Welcome! Please use the navigational links to explore our website.
PartsASAP LogoCompany Logo Auction Link (800) 853-2651

Shop Now

   Allis Chalmers Case Farmall IH Ford 8N,9N,2N Ford
   Ferguson John Deere Massey Ferguson Minn. Moline Oliver

Tractor Talk Discussion Forum

6.5 pics

Welcome Guest, Log in or Register
Author 
MF294-4

06-03-2007 20:33:05




Report to Moderator

Third Party ImageThird Party ImageThird Party Image Here is the 6.5 that broke a rod at 55mph. Bent every exhaust pushrod except the cyl that had the broken rod. That is all of the rod that we found. Broke the rocker arm shaft. Haven't seen the new timing chain yet. Working on putting another engine in.

[Log in to Reply]   [No Email]
mj

06-04-2007 22:14:24




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to MF294-4, 06-03-2007 20:33:05  
third party image

The Ford and the GM are rated as light-duty diesels while the Dodge/Cummins is rated as a medium duty engine; which is why I'm driving a Dodge.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
jdemaris

06-05-2007 06:12:00




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to mj, 06-04-2007 22:14:24  
I've read the same classifications - but it's not that simple. The EPA uses a light-duty and medium-duty classification that is totally different then the truck engine duty classification uses.
Some Ford-IH diesels are projected to last as long as the Cummins.

There is no doubt that the Cummins is built very heavy as compared to other engines used in pickups. That being said - some of the newer Ford-IH engines carry exactly the same duty-rating as the Cummins.

The trucking industry rates projected engine life with a B-rating. That is a projection on how long an engine will last with heavy use (not just cruising empty) - before any major teardown.

GM Duramax has a B10 rating of 220,000 miles (that means 90% make it, and 10% don't).

Cummins 5.9 has a B10 rating of 250,000 miles.

The new Ford-IH 6.4 liter has a B10 of 262,000 miles.

The older Ford-IH 7.3 has a B10 of 200,000 miles.

GM 6.5s - as far as I know - were never tested and rated for heavy use.

Odd thing is - the B50 ratings - being a point where 50% make it, and 50% don't. The Ford-IH 7.3 and the Cummins 5.9 are the same at that point - 350,000 miles. I guess that means that more Ford-IHs fail early - but those that make it beyond a certain point last a long time.

Another note- is the new compact Cummins V-8s for light trucks e.g. SUVs and 1/2 tons. Cummins claims the new 4.2 liter V-6s and the 5.6 liter V-8s will have a B10 of 325,000 miles.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
RodInNS

06-05-2007 07:03:39




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to jdemaris, 06-05-2007 06:12:00  
There's a funny thing about those IH 7.3's, and you're probably right. There were quite a number of them around here, and there were a lot that gave a lot of misery and failed early. I don't know if it was maintenance related, or why.... but hey were done like dinner. I know os some more that spent 300000 miles under a cattle trailer and were still running fine when the truck collapsed under it. But, most were either low mileage or the engine died.... or they gave up on it from oil consumption.
The Dodge's that i've seen around here run forever, or until the truck falls apart, and the damn ol B is still running strong. I can't say that I personally know anyone that had a B fail on them, but I do know several that had the 7.3 fail.... and a few that had very good luck with the 7.3/6.9.... but they're rare. Don't even get me started on the 6.2/6.5.... I know several of them that died, mostly with broken cranks.
Personally, I'd stick with the Cummins.

Rod

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Mike M

06-04-2007 08:01:59




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to MF294-4, 06-03-2007 20:33:05  
GM has alot of gas engine troubles too. Even though the Quad 4 and the 3.1 and 3.4 are in millions of cars and people love them but they can't build them to keep from being troubled with head and intake gasket problems. Worst thing is they still keep building this junk instead of scraping it for something better even if they allready have better designs they still push the junk. No susprise the Korean and Japaneese are kicking their rears. Gm finally had to get Isuzu to design them a diesel that seems to be holding together. Hard to do in a V8 configuration. Cat and Cummins and IHC/Navistar (9.0L ) even had a try at it and gave up. But their smaller 6.9,7.3 worked susprisingly well.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
jdemaris

06-04-2007 10:12:18




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to Mike M, 06-04-2007 08:01:59  
GM owns the controlling interest in the Isuzu Engines division - and the Duramax was designed with a lot of input from U.S. GM engineers. So, you can really say GM hired "out" for it. Also, as I recall - the changeover to the Duramax was partly due to the emissions regs and problems dealing with an indirect-injected diesel like the 6.5.

In regard to V-8 diesels in general - an inline ladder-frame block is inherently stronger. But, there are still many very strong V-8 diesels out there. The IH 445 (7.3 liter) and the somewhat larger IH DT466 are pretty durable and have "B" heavy-duty ratings as good as the Cummins 5.9.

Sometime probably next year - there's going to be a bunch of new, lightweight V-8 diesels coming out - from GM, Cummins, and Navistar. Many will be available in 1/2 ton trucks and SUVs.
Cummins has a new 5.6 liter V-8 diesel with a "B10" rating of 325,000 miles - that means 90 % will make it that far, and 10% will not. The Navistar Ford 6.4 V-8 has a B10 of 262,000 miles and a B50 of 375,000 miles. The Navistar DT466 V-8 has a B10 of 300,000 miles and a B50 of 450,000 miles.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Mike M

06-04-2007 12:27:59




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to jdemaris, 06-04-2007 10:12:18  
You mentioned the DT466 and yes it is one of the BEST out there. BUT it is an inline 6cyl. not a V8.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
jdemaris

06-05-2007 05:53:35




Report to Moderator
 Woops in reply to Mike M, 06-04-2007 12:27:59  
I "mis-spoke" - I was thinking of the non-sleeved DT444E - which I think is basically, a form of the older 7.3.

