Jump to content

D466 vs DT414 in hydro 186


acem

Recommended Posts

I still need to replace the engine in my hydro 186 and my mind is ruminating. The engines used in this style hydro include D414 (966 hydro), DT414 (1066 hydro),  D436 (hydro 100 and hydro 186) and D466 (3488). 

Im considering using either a D466 or DT414 as a replacement. I think the DT414 might be more fuel efficient because of the turbo and D466 might have more torque at lower RPMs due to the longer stroke. Of course I could use a D436 too. 

Any experience or thoughts?

Ideally anybody have a 1066 hydro,  hydro 100/186 and 3488 to compare.

Thx-Ace 

image.png.1a8f45c24fa26ba097e833f5374d3cc4.png

image.png.ebc8c8b9b86344dda150314545983caf.png

image.png.05572fb787380a216e593a56e0ab7b44.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've still got the factory 436 in my 186 but I can tell you that after I added a turbo it has way more power using the same amount of fuel.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, nepoweshiekfarmalls said:

My Hydro 100 has a 436 Turbocharged engine.  That engine is stout!  Pulled a 15' disk in plowed ground with no effort. 

20210406_184517.thumb.jpg.15338aa87113c6b8e62fcb9da5fedce0.jpg

I've been told adding the hair dryer to a D436 adds about 30 ponies. I had a 186 with a turbo augmentation and decreased the oil change interval to 75 from a hundred hours due to the cooling capacity deficit on the D436.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have a 1066 hydro and 186 with a hair dryer. I wouldn't be afraid about any combination of those engine's with a turbo, it's how it's used that effects transmission life. Turbo seems to use less fuel per work done 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Matt Kirsch said:

"Torque at lower RPM" is not really useful on a hydro. Generally you want to keep them wound up for maximum pressure and flow to the transmission.

Matt beat me to it effectively using torque with a hydro is not  a real issue hydraulic drives depend on consistent higher rpms to be effective . Now adding a turbo I am all for those 400 series engines all seem to come alive with extra air  I am scheduling a 186 into the my shop to turbo for a customer right  now so he can get a few more ponies for running the auger in the fall but I think he will appreciate the better fuel economy with the baler this summer also .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Matt Kirsch said:

"Torque at lower RPM" is not really useful on a hydro. Generally you want to keep them wound up for maximum pressure and flow to the transmission.

Your right,I about never lug or idle any of mine around. Set it at pto speed or  3/4 of the way and go.I know I been thinking of turboing my H100 just for the extra HP for my hills,fuel economy and nicer sounding engine. Anyone know about what it would cost without labor and would the hood have to be changed?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the good replies. I'm just thinking.

I thought about the d466 because I can get a DT466 reasonable from  a combine. If I removed the turbo for my 4366 I could install the D466 (less turbo) in my 186. He also has some nice low houred D466 in 1822 cotton pickers.

The DT436 is also readily available but good DT414s are becoming harder to find.

I wonder how the hydro 1066 compares to the 3488?

Just thinking.

Thx-Ace 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John misencik said:

I have 100 hydro, 436 turboed, making 147 hp, it only bales hay, nh  hayliner, I m very happy w it good even power

That's the thing with all the 400 series turboed tractors,good even power no highs or lows or at least seems with me.I also think with the Hydros the power is even more even if that makes sense. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, jimw said:

Bigger is better ? Always thought the 414 started better , if that’s possible. What are the torque numbers comparison on these engines 

Agreed, the 414’s I’ve been around seem to start better than the rest, but does anyone know why. That’s my choice, smallest displacement should give the best fuel economy, although the difference may be insignificant, and best starting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, acem said:

Thanks for the good replies. I'm just thinking.

I thought about the d466 because I can get a DT466 reasonable from  a combine. If I removed the turbo for my 4366 I could install the D466 (less turbo) in my 186. He also has some nice low houred D466 in 1822 cotton pickers.

The DT436 is also readily available but good DT414s are becoming harder to find.

I wonder how the hydro 1066 compares to the 3488?

Just thinking.

Thx-Ace 

Not sure if would be noticed or not, IH used a high swirl head for the naturally aspirated engines and started out with a low swirl on the A series and then went to an intermediate swirl head on the B and C series engines. Not sure what you would notice on a DT running without the turbo.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, sd186man said:

the 414’s I’ve been around seem to start better than the rest, but does anyone know why.

My guess would be the pump and injectors. When the dealer replaced the 414 in the 1066 with a 436 long block, they just moved the pump and injectors over to the new engine. It started every bit as good as it did before it dropped the coolant in the oil pan. That tractor would start in 2 revolutions if you could get it to turn over.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We had a '72 1466 that would start parked outside with snow on the hood in sub thirty degree temps without using booger sugar and no block heater because it didn't have one installed. Acquired it as a low hour one owner. Factory fuel screw retainer wire was missing. Not sure how many horsey ponies were in the trailer but I do know it would get to 2500 rpm in 4th gear High Direct in a big hurry and stay there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/2/2023 at 7:25 PM, jimw said:

Bigger is better ? Always thought the 414 started better , if that’s possible. What are the torque numbers comparison on these engines 

Our 414 starts better than our 436. Both have been overhauled with fresh injectors and pumps, it was like that before  and after overhaul. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

414 ,436, and 466 starting ease. Local retired mechanic said that they all should be set to the same timing before TDC. I think it's 18° on the 414 and less on the 436+466 . He said he set them all to 18 and then they start a little better . We have a 466 truck engine in our 1066 Hydro and it starts just fine with the pump from the tractor set up the sale as the 414 was 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I grew up starting two of each of them pretty much daily. Good and tight motor, with good head, injectors and fuel pump. They all start excellent. I never would’ve said that one displacement was better than the other. Our original 1066 with 1600hr on it, starts in about one revolution. Like the rubber on the starter button is still pushing out on your finger and your trying to get your hand off of it.  9k hr  1466 with freshly rebuilt everything, starts almost as fast.  
 
I vote “low our” or rebuilt, and “turbo”, get priority over displacement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, for this application, a DT414 would be ideal.

DTI466 in a 4386, rebuild with the head done right - barely roll over a 1/2 turn before firing up after sitting all winter!   Best starting diesel I ever had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Put a turbo on a hydro makes them a lot more tractor. We put a turbo on our 3488 now it goes before it was a dog. we did'nt open the pump left it the way it was never dyno it so dont know what its at for power.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My dads 5488 has a Reman engine with around 2,000 hrs on it and it is easily the fastest starting machine of any kind that I've ever run and it's not close. You touch the key and it's running. He also has a 1086 with a more recent Reman, and while it starts as good as you could ever expect, the 54 is still quicker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...