but my mild N/A 6.2 does fine for what it is. Steve, if you can, i would look at getting either an early ford, or a CUCV chevy. While the dodges are stout, they are more expensive as of late because of the "Bombing" craze.

And there is no way a 6.2 has 355 ft/lb of torque. My buddy with a 7.3 N/A will walk all over my 6.2, and he only has 380 ft/lb of torque with the same HP as me. He has way more power than i do, and my 6.2 actually has a few tweaks done to it. Id say 280-300 is a good number. it doesnt have 355, but it also doesnt have 240.

After reading through this thread and with all the discussion about gassers and power numbers.....

If I were in your shoes Steve it is as simple as this....

Forget a gas engine, they suck way too much gas and don't pull as well as a diesel, period IMHO. I'd rather have a slow 6.2 than a gas eating 454 that might get me to my final destination over say a 100 mile trip 10 minutes sooner than a 6.2 would. Is 10 minutes worth twice the cost of fuel?

If I did not want to spend a lot of money on a tow rig I would look for an 80's ford F250 or 350 first, the 6.9 na motor first came out in '83 IIRC and is considerably more powerfull than a 6.2 GM. Had a decent drivetrain behind it too. Then i would look at an 82' and up 6.2 GM. I would choose an early first gen CTD preferably but '89 was the first year for them and would probably cost fairly more than the early Ford or GM.

Don't worry about dyno numbers or peak torque numbers, yada yada, Both the Ford and GM will get any load to where you are going just fine, the ford probably doing a little better. It's as simple as that.

Also remember that you have the option for a newer rig too if you can afford it. I wanted a newer electronic CTD that is a lot nicer truck in and out than an earlier model. I put down what I would have spent on an earlier rig and financed the other half and am making a relatively small monthly payment for a little while. If you can afford a monthly payment for a while then that is definantly the route I would take. You will praise yourself down the road while sitting in your nice compfy powered leather seats cruising over hills passing people with the trailer and K5 in a much quieter, nicer truck.

 

[big_truxx]

leather seats? i just took the power leather seats that someone had once put in my 84 crew out in favor of a bench. just my personal taste. so how does the gen thing go on CTD? and are the older cummins any good the ones before the CTD? did i read right in that the 1st gen CTD started in 89? also were the 1st gen CTD mechanical injection or what?

just a side note; if you could afford the project a CAT 3116 I-6 swap would really rule steve. followed by the CAT 3208 V-8. the 3208 used to go for $3500 around here in maine and i never got to pricing the 3116.

 

[84gmcjimmy]

just a side note; if you could afford the project a CAT 3116 I-6 swap would really rule steve. followed by the CAT 3208 V-8. the 3208 used to go for $3500 around here in maine and i never got to pricing the 3116.

I read someones post earlier about how they can haul! But they sound really heavy. Also, I doubt I would beable to find one anywhere close to me, especially for a good-not bad price.

f I were in your shoes Steve it is as simple as this....

Forget a gas engine, they suck way too much gas and don't pull as well as a diesel, period IMHO. I'd rather have a slow 6.2 than a gas eating 454 that might get me to my final destination over say a 100 mile trip 10 minutes sooner than a 6.2 would. Is 10 minutes worth twice the cost of fuel?

If I did not want to spend a lot of money on a tow rig I would look for an 80's ford F250 or 350 first, the 6.9 na motor first came out in '83 IIRC and is considerably more powerfull than a 6.2 GM. Had a decent drivetrain behind it too. Then i would look at an 82' and up 6.2 GM. I would choose an early first gen CTD preferably but '89 was the first year for them and would probably cost fairly more than the early Ford or GM.

Don't worry about dyno numbers or peak torque numbers, yada yada, Both the Ford and GM will get any load to where you are going just fine, the ford probably doing a little better. It's as simple as that.

Also remember that you have the option for a newer rig too if you can afford it. I wanted a newer electronic CTD that is a lot nicer truck in and out than an earlier model. I put down what I would have spent on an earlier rig and financed the other half and am making a relatively small monthly payment for a little while. If you can afford a monthly payment for a while then that is definantly the route I would take. You will praise yourself down the road while sitting in your nice compfy powered leather seats cruising over hills passing people with the trailer and K5 in a much quieter, nicer truck.

What does the ford have behind them? You think if I can find one it would be better than the GM? I will keep my eyes open for the ford 6.9 diesel too then. Then when I do find either of them, I will update and ask if it's a good price and all that. Until now, I will just keep reading everyones responses.
Oh, and I definitly won't beable to get a newer rig. Way out of the budget.
So in the good-okay list, it goes dodge, ford, then GM for pulling power?

