Diesel --> Towncar

[Archangel]

the 4bt should fit length-wise, but I wouldn't consider it a wise decision - it can make good power, but that ain't really what Jon is going after, so dumping 4k for something that's gonna give you the same fuel economy as a $900 military diesel is just a waste, methinks

[mrltd]

Uh, if it'll fit in a ranger.,..

http://www.fototime.com/ftweb/bin/ft.dll/pictures?userid={9DB1F04B-DB72-4075-BAE2-3374A41C91BD}&guid={82EB65B4-7436-438F-B167-1BEF724A778B}&albumid={ACE51213-0189-4679-97EC-4439C647F546}&st=he&sent=stored

This site has a lot of swap info....

http://www.4btswaps.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=7&page=3&order=desc

[Archangel]

Holy shit, that ranger is a stacked-turbo setup! Damn!

[DriverSideImpact98]

I kinda wanted to do the same thing with a Caprice. A 6.2/6.5 is almost identical in size and weight to a 454 BBC. They are about 650-700 lbs. A 4bt cummins is 7-800 lbs and the 7.3 is about 900. The 6.2 is also more fuel efficient than the 7.3, but it does have less power. I'd rather have a 6.9/7.3 in a truck, but a 6.2 would be more than enough for a CV). I've heard of 2wd C10's getting close to 30mpg. You can run a 700r4 (has overdrive and a lower 1st gear).
There's a guy on youtube who has a 6.5TD in a Nova, pretty badass. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLtEXkLO-XE

My ex-nat'l guard M1008 Chevy sounds pretty much like this one, I have some cherrybomb glasspacks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_l6P08ibv7o

[p71towny]

Fuck the GM 6.5, horrible engine. Just put a new one in our work truck.

[Southern_Pride]

I personally love the 6.2. They can be wound up way tighter than they should for a long time without exploding. It is slow, but they are good motors.

[Archangel]

Get the manifolds (intake and exhaust) and the turbo from the 6.5 and put then om the 6.2 then crank the DB2 fuel up a bit and you should be doing pretty good on both power and fuel economy. I'm not sure what upgrades the 6.5 has over the 6.2 but if you can you should swap those as well (like we put 7.3 rockers on 6.9 engines). At least that's my plan for a daily driver down the road: late-'70s shortbed stepper with 1-ton running gear, 5-speed, NP205, 4 discs, tweaked RWAL with manual override, small lift and 35s.

[grandpaslincoln]

A guy just set a land speed record for fastest 6.5. 153 miles per hour. 300 HP. 6.2/6.5's don't suck, it's peoples perception that sucks.

[Archangel]

Amen to that, sad thing is even them Chevy guys don't get it - it's kinda funny sometimes how a Ford guy (me) has to persuade Chevy kids their stuff is actually pretty darn good.

[grandpaslincoln]

Get the manifolds (intake and exhaust) and the turbo from the 6.5 and put then om the 6.2 then crank the DB2 fuel up a bit and you should be doing pretty good on both power and fuel economy. I'm not sure what upgrades the 6.5 has over the 6.2 but if you can you should swap those as well (like we put 7.3 rockers on 6.9 engines). At least that's my plan for a daily driver down the road: late-'70s shortbed stepper with 1-ton running gear, 5-speed, NP205, 4 discs, tweaked RWAL with manual override, small lift and 35s.

To add a little bit more to this. Replace the harmonic balancer, they had a tendency to come apart, which would cause a crankshaft failure. Another thing to do is make sure your cooling system is more than adequate. The stock cooling systems for the 6.2/6.5 were not that good, that and the 21.3:1 compression ratio made a shitload of heat that couldn't be handled, and would sometimes crack the heads. If you feel up to it, there are some 18:1 pistons you could put in to help, but if you don't want to do that, just make sure the cooling system is good. If you take smoke & rattles advice on the turbo, I'd definitely swap in those 18:1 pistons.

[DriverSideImpact98]

A guy just set a land speed record for fastest 6.5. 153 miles per hour. 300 HP. 6.2/6.5's don't suck, it's peoples perception that sucks.

Everyone thinks the 6.2 is the same thing as the 4.3/5.7 Olds diesel...

As for the differences between 6.2 and 6.5...I don't think there's much. 6.5 is the same block bored a little, they have different Ex. and In. manifolds and have an electronic injection pump, and injectors. And generally a turbo. I'm not sure about heads, crank, pushrods, etc.

[Southern_Pride]

Ive seen one 6.2 crank fail. May have been the balancer or the fact the guy modded the injection pump and was running it at 5000 rpm in a tow truck loaded or not.

[grandpaslincoln]

Everyone thinks the 6.2 is the same thing as the 4.3/5.7 Olds diesel...

As for the differences between 6.2 and 6.5...I don't think there's much. 6.5 is the same block bored a little, they have different Ex. and In. manifolds and have an electronic injection pump, and injectors. And generally a turbo. I'm not sure about heads, crank, pushrods, etc.

Electronic injection pump was introduced in 94. Any 6.5 before that was mechanical. 6.5 heads will swap onto the 6.2 with no problems, would have to anyway if running the 6.5 turbo and intake and exhaust manifolds. 6.5 is about 100 lbs heavier than the 6.2 due to the beefing up of the block webbing. 6.5's also have oil squirters to coat the underside of the pistons.

[grandpaslincoln]

Ive seen one 6.2 crank fail. May have been the balancer or the fact the guy modded the injection pump and was running it at 5000 rpm in a tow truck loaded or not.

Could be. The 6.2's max RPM stock was 3600 RPM.

[DriverSideImpact98]

Electronic injection pump was introduced in 94. Any 6.5 before that was mechanical. 6.5 heads will swap onto the 6.2 with no problems, would have to anyway if running the 6.5 turbo and intake and exhaust manifolds. 6.5 is about 100 lbs heavier than the 6.2 due to the beefing up of the block webbing. 6.5's also have oil squirters to coat the underside of the pistons.

Yeah I forgot that the 1st 2 years of 6.5's were mechanical. I figured the blocks would be beefed up. I didn't realize they had the squirters though.