671 detroit swap??

[oldmisterbill]

My father had a boat for 7 years that was powered by twin 6-71 turbos. You wanna talk about loud. Man I loved that boat.

Show me another engine that displaces 426 CU IN that gets 450 hp at 2100 rpm. (marinized version. OTR N/A was ratede at 238 horses)

also it had a manufacturing run of about 60 years.

Drove a 671 over the road (full size semi) with a IH CO4000 (the first of the square series cabovers-Before that almost every manufacturer has some kind of a rounded or sloped nose version. 238 HP w/a mechanical blower (they all had blowers there were no NA Detroit's they has asthma without one). What was it like? Well 1st of all set the Governor to 220 RPM instead of 2100. Shift down at 1800 RPM wind up to 2200 then shift. You kept it wound - never lug it. Of course put a drain pan under it to recycle the oil it would leak. They didn't like to idle to keep the cab warm at night if you set the idle up a little it would either drop to idle or wind out after a while. I remember having it "resealed" to stop the oil leaks (did it at an international dealer in Boston). 1st trip was to put a computer system in Omaha (for Mutual of Omaha) in January, cold as the devil , so I had to idle it to keep warm while I slept. When I got back to Boston a few weeks later - I needed a new drip pan to catch the oil. It seemed they would all leak after a lot of idle time. It had no AC , steel interior and the log books?? = a lot of tired hours. Example I was going down hill in Connecticut wound out screemin at me,trans slipped into neutral (so tired it didn't register) and was slowing down - real slow ,wondered why it seemed so slow (no speedo),engine sounded like it was ok wound right out.It sunk in that I was slowing down even though the engine was still wound out & screamin,because it was in neutral. Point the noise could make you numb. For the times it wasn't bad speed wise-after all cummins had the 190 -250 NA,270 & the 290s were just out in the field. 8V71 were the thing to beat back then with 318 HP WOW!!
I remember when they got me a new Ford 9000 with a 318 & AC and a diamond tuff interior -even had a radio.WOW I was a big dog and it wasn't so noisy because of the insulation & interior upholstery. They were good in many ways the bottom end was bullet proof -most of the problems came from the top end. They had a real bad fuel addiction. I guess that gives you an idea what driving one OTR was like. Oh yes they never got warm enough in the winter to keep you comfortable until they were working.

For some unknown reason I wound up with an affection for these old man killers - I'll never understand why.

 

[RLDSL]

Detroits do well in boats, there is no arguing about that... but they just plain suck in trucks. I remember way back when I was driving a big ol Freightliner with a hopped up silver 8v-92 that started out at 430 hp, anyones guess what it was putting out after alll the fooling around and it had a nice combination box behind it, 5x4 trans ( 4 speed air shift auxilliary )
The screaming beast would do over 120 on the flats.... but right about the time Id cross the state line from Kansas into Colorado it would suffer heart failure from the thought of having to climb a mountain and would fall flat on it's face, just like all detroits. The things just do not pull against a static load well

They do fine in boats where you can get the rpms wound up in their comfort range and left there , and props have the luxury of slipping in the water if the load is too hard, where on solid ground your options include dropping gears while coming to a crawl and praying the thing doesn't bog completely down. They are just not a pulling engine. THey do well in city trucks and buses , garbage trucks etc with slushboxes that let them wind up in traffic so long as they aren't trying to haul anything very heavy, but being on land and being coupled with a manual tranny is not really a very good setup for teh things.

 

[stumiister]

Not to get off topic but heres my 2 cents,
Y'all talk about trucks and engines, Ive been wrenching on trucks for 20 years or so and have done my share of engine overhauls.
I have noticed that the Cat 3406 series engines whether it be a A,B,C PEEK or E model they all like the lower end of the power band they pull way better.
The Cummins are better pullin in the middle range of the power band.
The Detroits are at the upper end of the power band.
If I had a choicce of trucks it would be a late '90's model extended long hood Pete with a 3406 E or C15 which for all intents and purposes are the same engine but the C15 has some revisions that the 3406 E doesnt but both are good engines.

 

[The Warden]

Detroits do well in boats, there is no arguing about that...

Agreed, but sadly some people will try to argue it, no matter how many people with experience in the field try to rebut the arguments

As someone who's never driven one on the road, thanks to both you and to OMB for writing up your real-world experiences shame they didn't do as well on the road as they do on the water, but I'll always have a soft spot in my heart for 'em...

wow this turned into a real ******* match. what about a 3116 CAT?