Thanks

 

[BlueBlazer]

I disagree, because what's getting to the ground is what you feel and what is doing the work. Nobody questions chassis dyno number on any CTD truck or D-max truck when they're posted, yet this dyno sheet is treated as if it's pure fiction. The Banks graph is more conservative but is an illustration, not a dyno sheet.

I agree with you, but I meant when comparing engine to engine, rear wheel power does not matter. For example, if you are comparing a 350 to a 6.2 in a factory configuration, you do not compare the chassis dyno numbers of a 6.2 to the GM rating of a 350, or the GM rating of a 6.2 to the chassis dyno numbers of a 6.2, its apples to oranges. So, just because fourwheeler did one test, where if you notice the engine in factory trim made 272 ft lbs. and only 94 hp, does not mean that the GM ratings are estimated and not valid in my opinion. In fact, it says to me that the 240-270 ft lb ratings I have seen are quite valid. What the fourwheeler test also shows is how big a gains you can get by doing some pretty simple things to make the engine run better. I hope I dont come off as being argumentative, I am just trying to assure that the information given out is as accurate as possible. I also do not want to sound like I am badmouthing the 6.2, I own 2 of them and I think they are an awesome engine for offroad or tooling around town, but I think they are underpowered for towing unless turboed which would probably put Steve over what he wants to spend.

 

[BlueBlazer]

So in the good-okay list, it goes dodge, ford, then GM for pulling power?

If we are talking pre-powerstroke, inline pumped Cummins (94 and newer), 6.5s, and duramaxes, then yes, that would be true.

 

[rjfguitar]

What does the ford have behind them? You think if I can find one it would be better than the GM? I will keep my eyes open for the ford 6.9 diesel too then. Then when I do find either of them, I will update and ask if it's a good price and all that. Until now, I will just keep reading everyones responses.


Thanks

The ford used the venerable C-6 transmission. It is basically the th400 for a ford with the C-4 being in the 1/2 tons like a th350. They use a Sterling rear end that I am not a huge fan of but is a decent rear end, ford still uses them today. It comes with a 10.5" ring gear and in both SF and FF versions. Basically the same strength as a 14BFF. Up front is not all that great but it is adequate, D44 TTB setup. Not real strong but you would probably never have any issues with it as long as you didn't lift it or wheel it.(it's a tow rig right?) My grandpa has 250,000miles on his '95 power stroke ford that has the same front D44 TTB with no probs. T-case is probably a Borg Warner, good box.
My neighbor has an '83 F250 with the 6.9/C-6/ 4x4 and it runs good, has decent acceleration, and he pulls a 20' gooseneck all the time and does just fine. I would definantly take the early 6.9 for over the weaker GM.

Oh, and I definitly won't beable to get a newer rig. Way out of the budget

Don't rule it out, you could even come up with an older '94-'98 dodge 12v CTD for somewhere around 10-15K(U.S.) depending on mileage which is cheap IMHO when it comes to a diesel powered 4x4. You might even be able to drop back down into 4 digits on the price if it is a 2wd early '94-95' cummins dodge. Plus people like to dump high mileage trucks for cheap and the cummins will last for 1/2 million miles between rebuilds.

Do you have a steady job? I don't make a lot of money either but enough to where I can easily pay my monthly payment. It isn't that bad.

.
So in the good-okay list, it goes dodge, ford, then GM for pulling power?

I would say definanlty in the older trucks and I say it is roughly still the same way.

 

[rjfguitar]

leather seats? i just took the power leather seats that someone had once put in my 84 crew out in favor of a bench. just my personal taste. so how does the gen thing go on CTD? and are the older cummins any good the ones before the CTD? did i read right in that the 1st gen CTD started in 89? also were the 1st gen CTD mechanical injection or what?

.

Yep, heated black leather seats. I wouldn't take anything else.
How it goes with the cummins dodges is, 1989-1993 are the first gen dodge CUMMINS, no the pickup itself. Second gens go all the way from 1994 to 2002. Third gens are 2003's to current.

just a side note; if you could afford the project a CAT 3116 I-6 swap would really rule steve. followed by the CAT 3208 V-8. the 3208 used to go for $3500 around here in maine and i never got to pricing the 3116

I have looked into a cat swap myself since I am a huge fan of cat engines. I wasn't interested in a mechanical 3116 or 3208 but I was very interested in the newer 3126/C7's that are electronic and more powerful. Cat wanted over $10K for a crate 3126 and then by the time you mate a new Allison behind it I said forget it! I wanted to put it in an '89-91 Crew cab SRW 1 ton 4x4 but after punching numbers I would decided to go the cheaper and easier route of buying my '01.5 dodge cummins. Less money for the D/CTD than the GM/Cat idea with a nicer, newer truck and a warranty.

