The Stovebolt Site Forums The Shop Area Engine Shop Diesel Comparison

I am sure this has been discussed more times than we can count but, I am looking to put a 50's Chevy COE (already have) on a platform. Can't decide between, Powerstroke, Cummings, or Duramax. Looking at mid 90's to early 2000. Have 2 insight . A wrecked 2001 Chevy 2500, bad cab, or a '97 F-250 Ford turbo Powerstroke. Opinions, Directions previous discussions or comparison articles, Please.
I have thought about a suburban frame or one of those small diesel van platforms but worry about strength.
Ultimate goal is to make a reliable vehicale with enough power to pull a 55 hundred pound, 5th wheel over a few mountains and take off for a year or so.
Thanx

If you want opinions your sure to get a few. I'll lead off with some real world experience.

First check the GVWR and the GCWR of the doner chassis. That means you need to determine the weight of everything...truck, trailer, people, gas, supplies. etc. and if your chassis will handle it then you can start deciding more about the engine.
I like the idea of an E350/E450 cutaway van chassis or a equivelant GM chassis. Both the Powerstroke and the Duramax will handle the job and those chassis should have the weight rating and stopping power. I had a GM cutaway Penske van with a 6 litre Vortec and it would run a lot faster than anyone had any business going with a loaded van so I know the diesel will do it. Great setup with std air, PS, PDB, New bucket seats for your old cab to boot. And you can sell the van body to help cover costs. To me this is a much more practical idea than changing an old truck over to diesel power. You gain all the bonus mechanicals in a proven match. They even already come with the electric brake contoller. It will save tons of time, torment, language, and a LOT of money. Only way to go if you want an old truck look to do a modern day job.

Good points!

One consideration when fitting an old truck body over a new complete drivetrain is track with and how much the wheels poke out of the fenders.
Remember these old trucks were a lot narrower than new stuff.

An excellent resource for diesel conversions of any type
www.4btswaps.com

Grigg

Stay away from the 6.0L Fords, the early ones are a night mare. We have 2004 though 2010, so far the '06 and newer are working pretty good. The '04 and '05s are a real mess. The E350 and E450's van cutaways used in our school bus fleet eat ball joints. The chassis and trans are holding up really well and our '01 Power strokes are holding up good.

joe

For what it's worth, I would also avoid the 12-valve Cummins/automatic transmission combo found in the Mid-'90's Dodges -- doggy on hills and the transmission is crapola maxima.

Hi Joe, BTW!

John

A bit off topic but one of the companies I rep had 4 2010-11 Ford diesels crap out under 15k miles. Now buying Rams for demo's.

all the engines are ok, however they have issues, they are all built by humans and accountants.

the cummins is based off an industrial engine. the GM/Isuzu and Ford/Navistar engines were designed to be light duty engines. The new Ford engines..... well enough said.

John, I agree with the poor RH47 transmissions behind the 12 valve. That is why Cummins had to detune the engines for the dodge trucks. however a titanium planet carrier and kevlar clutches will make the trans bullet proof, then you can go with a TST Fuel plate and pull 275hp all day long. much more if you change the governor springs and injectors.

Ford/Navistars suffered from broken rockers for many years, then when the new engines came out in 2006, they would start on fire when they went to regen. I dont have enough exposure to the 2010 and newer Ford designed engines to know all their shortcomings.

the GM/Isuzu engines mounted the electronics to the fuel pump in the valley. at about 140k it will fail. also, the oiling system is a bit on the weak side.

I myself am partial to the Cummins.

I got to say since I got my LBZ Duramax I sure wish I had put one in my 56. Duramax at least the LBZ is an incredible engine. Not many powerplants are capable of over 500 RWHP and 1000 ft lbs of torque @ 18 MPG.The 496 I built may come close to 500 HP @ the flywheel but no where near the torque or MPG in fact most likely less than a 3rd the MPG.

RUN- - - -do not walk away from the Ford Diesels, particularly the ones with the electronic-control turbo. I see a couple of them a month doing warranty claim inspections, and they're always having horrendously expensive problems with the variable-boost systems. The ring that positions the wastegate vanes locks up and/or spits a few vanes into the impeller. Once the turbo debris gets into the engine, you've got a medium-sized boat anchor.

GM Diesels are a little better, but the Cummins lives about 3 days past forever, IMHO. I see virtually no warranty claims as long as the motor oil and fuel filters get changed regularly.
Jerry

Most everything has issues now of because of the point of manufacture of the parts. Most everything is made offshore and if it is built here in US its just assembled from the offshore parts. And other than just plain bad designs its one of the main causes of all the problems now with the newer motor vehicles cars and trucks. Makes me wonder where the ignition switches that GM has to recall were made?

Engines don't have to be made by humans. See video.

I'm a cummins can myself. I own one so in biased. But the 12 valve is a work horse. They're heavy as heck though. Motor with trans are around 1200 lbs. Get the mechanical version, pre '98 I believe. With a minor fuel plate grind you can get 900 lb/ft and 400 hp reliable. My business partner has one with 300k miles. We tow mini excavators and bobcats weekly. Tractor and trailer maybe 11k lbs.