Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, acem said:

You are delusional.

Obviously the 12v Cummins Dodge is the ultimate pickup!!!

image.jpeg.9033d0543365ba9daeeba4377b6d389c.jpeg

Except for the tranny!

  • Like 2
Posted

I’ll take my Duramax with 6-speed manual over a Frod or Dodge. The ultimate would be a square body Chevy with 12 valve Cummins and Allison auto.

  • Like 2
Posted

I still  love my Fords,  but economics forced me into an S10 with  a  2.2 . That little  engine  is something else.  While  changing  a head gasket,  the pistons  were so sloppy  that they  could have been  connected to the rod with  a ball/socket arrangement rather than a wrist pin. 

Whether I  should  overhaul,  I considered 2 factors. 1). Does it knock? No. 2). Burn oil? No. 

Just clap the head back on and run it. 

That engine deserves a  'future use' spot under my bench when  the truck  is gone. 

Posted
33 minutes ago, Binderoid said:

I still  love my Fords,  but economics forced me into an S10 with  a  2.2 . That little  engine  is something else.  While  changing  a head gasket,  the pistons  were so sloppy  that they  could have been  connected to the rod with  a ball/socket arrangement rather than a wrist pin. 

Whether I  should  overhaul,  I considered 2 factors. 1). Does it knock? No. 2). Burn oil? No. 

Just clap the head back on and run it. 

That engine deserves a  'future use' spot under my bench when  the truck  is gone. 

Had a 95 I bought at auction cheep 

Was a good truck after I changed the head the original had porosity in the casting was loosing coolant 

Got 25-26 mpg on the highway but wasn't much for power on the hills 

Not impressed with two things on those 2.2s 

The fuel injection system uses some funky injectors and the coil pack are 2 cylinders each.

All different from the LS motors.

You would think some of design criteria given to the design team would be use as many common parts with other high volume platforms.

That is just lack of leadership in R&D which is the down fall of most companies   

Posted
3 minutes ago, jeeper61 said:

That is just lack of leadership in R&D which is the down fall of most companies   

I think part of the problem also involves the bean counters sticking their noses where it doesn't belong. 

In days gone by. Stockholders were content with getting a modest return on their investment. Now that investment has to grow every year. No matter what.  The bean counters keeping their masters happy were given power that they never used to wield and their fingerprints show on everything. 

  • Like 4
Posted
22 minutes ago, Reichow7120 said:

I think part of the problem also involves the bean counters sticking their noses where it doesn't belong. 

In days gone by. Stockholders were content with getting a modest return on their investment. Now that investment has to grow every year. No matter what.  The bean counters keeping their masters happy were given power that they never used to wield and their fingerprints show on everything. 

  The desire for being the most wealthy and outdoing the other guy is going to lead to a failure of the system.  Just my opinion but when the goal was to have a good home and a modest vehicle people got by on less.  Today its about having the most expensive vehicle without having a Cadillac or Lincoln nameplate because that it what stuffy old people drove in our youth.  We need far more square footage in our homes even if we do not use most of it.  The other guy makes X amount of money for 40 hours per week so we need to make X plus Y otherwise we are some kind of loser.  People need to mature and see that there is more to life than an all out drive to acquire wealth.  

  • Thanks 3
Posted
46 minutes ago, jeeper61 said:

Had a 95 I bought at auction cheep 

Was a good truck after I changed the head the original had porosity in the casting was loosing coolant 

Got 25-26 mpg on the highway but wasn't much for power on the hills 

Not impressed with two things on those 2.2s 

The fuel injection system uses some funky injectors and the coil pack are 2 cylinders each.

All different from the LS motors.

You would think some of design criteria given to the design team would be use as many common parts with other high volume platforms.

That is just lack of leadership in R&D which is the down fall of most companies   

Im even  less of a fan of a single compression ring in the 3204 of a D4H.

Thank God the bean counters allowed us to have an oil ring.

  • Haha 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Alan Dinan said:

The ultimate would be a square body Chevy with 12 valve Cummins and Allison auto.

 

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, dale560 said:

Those ford six cylinders were tough engines.

Darn right they were! I don't know of any engine that lasted as long as those would... but when you consider they only made about 190 horsepower and wouldn't rev much over four grand, they were hard to wear out! Still, I've owned a couple that did everything I asked (and more) and they never gave me an ounce of trouble.

  • Like 2
Posted
1 minute ago, MacAR said:

Darn right they were! I don't know of any engine that lasted as long as those would... but when you consider they only made about 190 horsepower and wouldn't rev much over four grand, they were hard to wear out! Still, I've owned a couple that did everything I asked (and more) and they never gave me an ounce of trouble.