 

[tRustyK5]

I agree with you, but I meant when comparing engine to engine, rear wheel power does not matter. For example, if you are comparing a 350 to a 6.2 in a factory configuration, you do not compare the chassis dyno numbers of a 6.2 to the GM rating of a 350, or the GM rating of a 6.2 to the chassis dyno numbers of a 6.2, its apples to oranges. So, just because fourwheeler did one test, where if you notice the engine in factory trim made 272 ft lbs. and only 94 hp, does not mean that the GM ratings are estimated and not valid in my opinion. In fact, it says to me that the 240-270 ft lb ratings I have seen are quite valid. What the fourwheeler test also shows is how big a gains you can get by doing some pretty simple things to make the engine run better. I hope I dont come off as being argumentative, I am just trying to assure that the information given out is as accurate as possible. I also do not want to sound like I am badmouthing the 6.2, I own 2 of them and I think they are an awesome engine for offroad or tooling around town, but I think they are underpowered for towing unless turboed which would probably put Steve over what he wants to spend.

There is nothing wrong with a spirited discussion, as long as it stays on topic and respectful...which it has. This forum was beginning to put people to sleep, but this post has been very active (and fun).

I know we're getting down to splitting hairs, but it was my understanding from the 4Wheeler article that the original dyno pulls were with an engine in need of repairs, like injectors, pump etc etc. If you read through the various pulls and notes you'll see they got to the point right before they added the stinger pack where it made 114hp and 329 lbs of torque. This became the new baseline so they could fairly evaluate the difference the Banks turbo made.

I think what it really illustrates is how important it is for the 6.2 to be in as good a tune as possible. Just seeing the difference the exhaust made makes me want to rip off my 2.5" single exhaust right now .

Regarding the Ford 6.9...my Dad had one in an 86 Cab and chassis with an 8x12 flatdeck. It had a non granny 4 speed and I drove that thing a lot when I worked for him. I found it to be comparable to my current 6.2/SM465 as far as acceleration. They both probably weigh the same (empty flat deck...obviously it could be loaded down a lot) It was a good truck that returned some really decent mileage, it never complained or gave us any problems either.

Rene

 

[big_truxx]

they are underpowered for towing unless turboed which would probably put Steve over what he wants to spend.

heh at the price tag of 2.5k yeah maybe a lil over budget

 

[big_truxx]

so how does the gen thing go on CTD? and are the older cummins any good the ones before the CTD? did i read right in that the 1st gen CTD started in 89? also were the 1st gen CTD mechanical injection or what?

 

[joez]

1st gen Cummins were mechanical, using the VE-series injection pump. These were 89-93. From 94-98.5, the Cummins used the P-series pump, which flows stupidly high ammounts of fuel, these are the more sought after. They are still mech motors. 98.5 started the ISB, which is the 24valve, electronically controlled cummins. They are all good motors, there were no bad ones, just non-intercooled in 89-90.

The W-series Dodge pickups were from the 70's, and lasted till 93. They had a Mitsu diesel in 78-79 IIRC, but it was a DOG, even worse than the 6.2's. Its best to pretend that motor was never put in a pickup. Only in 89 did the W-series start getting a real motor.

 

[84gmcjimmy]

blueblazer, do you have any pictures you can send me of your K3500? Regarding the turbos for the 6.2, are they aftermarket, or did some of them come with a turbo, and some not? Someone said they were 2500 dollars? is that just the turbo or everything on the engine all together?

As we all know there are millions of furds for sale all the time... I will put the ford 6.9 to the top of the list because that is what I probably will find easiest. And it also sounds like the 6.9 would be better than the 6.2, from what I am understanding. Although, how much would they be? And someone said they were in f-250's and f-350's? And the year is 83+ I think. Did they ever come with a manual tranny? I don't really want an auto on it, considering all the posts I've read, most of you guys say the manuals are better for getting started. I hear a lot of people want allison trannys... are they good? Do they bolt up to a ford? how much moola? I think I remember they are quite pricey, but how pricey?
I saw a f-350 with a diesel in town today, it said turbo diesel on it, and I heard the sexy sound of the engine rumbling So it must have been a diesel. It looked real good! It was crewcab but just SRW instead of DRW (It's amazing what I learn, I just realized "SRW" stands for single rear wheel... I always wondered what it meant, but didn't want to ask)

I am trying to take in as much info as I can... so if I sound stupid, please forgive me. Diesels are very new too me.
Another question a bit off topic. I was thinking of getting a plow for the front of it to make extra money during the winter... but then I got thinking and realized the extra weight may not be good for the front axle (if it is a ford d44, and whatever the dodge has might be weak too..doubt it though) and also since these diesels don't accelerate very fast, they might have trouble pushing snow, right? I'm not saying I want one...nor do I need one...but it would be nice to make extra cash, driving a nice truck
Bobby, I currently don't work because I don't want to work at a fast food place, and I don't really have a lot of options here. When there is no snow I usually cut grass and all that... plus, with school 5/7 days a week, its hard to get a good job that will pay me good...

