[Sirrotica]

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

Never heard of a 901 cummins; you mean the V903 ? They had a 927 that was a long stroke 855 I believe -

292s ? The 283 would be a 3" stroke though vs the 4 1/8" stroke

I've had this debate before: take an inline 300 Ford (or whatever) and made it a 60 deg or 90 deg V engine; how can laying a cylinder/piston on its side produce less torque ?

292

The 292 was only used in Chevrolet and GMC trucks; the block deck is taller, along with a relocated passenger-side engine mount. These were produced between 1962 to 1990; production of the engine shifted to Mexico after 1980. Year 1988 (only) 115 hp @ 3400 rpm and 215 lb. ft. @ 1600 rpm

[hurryinhoosier62]

Brad,

Sorry, I meant 903. I have the damnest time keeping those number straight in my head!!
Build a 292 V8 with a 4.125" stroke? Sure, it CAN be done. let me play with the number!!

[hurryinhoosier62]

Brad,

3.375" bore X 4.125" stroke= 295 cubic inches. Kinda like the old flathead Lincoln V-8s.
The question is what rods would you have to use? 5.7 or 5.565 400 rods might be too short.

[hurryinhoosier62]

The two barrel version of the 283 developed 275 ft-lbs of torque. The 4 barrel version developed 300.

[bigunde]

Originally Posted by hurryinhoosier62

The two barrel version of the 283 developed 275 ft-lbs of torque. The 4 barrel version developed 300.

Neat site about the 283

http://enginefacts.com/chevrolet283.php

[hurryinhoosier62]

It sure is!!! I did the numbers on a 295 small block. Using the nomial 9.025" deck height,
the calculations are as follows:

Piston compression height: 1.5625"

Stroke/1/2= 2.0625"

Rod c-t-c= 5.400" (can you say small block Ford?)

[big hammer]

Originally Posted by hurryinhoosier62

No arguement there; the 300 is a much better towing engine than the 302. However, inline sixes will "shake" themselves apart unless you are VERY aware of engine balancing when overhauling one. YOU are going to teach me about engines?? Show me your ASE card and I'll show you mine!! What creates superior torque is a LONGER stroke and longer rods.

a longer stroke helps to build peak torque at a lower rpm. not more peak torque. longer rods will create more dwell time and will generally increase an engines specific output regardless of stroke.

Originally Posted by 455Grandville

Don't know; seems to me there's alot more troubled engines. Then again, they keep bringing out new engines with a much shorter shelf life vs. making the same engine for decades.
IMO aluminum heads on a diesel are less than ideal. If they were all that big rigs would use 'em. Maybe that's why I prefer the older IDI & Powerstroke engines. Some of the 6.0 and 6.4s worked with aftermarket studs are showing tremendous power when the weak spots are addressed.



Inliners making more torque is BS ! Detroit 6-71 and 6V-71 post the same damn numbers. The aluminum heads on the Duramaxx I predicted would be an issue years ago; just seems to me aluminum is not up to the task. Long rods make more torque, yea, but they'll do it further up in the RPM range; that's why some of 'em use shorter rods for now torque !

aluminum heads on a diesel is bad, imo. take the different expansion rates, combined with high combustion pressures is not a good time.

ah the old 2 stroke detroits. good times.

Originally Posted by hurryinhoosier62

Brad,

Precisely!!! Build a GM I-6 292, then build a long stroke,long rod 292 from a 265/283. The V8 292 will have two more pistons to produce both horsepower and torque. The N14 and 901 Cummins is the same. Both engine are rated at 300hp, but have similiar torque numbers. The N14 just happens to be more reliable and can pass modern emission specs.

yes torque numbers between a v8 and I6 can be similar, but the I6 makes it at a more efficient lower RPM. also, most big v8 diesels had very poor longevity in a high load application. in tractors especially, most v8 diesels grenaded by 3000 service hours while most I6 engines would go 8000-10000.

[bigunde]

Originally Posted by big hammer

a longer stroke helps to build peak torque at a lower rpm. not more peak torque. longer rods will create more dwell time and will generally increase an engines specific output regardless of stroke.



aluminum heads on a diesel is bad, imo. take the different expansion rates, combined with high combustion pressures is not a good time.

ah the old 2 stroke detroits. good times.



yes torque numbers between a v8 and I6 can be similar, but the I6 makes it at a more efficient lower RPM. also, most big v8 diesels had very poor longevity in a high load application. in tractors especially, most v8 diesels grenaded by 3000 service hours while most I6 engines would go 8000-10000.

We had an IHC 1568 (DV-550 V-8), now that thing was a beast and sounded like a race car in the field. Not sure on hours as I was younger and we had it for years, but when we got rid of it, we got a 1586 with the DT-436 and my Uncle STILL has that thing. My Dad said the V-8 was fine but loved the fuel. But you dont really see V-8's in tractor much anymore. Had to be a reason.

[hurryinhoosier62]

big hammer,

Spoken like a TRUE NEOPHYTE!! You might want to tell the city of Detroit that. You see,
I worked for the primary overhaul facility for the 8V71 and 8V92 Detroit Diesels used in their buses. On AVERAGE, these engines logged 10-12 hrs a DAY and were in service for up to 10YRS. You do the math.....60-72hrs per wk times 520wks. Kinda blows your WAG
out of the water, doesn't it?? Not to mention that the CAT 3408 is one of the most popular and DURABLE engines used in heavy equipment.

Bigunde,

See what I mean???

