Gen 1 diesel.

[86MUDRCJ]

I have decided that my truck will be a diesel... Cummins powered ranger! Why the reason? Well my answer is pretty much because I can.lol now all I gotta do is stock pile parts. Cant wait to get it started!

 

[bobbywalter]

dont like duramax?


6.2-6.5 pretty easy for parts

 

[93 Ohio Ranger]

Mines going to be 4bt powered 3rd gen. I personally like the 4bt just for simplicity and how reliable they are. They fit in pretty good and are just fun all around.

If you do put one in, do the kdp, put a Denny T fuel pin in, 3200 Gov spring and hx 40 turbo and have at it.

 

[86MUDRCJ]

dont like duramax?


6.2-6.5 pretty easy for parts

Never really been a fan of them, and everyone tells me they have their problems... Many problems.

Mines going to be 4bt powered 3rd gen. I personally like the 4bt just for simplicity and how reliable they are. They fit in pretty good and are just fun all around.

If you do put one in, do the kdp, put a Denny T fuel pin in, 3200 Gov spring and hx 40 turbo and have at it.

Same here and suprisingly I can get one for pretty cheap. Stupid question... What is a kdp?

 

[superds]

I think many of the people that say the 6.2/6.5 has problems are really referring to the Olds diesel of about the same era and think the 6.2/6.5 are based on gas engines modified to accept diesel. It's an ok engine and there's many still around to prove that.

 

[lneidlinger]

dont like duramax?


6.2-6.5 pretty easy for parts

6.2 and 6.5 are detroit diesels, not duramax. Even so, the torque the 4bt makes is good for it's size, 330lb-ft. The 6.2 only made up to 257lb-ft in civilian form, the CUCV's had 330lb-ft though. The 6.5 would be ok, as they made up to 440lb-ft but trying to find one standalone is pretty hard (and I wouldn't want to ruin a nice C/K 2500/3500 as I do like the look of those trucks), not to mention you have a much larger 90 degree V engine to try and shoehorn in there.

 

[superds]

6.2 and 6.5 are detroit diesels, not duramax. Even so, the torque the 4bt makes is good for it's size, 330lb-ft. The 6.2 only made up to 257lb-ft in civilian form, the CUCV's had 330lb-ft though. The 6.5 would be ok, as they made up to 440lb-ft but trying to find one standalone is pretty hard (and I wouldn't want to ruin a nice C/K 2500/3500 as I do like the look of those trucks), not to mention you have a much larger 90 degree V engine to try and shoehorn in there.

The advantage of that 90 degree V engine is that you have less overall engine height to deal with. The 4BT practically necessitates a 4"+ suspension lift to facilitate oil pan to front differential clearance in a 4x4 Ranger. To some people this is a moot point because they wanted a suspension lift anyway but not everyone wants one. I think you could get away with less suspension lift with the 6.5.

 

[Snoranger]

Never really been a fan of them, and everyone tells me they have their problems... Many problems.


Same here and suprisingly I can get one for pretty cheap. Stupid question... What is a kdp?

kdp = Killer Dowel Pin.

 

[Snoranger]

The advantage of that 90 degree V engine is that you have less overall engine height to deal with. The 4BT practically necessitates a 4"+ suspension lift to facilitate oil pan to front differential clearance in a 4x4 Ranger. To some people this is a moot point because they wanted a suspension lift anyway but not everyone wants one. I think you could get away with less suspension lift with the 6.5.

A 2wd with no crossmember trimming and a 2" body lift will clear the turbo to intake pipe, with very light rubbing on the hood insulation. (goes over the valve covers.)
With a 4x4 you will need to cut the pan to clear the crossmember, but it can be done at stock height without much of a problem. Yes, you will need springs that can hold the extra weight (about 750lbs of engine plus a heavier than stock trans.)

 

[superds]

Well, snoranger, I'll take your word on it. I've never done a 4BT swap into a Gen1 but was mostly going off the observations I've made from other builds I've seen and what the owners had to say about the swap.

ps. I can't wait to see your 4BT Explorer on the road, it looks like a good swap so far!

 

[86MUDRCJ]

The advantage of that 90 degree V engine is that you have less overall engine height to deal with. The 4BT practically necessitates a 4"+ suspension lift to facilitate oil pan to front differential clearance in a 4x4 Ranger. To some people this is a moot point because they wanted a suspension lift anyway but not everyone wants one. I think you could get away with less suspension lift with the 6.5.

I already have 4" lift but plannin on runnin a 6".

kdp = Killer Dowel Pin.

thanks!