Also, about the newer trucks again... I don't have 10 thousand to spend, nor do I like monthly payments for that long of a period. Since I wanted an older truck, I didn't think I would have to pay that much for one, since they have diesels, maybe around 4 thousand... but maybe I am wrong. Maybe any truck with a diesel is worth a lot more. personally, I just want the truck for the diesel and drivetrain... and hopefully not a lot of rust that it's not safe, but a little rust I won't mind. I don't care about the interior because I will probably put something else in rather than those bench seats.
So someone clear something up for me, was I wrong? How much am I looking at for a basic runniing ford truck/GM truck /dodge truck, diesel with DRW, crewcab? I hope I am not wrong... hopefully they aren't actually 5,000+ unlike what I was thinking...



Thanks for all the help, I can't believe all the replies I am getting. Thanks!!

 

[joez]

If you need a true crew cab, then cross the dodge off of your list right now, as there is no such thing as a crew cab W-series Dodge with a diesel. I think a few squeaked out with the mitsu diesel, but you do NOT want one of those.

One thing i must ask, though, is why do you think you need a dually? What exactly are you planning on towing with this truck?

Now, to answer a few questions. Yes, the fords come backed by a 4-speed, granny gear non OD tranny every bit as stout as the 465. So you can get a manual in them. As for snow plowing, they will push snow until they loose traction, and do it better than a gasser. They have the torque to keep the big mounds moving, remember, you are not racing when plowing, so acceleration is not what you need. You need contact pressure and torque to push the snow.

 

[84gmcjimmy]

LOL sorry, yeah I don't need to race.
I want a dually for stability and I can haul more weight. I will have this truck for QUITE a few years so I want a versitile truck.
Do you think it's unnessisary?

 

[joez]

Unless you are planning on more than 3-4K in the bed or hauling multiple rigs, then yes, i do, even on older trucks. Heres a buddy of mines setup, hauls two rigs regularly on a VERY heavy trailer and with SRW ford. He runs the highest rated tires he can, and is airbagged. Tows it every weekend, either with rigs on it or farm equipment. Grosses 22K pounds total.

 

[big_truxx]

i had asked on here a couple weeks ago how much a turbo for 6.2 cost. i was told $2,500. so... imho its not worth it unless you really have cash to throw at it. i see in my own eyes being worth it to save the little extra cash to go get a used CAT engine for a swap. not too sure what current market for the CTD is in my area. i think they are more expensive than i would want to bother with for the afore mentioned reason. just saw a 93 2wd dodge w/ diesel for $4,000in my area... not exactly in the cheap club for taking a motor out for a transplant IMHO. I am also thinking about a diesel swap in the future. there is a lot for me to think about. like is it really worth the time effort and $$ i would need to do it? since i know that the gassers i currently have in and running in my trucks will haul loads... i still LOVE diesels and would love nothing more than to put one or two in my rigs. but you are in a slightly different situation than me steve. you are looking for a rig to tow. i already have two. but for the money i paid i couldnt say no to either. and doubt i would have been able to get even a 6.2 equiped rig for the prices. my 82 has 84k orig miles on it with mr goodwrench that has 24k. silverado with no options and is 2wd but i plan on making it 4x4 after house is built. still, $2,000 and already setup to haul my gooseneck. been REAL good to me and had no troubles with it. my 84 which will see the road one of these days, (brake lines need replaced and im workin on budget for my house so its on the back burner) but even with bad brakes... 20k on a rebuilt 454, was converted to 4x4 before i bought it but even still has a 465/205 behind the motor... even though it only has a d44 8 lug.... i only paid $1,000 for it. both trucks are crew cab dual wheels. so... with that all being said... i basically bought both trucks for just over the cost a turbo for a 6.2 would cost... thats why i could not commit myself to go the turbo route w/o a lot of "spare" money to throw into the project. now im no expert but i have been told that the turbo 6.2 puts out close to 400tq. which IMHO for the $$ spent isnt worth it as you can have much better for just a little more.

 

[big_truxx]

i dont spose anyone could tell me the rpm of peak tq on the 6.2 could they?