[455Grandville]

Originally Posted by bigunde

We had an IHC 1568 (DV-550 V-8), now that thing was a beast and sounded like a race car in the field. Not sure on hours as I was younger and we had it for years, but when we got rid of it, we got a 1586 with the DT-436 and my Uncle STILL has that thing. My Dad said the V-8 was fine but loved the fuel. But you dont really see V-8's in tractor much anymore. Had to be a reason.

DV550s worst feature it was based on the V549; as long as you dont REV 'em mercilessly they do OK. The bottom end was just not that rugged. My Dv550 is pretty good at sippin fuel, but it's seldom used as it just hauls firewood & other misc stuff. They do start well in the winter.

Originally Posted by hurryinhoosier62

big hammer,

Spoken like a TRUE NEOPHYTE!! You might want to tell the city of Detroit that. You see,
I worked for the primary overhaul facility for the 8V71 and 8V92 Detroit Diesels used in their buses. On AVERAGE, these engines logged 10-12 hrs a DAY and were in service for up to 10YRS. You do the math.....60-72hrs per wk times 520wks. Kinda blows your WAG
out of the water, doesn't it?? Not to mention that the CAT 3408 is one of the most popular and DURABLE engines used in heavy equipment.

Bigunde,

See what I mean???

He's wrong on the V8 diesels : Electra Motive used V8-12-16 and 20s for years (the V20s broke cranks)

IH 6.9/7.3s are damn good engines and some have passed 1,000,000 miles in pickups

The Mack E9 (V8 : 998 cid) is a very rugged engine

Disagree on the 3408: those split journals tended to break cranks (something like $15K for a new one )

Can't say much about the SAAB Scania V8 diesels or the Perkins diesels.

There's plenty of V type engines in boats that are proven -

[hurryinhoosier62]

Brad,

That's why I call him a neophyte. Obviously, he has very little "real world" experience with ANY diesel engine. Most of the 3408s we saw had cracking problems in the seal bosses for the liners. I saw no broken cranks, but we only did a couple a year.

[bigunde]

If i recall , our 1568 ran on 4 cylinders until you really needed the power. Check this out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EHa-6VU5eE

[hurryinhoosier62]

That was dangerously close to a "full" pull!!

[big hammer]

Originally Posted by hurryinhoosier62

big hammer,

Spoken like a TRUE NEOPHYTE!! You might want to tell the city of Detroit that. You see,
I worked for the primary overhaul facility for the 8V71 and 8V92 Detroit Diesels used in their buses. On AVERAGE, these engines logged 10-12 hrs a DAY and were in service for up to 10YRS. You do the math.....60-72hrs per wk times 520wks. Kinda blows your WAG
out of the water, doesn't it?? Not to mention that the CAT 3408 is one of the most popular and DURABLE engines used in heavy equipment.

Bigunde,

See what I mean???

lol!!! city busses are not any type of heavy service at all!!!

[hurryinhoosier62]

big hammer,

Brad is a former engine machinist. I'm a retired master engine machinist(gas and diesel) and diesel injection tech.Bigunde has years of experience with diesel engines. Pray tell WHAT is your experience? Frankly, your ignorance is showing.

[big hammer]

your ignorance is showing in a massive way. there have been no major v8 diesels since when? the 80's? and why.... they sucked! 3208's and 3408's would all GRENADE under a high torque load application. if you got 1\3 to 1\2 the life of an I6 with a v8 diesel you were doing well. there's a good reason they went away from them. it sounds like you havent been around a piece of heavy machinery in your life.

[giddygoat]

Theres a 7.3 Ford in southern MN that the owner claims is over 900,000 miles and going for 1m on the original engine... Its a two wheel drive, the owner runs an over the road service. Take a look at the for sale ads on these trucks, not many chev 3/4 or 1 tons listed to begin with, lot of Fords, most with 150,000 to 300,000 miles on the clock, they are not setting in the shed.

[455Grandville]

Originally Posted by bigunde

If i recall , our 1568 ran on 4 cylinders until you really needed the power. Check this out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2EHa-6VU5eE

I read an article recently that it was not for fuel economy, but to smooth out the idle.

Very good two part story on that tractor ; you can probably get the 2 back issues :

http://www.heritageiron.com/

Plus, they've had a few Steigers in there

Originally Posted by giddygoat

Theres a 7.3 Ford in southern MN that the owner claims is over 900,000 miles and going for 1m on the original engine... Its a two wheel drive, the owner runs an over the road service. Take a look at the for sale ads on these trucks, not many chev 3/4 or 1 tons listed to begin with, lot of Fords, most with 150,000 to 300,000 miles on the clock, they are not setting in the shed.

That's not surprising. I had a guy come to the shop that had the pushrod break through the rocker on a IDI 6.9 and it was just a few miles short of million miles and had never been apart.

[giddygoat]

On the 292 mount location, does this have to be modified to fit into a non 292 vehicle?

[sleepy]

Originally Posted by big hammer

your ignorance is showing in a massive way. there have been no major v8 diesels since when? the 80's? and why.... they sucked! 3208's and 3408's would all GRENADE under a high torque load application. if you got 1\3 to 1\2 the life of an I6 with a v8 diesel you were doing well. there's a good reason they went away from them. it sounds like you havent been around a piece of heavy machinery in your life.

I think you should do a little reserve. V-8 diesels are almost 90% of the heavy equipment engines on the planet. They were pretty much gone from road use because of their weight.
The I-6 weighs less and is easier to service than the V-8 but mostly the weight.
In construction equipment(off road) the weight doesn't matter. ON-road weight is a huge concern.