dbarilow said:
1972 304 auto I gotta find some pics luckily I foound a guy who took good care of her
Very nice! Sounds like you had a good one...which auto did you have? I know that nearly all Scout II's used the Chrysler Torqflite 727 auto, but IIRC some really early SII's used a Borg-Warner unit...don't know much about it, except that it existed and used a different flexplate than the TF727. With my Scout, I learned a valuable lesson...terminal rust is NOT limited to navigation buoys and Sea Scout boats
I didn't think to check the undercarriage thoroughly...and realized later that I had paid $2K for a truck that had spent most of its life in Michigan and Utah, and was rusted so badly that the doors didn't close properly and the body tried to fold in on itself when I removed the top
GOD!! it was a fun truck, though...I miss it...
Hoss6.9 said:
Early 60's Scout is either an 80 or an 800 - Depending on the year! I think 61-64/5 would be an 80 and 65/6 thru 70? is an 800.
I could be mistaken, but I think 1971 was a transition year...you could buy a Scout 800 or a Scout II. Certainly, by 1972, the Scout II was the only one available (other than the pickup and the Travelall). Personally, I always thought that a cherry Travelall with the 3rd row seat and an IDI/T-19 would make a REAL sweet rig
dbarilow said:
just find one with the diesel engine in it already!!!!
Just wondering, have you driven an SD-33 or SD-33T? IMHO, describing them as "anemic" is charitable...they're actually VERY reliable if you keep the EGT's down
(high EGT's and a rusted-out Michigan body are why I no longer have my Scout), but a Geo Metro or a 240D would have easily outrun my old Scout, which had a turbo engine and a T-19. I drove an n/a SD-33 (hooked to a Torquflite 727 auto) once, and THAT made my truck look fast
To IH's credit, they intended the Nissan diesels to improve fuel economy, not power...and they were supposedly really good on fuel. I've heard people claim low to mid 20's (compared to a 345, where double digits is a pipe dream
), although I never saw much higher than 15 (that was with a cracked piston that took a while to manifest itself, though, and I didn't check mileage early on).
Agnem said:
As for the Scout, I would think a 6.9 in a Scout would be an excellent project. Would certainly beat that Nissan plant.
That would PROBABLY be fairly straightforward. It would be best to start with a truck that had a diesel to begin with, because (like our IDI's) diesel Scouts used a different tranny than g@$$ers, with more diesel-friendly gear ratios. Also, all diesel Scouts with manual transmissions used T-19's, while T-18's and (I believe) NP435's were also used behind g@$$ers. The IDI bellhousing ought to bolt right to the IH T-19, and I think the only issue there would be converting to a hydraulic clutch, assuming the input shaft is the same. There's also weight to consider, but IH used "normal" leaf springs for the front, so getting stronger springs shouldn't be a big deal. Finding a 1980 model year would be ideal, since for that year only they used a Dana 300 transfer case instead of a Dana 20, and the D300 has a lower 4L gear ratio (I think it's 2.61 as compared to 2.00 on the D20?) that makes it VERY much in demand.
I wonder how the IDI would do for fuel economy in a Scout? Considerably lighter than a pickup truck (about 4K lbs? Mel, I would venture to guess it's about the same weight that the Moosestang is, and 4K lbs is actually about what my Benz weighs
), and while most g@$$er Scouts used lower ratios (4.10 or 4.56), I believe they only put 3.73's behind the SD-33/T's...
BTW, to get this thread semi-on-topic, my old Scout had dealer-added a/c, with a York compressor. I did a "death kit" conversion to R-134a, and, amazingly enough, never had a problem. The system leaked enough that I had to add a pound of freon twice in the year between the time I got the a/c working and the time I sold the truck, but it did a good job of keeping the cab cool.