A 2wd with no crossmember trimming and a 2" body lift will clear the turbo to intake pipe, with very light rubbing on the hood insulation. (goes over the valve covers.)
With a 4x4 you will need to cut the pan to clear the crossmember, but it can be done at stock height without much of a problem. Yes, you will need springs that can hold the extra weight (about 750lbs of engine plus a heavier than stock trans.)

what setup would you reccomend? Coils off a f150 or superduty?

6.2 and 6.5 are detroit diesels, not duramax. Even so, the torque the 4bt makes is good for it's size, 330lb-ft. The 6.2 only made up to 257lb-ft in civilian form, the CUCV's had 330lb-ft though. The 6.5 would be ok, as they made up to 440lb-ft but trying to find one standalone is pretty hard (and I wouldn't want to ruin a nice C/K 2500/3500 as I do like the look of those trucks), not to mention you have a much larger 90 degree V engine to try and shoehorn in there.

where im at 4bt is easier to find and like stated I dont want tear open a complete truck if I dont have to.

 

[Snoranger]

I already have 4" lift but plannin on runnin a 6".
thanks!

what setup would you reccomend? Coils off a f150 or superduty?

The 4bt weights about the same as a 460. I'm really not sure what springs you will need. I think superduty springs would be WAY too much. F150s might work good. You could even try Ranger 6" springs and hope they sag to a 4" (or 8" and hope for 6", etc).

Talk to Dave (Cummins_Ranger) on here. Hes got a lift on his 3rd gen 4bt 2wd Ranger, see what hes using and how much lift he has.

 

[bobbywalter]

Never really been a fan of them, and everyone tells me they have their problems... Many problems.


Same here and suprisingly I can get one for pretty cheap. Stupid question... What is a kdp?

it is true they have more issues mechanically then a 4bt. but the engines are easily brought into line with minimal money and effort depending on power goals and truck operation goals

my experience with maintaining delivery trucks with these engines and every swap i have seen and driven/ridden in leaves em off my radar till fuel gets a bit more expensive.

these engines are superior to the little detroits in every way except for NVH...and in my truck which has seen 60 k plus a year again...well, now NVH matters.

I think many of the people that say the 6.2/6.5 has problems are really referring to the Olds diesel of about the same era and think the 6.2/6.5 are based on gas engines modified to accept diesel. It's an ok engine and there's many still around to prove that.

this is not really true, they do have a well deserved bad reputation in more then one sense....

the little detroits were made to replace the 307 power range trucks with goals mandated for fuel economy with 70's ideals...they homerunned it for goals intended...its made for 1/2 tons on up after all.....when you extract over 250 whp from a 6.5 its generally on a timer to say the least, but left to mechanical injection with 200 or so whp they are stupid reliable for a general application driver/hard wheeler. smart use of the electronic versions still nets a powerful and reliable unit... you need to really pay attention to the oil on these idi bastards in any case....

6.2 and 6.5 are detroit diesels, not duramax. Even so, the torque the 4bt makes is good for it's size, 330lb-ft. The 6.2 only made up to 257lb-ft in civilian form, the CUCV's had 330lb-ft though. The 6.5 would be ok, as they made up to 440lb-ft but trying to find one standalone is pretty hard (and I wouldn't want to ruin a nice C/K 2500/3500 as I do like the look of those trucks), not to mention you have a much larger 90 degree V engine to try and shoehorn in there.

i certainly know the difference between a d max and idi detroit....my intentions to my statement were to use a d max...if the electronic thing was not in the cards stepping down to the idi turds isnt so bad...which is why its spaced so far apart....just feeling out the goals and throwing them out there. i certainly know all of these engines very well and can install any of them in anything regardless of the electronics etc...but i see how i messed up my intentions the way i stated it...

the d max is easier to fit then a psd......but equally complex. really the best choics for big power...easily the best choice imo.

the 6.2-6.5 is retarded easy to fit all around....way way smoother then a 4bt and much quieter at 75 mph for 1500 mile rides to work. in my application i now know they get similar economy at the same powerlevels. so smooth and good sounding v8 it is for me.



the powerlevels you list for the 6.5/6.2 i am not familiar with as they vary between turbo and non turbo...

the n/a 6.5 i have does ok. making a 450 ft pound 6.2-6.5 is pretty easy to do with minimal money and patience.



just saying there are alternatives to the 4bt...and depending on goals they are much more sensible in some cases.

 

[bobbywalter]

one thing to note, the 4bt and 6.5 weight about the same....which really should put into perspective how much stronger a 4bt is stock.

 

[Snoranger]

Booby's right, the 4bt is NOT a refined motor. It will shake, rattle, and roll. It will howl and growl at you the entire time your cruising. The turbo will just sing to you. You'll love every minute of it.

If you want a good long lasting gas mileage motor, either one will work. If you want to make a lot of power and beat on it like you stole it --- go with the Cummins.