Either way, I'm no expert on any of the Navistar -non-Ford versions - just seen a few around and read the specs. Just had a guy here with a large tilt-bed last week - almost a new IH truck. It has the 444 engine - and it looked pretty much like my 7.3.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Mike M

06-04-2007 04:57:15




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to MF294-4, 06-03-2007 20:33:05  
About the only thing good about that is that I see I'm not the only one to have problems with those JUNK GM's !

Others will show up on here and tell you how GREAT they are,but I know better.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
jdemaris

06-04-2007 05:36:42




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to Mike M, 06-04-2007 04:57:15  
Blanket statements e.g. "they are all junk" are a little silly. The Detroit 6.2/6.5 series is the lighest V-8 diesel (weight per cubic inch) ever made in the U.S. up to now. Subsequently, it certainly has shortcomings when used for HD use.

When GM hired Detroit Diesel to design it - the idea at the time - was a compact light-duty engine - and it worked fine for that much of the time. All the later add-ons - e.g. larger precombustion chambers, turbo, etc. were a sort of catch-up game to compete with the competition.

Many 6.2s and 6.5s have lasted well over 500,000 miles. And, some have blown to pieces before 100,000. That is verified fact - and indicates they are not ALL junk, as you say.

The 6.5 in the photos seems to have suffered some sort of failure not associated with any flaw in the block, crank, or rod design. Timing chain fell off or broke maybe?
If so, that is extremely rare with the 6.2/6.5.

I will say this though, to the credit of the Ford IH engines - there are NO timing chains to worry about. The 6.9s and 7.3s also have forged-steel cranks instead of cast-iron like GM uses.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Bob

06-04-2007 09:39:01




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to jdemaris, 06-04-2007 05:36:42  
Looks to me like the rod broke (located near the front of the engine), swung around and broke the camshaft, causing the remaing pistons still operating to smack whatever valves were left even slightly open at that point.

I've heard of other instances of the connecting rods simply snapping.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
jdemaris

06-04-2007 10:42:22




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to Bob, 06-04-2007 09:39:01  
I'd like to see the engine up close - it's interesting. If all the pushrods are bent, I'm more inclined to think a valve-train issue started all the trouble. I had a big-block 454 that lost a valve retainer, then had a piston hit a valve, then the timing chain came off, and then all valves and pushrods got bent or broken - and also bent a rod.

I've got a couple of 6.2s and 6.5s in my junkpile with bent rods - but that happened after a main-bearing web support broke off the block and the crank broke.

Also got a Deere 4020 engine in my junkpile with two severely bent rods (can't remember what caused it though).

I think rod breakage in 6.2s/6.5 is pretty rare - unless caused by some other calamity. They have forged-steel rods which is a plus. Unfortunately, the cranks are NOT forged - just cast-iron.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
720diesel

06-05-2007 07:17:27




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to jdemaris, 06-04-2007 10:42:22  
The pics are from my engine,mf294-4 (dad). Truck fired up great that morning. Running great, pulled a series of hills and curves great, but she blew up out on the flat.Timing chain was new 7000 miles ago on this truck. We replaced it. As far as the heads go im sure there is no way to for sure tell without a machinist checking but I dont think it bent the valves as they still look good.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Bob

06-04-2007 10:52:13




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to jdemaris, 06-04-2007 10:42:22  
They 6.5 TD's ARE known to break rods, supporting MY theory of destruction.

Thay also are known to shear camshaft drive keys, which could explain YOUR theory of destruction.

Either way, at today's prices, it's a LOT of money down the drain!



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
jdemaris

06-05-2007 05:58:01




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to Bob, 06-04-2007 10:52:13  
I've seen many with broken cranks, broken blocks at the main webs, and cracked #8 cylinders.

I also hear many opposing stories form various engine rebuild shops.

With my own engine that blew to pieces - I was kind of amazed at how strong the rods were. My crank broke into three pieces - and two main bearing webs pulled off the block with bolts still intact - and several rods bent as a result - but none broke.

[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Formerly PaMike

06-04-2007 09:23:28




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to jdemaris, 06-04-2007 05:36:42  
I am with you on this one. Have a 98 6.5 with 175,000 miles on it. No problems what so ever. I might start looking for a new truck when it hits 225K



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
Bob

06-04-2007 09:35:11




Report to Moderator
 Re: 6.5 pics in reply to Formerly PaMike, 06-04-2007 09:23:28  
I have a little over 200K on my '94 6.5, with NO engine problems.



[Log in to Reply]  [No Email]
[Options]  [Printer Friendly]  [Posting Help]  [Return to Forum]   [Log in to Reply]

Hop to:


TRACTOR PARTS TRACTOR MANUALS
We sell tractor parts!  We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today. [ About Us ]

Home  |  Forums


Copyright © 1997-2023 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy

TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters

Website Accessibility Policy