I imagine it could be shoe-horned, but IIRC the 3116 is about the same physical size as an IH DT466. Might be worthwhile to take a look into what Heath has planned

I was thinking about putting a Cat 3208 in my truck with an allison auto just wondering how that would fit in a F250?

There's a guy named Dave Haven...he used to post on TDS; I don't think he ever made it over here, unfortunately. But, he inherited a '70 F-350 with a 3208 swapped in that his father had built into a welding rig...I'm attaching a few pictures that he posted at the time IIRC he was quite happy with the power

 

[oldmisterbill]

"We see this in the truckers explainations of winding out their trucks when hauling freight....well, when they're winding the DD's out, all the winding is just plain waste....they don't realize they can shift earlier once the pedal becomes hollow".


Tom that is correct the working band on an old Detroit is 300 RPM - occasionally you might shift ahead of time to make the shift Before it pulls ******* a grade - as the speed drops the shift is completed and the engine is ready to pull.

Another quick story I'll never forget -I drove part time (rarely) for a small company in MA -they had an old Detroit (tired old) but still worked every day, I picked up a load of wool in rural western MA. I hit a steep hill and was almost at the top when the old gave it up. Not quite enough power to crest the hill. What a situation it took almost an hour to back down and find a different route for the tired ole girl to go over.

 

[DeepRoots]

Also of note....
Detroit Diesels will run long past their prime. At the point where most engines would be needed to take out of service, the detroit is still leaking and gasping in service.

I've seen many "****** rebuids" (two cans of spray paint and a new hour meter).

 

[CaptTom]

wow this turned into a real ******* match. what about a 3116 CAT?

The 3116 is also a high spooler for best torque range. Depending on which 3116 you have, depends on the actual torque value, but, top torque is produced at around 1550 rpm.... not at the low end of 1200.

And for those who keep saying Detroits power band is at the high end, this is just not so, it is at the low end of the rpm spectrum. Almost all of the torque out put will be around 1200 rpm's and will go hollow at around 1500 rpm's, with a gain of only around 20 ft lbs between 1200 and 1500 rpm's. This means power is "ON" at the low end...almost all of it produced at 1200.,,, when compared to a turbo'd engine, this torque CANNOT occur until the turbo spools up. Turbo's don't really start kicking in until 11-1200 rpm's.

At 1500 rpm's, torque goes back to the basement after that.

The 3116 is a turbo'd engine.

This is also why truckers despise Detroits.... they go hollow at a very low rpm range, but, they can move a buncha load at that low end....when going up a hill under load, this requires more fuel, which equates to more rpm..... HOWEVER.... if we look again at the rpm/tq curve, you will see, with a Detroit, there will be no more power gained by goosing it up to 1800-2300 rpm's! Thus, there is a loss of headway.

This is really simple stuff.

Truckers want to do 70 mph up all hills under all conditions.... but this cannot be done when the engine torques out well below cruising rpm....no or minimum torque is required on the flats.

On vessels, low end torque is great stuff because fuel costs are way lower due to the lower rpm required to move them. Also, if you do 70mph on anything but the flatest days, all you're really doing is beating equipment and wasting fuel.

A vessel loves life at between 10-14 knots. This is not only optimum fuel efficiency, rpm's between 1200-1500, but it doesn't beat the equipment nor the people.

Here's a closer comparison than trucking v. boating.

Take your favorite rig into the back country and drive it at 1900 rpm's in second gear,without clutching or a slushbox, under all conditions and see how your Cummins, Cat or International does. You will find that if you even survive the beating, you will be at lower rpm's because you only have one gear and the torque in the latter three engines will bog your fannies into the dirt.... a Detroit will push you through every boulder you come across or until the rest of the vehicle gives up....including the driver. THAT! Is more like boating.

This debate isn't what engine is better, it is about application of torque and where it resides.

We can all create a perfect scenario for our favorite power maker, but until one realizes that just because it says it produces 10,000hp.... doesn't mean it will get the job done.

Oh sure, it's impressive to brag about, but will a 10,000hp engine turning only 520 max rpm make your F-350 go faster?

Not a chance in Hades!

