diesel swap to pick up

One problem with older tractor engines is their excess weight since many such engine blocks also serve as part of the tractor-frame. Many newer tractor engines now come in two versions - HD for frame-support, and lightweight for tractors that have a separate frame.

Cummins 4BTA is one of the most popular being used for swaps into pickups. When used in tractors the governor is a bit different.
Put a 4BTA into a full size 4WD truck and it can get 23 - 28 MPG which is pretty impressive.

If you've seen the big bread vans -like the Chevy P30s - many originally came with 350 gassers or 6.2 disels. The 6.2 diesel version got around 15 MPG at best. Then Cummins made repower kits to rip out the 6.2s and put in the 3.9 liter 4BTAs instead. Mileage was then over 20 MPG and the 3.9 liter has more horsepower and low-end torque than the 6.2. Also comes with factory adapters to fit into any Chevy or GMC. Cummins also made the repowers for Ford vans.

I'm building a Cummins 4BTA rig right now. I have an 86 Chevy Blazer with a pop-up motorhome body on it - with a 6.2 diesel. Soon to be 3.9 liter Cummins.

Rod

The Cummins get picked more often since they are available with all the adapters to fit Ford and GM transmissions which makes swapping easier. Isuzu also has adapters for GM setups, but the other stuff doesn't.

Seen a picture of a Detroit Diesel 6V-53 squeezed into a GMC pickup. For transmissions a T-56 six speed from a Camaro or Firebird will give the low 1st gear and the O.D. top gears required. A TH700R4 built for HD towing works fine too with a 3 or 5 plate Precision Industries lock-up torque converter. Direct bolt in swap into the computer controlled vehicles too.

About all I've seen two of the the big three do is make noise, and they achive that with rpm. with that kind of rpm one may as well run a gasser.

You think about this, consider what a highway tractor is moving and getting 6 mpg. 40 mpg should be reasonable in a pickup. Bear in mind I am talking imperial gallons.

If that engine was THAT fuel efficent Deere would still be using it in ag tractors.

I happen to have put 13,000 hours on a 404 turbo diesel before it required a rebuild, and it was a lot more efficient than a IH DT414 I was running at the same time. Now you just read what I said Buickanddeere. If Ford, GM or Dodge are going to sell me a diesel pickup, they've got to guarentee me 40 miles to the Imperial gallon. (non trailering) It's also got to be a lot quieter than their current diesels.

I've owned and driven several highway tractors and if you compare the efficiency of highway tractors to what Ford, Chevy and Dodge are putting out today and indeed since they started putting diesels in pickups they are doing a damn poor job. If you consider the weight being moved, it should be reasonable to come up with 40 miles per Imperial gallon running 3/4 or 1 tons weighing around 3 ton.

Clearly what Ford, Chevy and Dodge build are little more than noise makers, designed for those who wish to make a noise. I've been in parking lots with 1/2 dozen Cat's Cummins, etc idling, someone pulls in with a pickup and you can hear that damn thing above all the highway tractors. I can remember back when I had a 6.2 and a 3306 Cat, start them on a cold morning, and while they were warming up one couldn't hear the Cat above the 6.2.

You guys can argue all you want, I know what the guy told me, and if you consider the facts it is reasonable.

I don't buy trucks because I LIKE THEM, I buy them because I have a use for them. Personally, I want a pickup that is more efficient than what is currently one the market.

Your comparison to big rigs doesn't work. A diesel locomotive can carry the weight of a full size pickup truck and get 800 miles to gallon (in equivalent to weight carried) - but that doesn't mean much on a smaller scale. A comparison to an over-the-road truck is just as silly.

A few Dodge engineers during the mid 70s played around putting tractor diesels into 3/4 ton trucks. The built a few with Deere 4219s and 4239s and got a best of 25 MPG out of them. But, they later opted for the Misubishi six-cylinder 6DR5 at 3.9 liters and made production vehicles with them for sale for one year. They were tested at 22 MPG.

You tell us to think what we want - and in return - you can too. But, what you stated defies logic and any experience I've had with diesel transplants - and I've been screwing with it for close to 40 years. A big diesel uses fuel even when hardly being worked. And, a big diesel used lightly becomes very inefficient. A key to the best mileage is a small diesel - that can act big when needed via a turboharger.

A Cummins 5.9 turbo-intercooled diesel tests as being more efficent than a NA Deere 404. A Dodge truck with a 5.9 that is geared properly can get around 22 MPG (US gallons). A Same sized Dodge (or Chevy or Ford) with a smaller Cummins 3.9 liter can get up to 28 MPG. I suspect a Deere 179 could do as well - but I don't know of any.

There were several factory-installed diesels in small cars and trucks back in the 60s and 70s. The British diesel used in Allis Chalmers and Massey Ferguson tractors was also used in British taxi-cabs (Standard Diesel Co.). Jeeps and Checker taxis were sold with Perkins diesels. International Scouts came with Nissan diesels (I drove one for years). Then later, we got the small and big Dodges with Mistubishi diesels, Isuzu and Chevy LUV diesel trucks, Ford Rangers and Escorts with Mazda diesels, etc. &c. None of those trucks ever got over 32 MPG, but a few were close. Now, if you want to call a Volkswagen Rabbit 2WDS mini-truck a real truck - with the 1.6 diesel - well yeah, some got 45 MPG (US gallons). Just for the record - my 1985 Isuzu PUP 4WD truck with a 2.2 diesel can just barely get 32 MPG with a wind at my back (that's US gallons).

You aren't the only guy that has put a few farm diesels in pickups.

I made it clear in my post when speaking of gallons - by putting "US" next to them.

You stated a Deere 404 diesel in a truck got 42 miles per Imperial Gallon and that is equal to around 35 miles per U.S. wet gallons.

That is just about impossible. It defies anything I've witnessed first-hand and also the many fuel-consumption and test charts available.

404 Deere is a good engine - but there's nothing special about it when compared to other DI diesels.

Tell me where it is - and I make this offer. If it gets 35 MPG - in any observed test at highway speed - I will pay $10,000 for the truck. If it tests at less - I get it for free plus any shipping and travel expenses I incurr. That is a solid offer - right now - for any full size truck with a NA 404 Deere engine that gets 35 MPG US or 42 MPG Canadian-British.

He told me it was geared up for advertising and a service truck. He did have trailer and used it only for tractors under 40 hp and lawn and garden equipment.

It was in New Brunswick, Canada, he is probably retired given his age when I met him. I know he is no longer the dealer in that town, it went bankrupt last year.

I've heard more BS stories with diesels and mileage than anything else. 35 MPG (US) Suburbans with 6.2s, Ford F250s with 6.9s getting 40 MPG (US), Dodge-Cummings getting 35 MPG (US), etc., &c. All a combination of wishful thinking, BS, or - a one time trip with a 60 MPH wind blowing at the back of the truck.

I used to think the claims were at least - amusing. But after many years of trial-and-error, doing thorough research on diesel specs, spending time trying to verify high claims - I now just find them irrating - and insulting to anyone with good diesel knowledge.

Again, there is nothing special about the 404 Deere. It gets mid-range efficiency for its design. A turbo-Cummins beats it at all RPM ranges. So, why doesn't a Dodge-Cummins truck with a 360 c.i. , 5.9 liter turbo-diesel get at least as good, if not better then your friend's claim? Easy answer, it never happened.