I am not a Ford man but the 200 six industrial on a versatile swather was indestructible. I don’t mind ford but always been a gm guy. There were a bunch of late 70 mid 80 sixes around both ford and gm and of course every Chrysler from the 70s with the slant six.

  • Like 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, dale560 said:

How about a 5020 with a kitty cat 3306. This would be a good match for the 4wd tractors.

5CF0B126-066C-4D32-949B-7F3ABD340A5A.png

Similar horsepower and displacement to the 619 so yes I agree. 

  • Like 1
Posted

How about spending hours cultivating row crops. This is from a Canadian video they are raising sunflowers in the late 1950s. Sunflowers took off around here in the late seventies. Plus the entire Dallas lineup.

IMG_3275.png

IMG_3276.png

  • Like 2
Posted

People  love those 6BT's ... but I think only  REAL Diesels  have sleeves.  

There  are a couple  very well done square bodies on you-tube with 6V53's in them. 

One guy even  used mufflers. 

Posted
2 hours ago, Alan Dinan said:

I’ll take my Duramax with 6-speed manual over a Frod or Dodge. The ultimate would be a square body Chevy with 12 valve Cummins and Allison auto.

That ZF 6 speed manual in yours is the exact same as the 6 speed in my 99 Powerstroke.  Except mine has cooling lines like an auto, yours doesnt.  Ford and Chevy used the same ZF manual transmission.

Posted
5 minutes ago, dale560 said:

How about a 5020 with a kitty cat 3306. This would be a good match for the 4wd tractors.

5CF0B126-066C-4D32-949B-7F3ABD340A5A.png

3306 is another  good motor.... can throw the tractor away, though.... 

  • Like 4
Posted
Just now, dale560 said:

I am not a Ford man but the 200 six industrial on a versatile swather was indestructible. I don’t mind ford but always been a gm guy. There were a bunch of late 70 mid 80 sixes around both ford and gm and of course every Chrysler from the 70s with the slant six.

Believe it or not, I used to be a GM guy until a 2009 GMC Sierra destroyed my opinion of them. I spent a fortune keeping that truck on the road between the AFM 4/8 cylinder thing and the junk front end. If it hadn't been my daily driver I might have reconsidered; my farm trucks have always been Fords so I just bought a newer one for a daily. 

I always wanted to put one of those 200 sixes into a 300 or 350; don't know if the trans/rear would hold up but it'd sure wake one up! 

Posted
5 minutes ago, MacAR said:

Believe it or not, I used to be a GM guy until a 2009 GMC Sierra destroyed my opinion of them. I spent a fortune keeping that truck on the road between the AFM 4/8 cylinder thing and the junk front end. If it hadn't been my daily driver I might have reconsidered; my farm trucks have always been Fords so I just bought a newer one for a daily. 

I always wanted to put one of those 200 sixes into a 300 or 350; don't know if the trans/rear would hold up but it'd sure wake one up! 

  I've got a 2006 Silverado with a 5.3 engine.  Rusted out but engine and transmission are good and low mileage.  Looking for a chassis to transplant into.  I think the quality regardless of manufacturer has been slipping for quite a while now.  Many would agree with you that serious problems were in the GM trucks from 2007 and up till the late teens.  Stuff is too electronic laden today which has its own problems especially here in road salt country.  

  • Like 4
Posted
Just now, 766 Man said:

  I've got a 2006 Silverado with a 5.3 engine.  Rusted out but engine and transmission are good and low mileage.  Looking for a chassis to transplant into.  I think the quality regardless of manufacturer has been slipping for quite a while now.  Many would agree with you that serious problems were in the GM trucks from 2007 and up till the late teens.  Stuff is too electronic laden today which has its own problems especially here in road salt country.  

I had an 07 with the 4.8, it was an excellent truck. Couldn't kill it, shoulda kept it for a farm truck but things just didn't work out. That 09 though... we both know that there's good and bad in all of them, but Lord 'amercy that one was a turd! I'm told that the newer ones are much better as you said, but so far the Fords haven't let me down. The only trouble I've had with them so far is the most recent one, a 2013 F150, and it's giving me some trouble with the EVAP system. That's something that series of EcoBoost trucks is known for, and is a fairly easy fix at least. The previous 2013 F150 and 2012 F250 gave me absolutely no issues. Like you said, good and bad in all I guess. 

  • Like 1

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...