 

[snicklas]

Another thing I have seen on the 3208's. Back in the day before there were diesel pickups.... Cat had a program at their dealers, McAllister here in Indianapolis was one of them. They had a "kit" where they would pull the gas powerplant out of a pickup, and replace it with a 3208 Cat V-8 diesel..... not sure all the specifices to get it in there, but have seen and heard about several that were around...... I would love to get ahold of one. I drove a S-Series single axle Dump Truck (Retired ILL DOT Truck). It had a 3208 Cat V-8 N/A with a 5-speed Allison bolted to its backside. The truck was not fast... and it would haul a full bedload of stone at or above the posted speed limit (the accelerator pedal got harder to push to go above 45.... don't think it went faster than that in its 1st life) but it was a pulling, and snow pushing monster..... it would muscle throught anything we put in front or it.... the only trouble we had was keeping the back tires hooked to the ground... not power to turn them..... one nice thing was we plowed mostly gravel roads... so we ran chains on all the trucks......

 

[Agnem]

This thread is an interesting read. I have no experience with any of these motors, so I can appreciate how some of you have a real love or hate affair with a particular motor. I also appreciate keeping the feelings at bay, and agreeing to disagree civily. My experience with 2 cycles are limited to what is in locomotives. And given that there are really only 2 builders out there and one is 2 cycle and one is 4 cycle, it's not really worth comparing or arguing about which is which.

 

[CaptTom]

This thread is an interesting read. I have no experience with any of these motors, so I can appreciate how some of you have a real love or hate affair with a particular motor. I also appreciate keeping the feelings at bay, and agreeing to disagree civily. My experience with 2 cycles are limited to what is in locomotives. And given that there are really only 2 builders out there and one is 2 cycle and one is 4 cycle, it's not really worth comparing or arguing about which is which.

Wanna know a great engine for a boat??

A 3126 Cat.... put a jet under it, double it and surround it with a rubber tube and not only will ya go pretty fast, the rubber tube acts like a shock absorber, lessening the effects on lower back, hips, knees and kidneys don't **** as much blood.

http://www.fas.org/man//dod-101/sys/ship/rhib-990527-N-4790M-006.jpg

BTW.... those boats are slow compared to some gassers I've driven.... with high HP and zero torque in comparison to a diesel.... but then again.... we spun 'em up to 6500 rpm.... there's a fine line at 6000rpm between boating and flying...Nuttin like twin 525's to both exhilarate and damage a body at the same time. No diesel made runs like those.

Here's an exciting ride for example:

http://www.warboats.org/images/jpg/GrayJuly/SBU12/gray120a.JPG

 

[pennsylvaniabo]

What about the ford 7.8l straight 6

 

[CaptTom]

What about the ford 7.8l straight 6

Interesting... I know nothing about those engines and even if I did, would give him $50 bucks for it.

Straight sixes are great engines. Ever hear of a bad one in any make or fuel type?

Cummins and Detroits are great engines because of this.

Cummins had a triple nickle V-8 that was supposed to be like a "Cat".... maybe the stuff a cat put in a sand box... very unreliable, under powered and....yeah well, whatever.

Just cuz it says some brand on the sticker doesn't mean they're any good.

There really isn't a bad Detroit, but, like everything... gotta know what you want the engine to do before you decide on what to get.

Here's another really funny thought.

Detroit was put into almost everything(around the world to boot) at one point in time for very good reason....trucks boats, buses, gensets, tugs, power plants, etc.. they were/are reliable power houses and easy to repair. Nothing matched them.... until Cummins challenged them in niche markets with computerized engines. Then Chevy, Ford, Isuzu, etc. all wanted to have an engine that produced reliable higher power in a wider power band at a higher rpm range. Detroits have definitely been schooled in a lot of applications, however, as old as they are in technology, they can still own the day....as I've bragged adnauseum over.

My single engine cost me $5000.00 to rebuild with tranny, 50/60 year old technology and kicked pants on two $30,000 each units.

Doesn't anyone find that interesting?

Here's another kewl engine... made by the Italians of all people.... Iveco. One of the most reliable engines I've ever driven....problem was... parts....find a freakin part for an Iveco Marinized engine in the US!!! HAH! Smoooooth as silk, half turn starter, no smoke, quiet, non-computerized too! Break an OEM part.... the engine gets even quieter for long periods of time.