1966 Ford F250 with OM617 turbo? - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

Dieselkraut23 · #1 03-01-2011, 02:45 PM

Am i crazy or has someone done it?

Aquaticedge · #2 03-01-2011, 02:50 PM

there was a old truck on here. It's doable

SirNik84 · #3 03-01-2011, 04:50 PM

rscurtis · #4 03-01-2011, 05:16 PM

You'll be much happier and see better MPG with a 4 or 6 cylinder Cummins B engine. The other thing to consider is are you altering what may be a collectible truck. Also, check with your insurance company and DMV to see if you can insure and register it when you're done.

I've done several conversions, one was a 3-53 Detroit in an International, and the other was a 5 cylinder Deutz in a 2WD Blazer. A lot was learned in these endeavors, not the least of which that a store bought diesel PU is light years better than what you can do yourself. When I did these, diesel PU's were not even on the radar.

charmalu · #5 03-01-2011, 06:19 PM

I was looking around on You tube for a Ford pu conversion and couldn`t find one but did find this Suburban

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phjIBD2yR-w&feature=related

So i don`t know why it wouldn`t work for a 3/4 ton Ford.
Do some searching around on the jeep forums, they stick the 617 in them. and there is one member here Dealwithit that put one in a Mazda pu. do some reading and check out what transmissions they used and the kind of adapters.

Charlie

BigSkillet · #6 03-01-2011, 06:49 PM

I did it one piece at a time, and it didn't cost me a dime. You'll know its me when I come through your town...lol

Sounds cool if you can do it!

47dodge · #7 03-01-2011, 08:05 PM

I did a 3-53 Detroit in a 47 Dodge with a 73 international frame. Drove it about 10 years this way. The 617 might be a little underpowered depending what you want to do with it. If it is just a run around truck, no heavy trailer pulling then you may be fine.

Ask the goverment and they shall answer...... it's up to you. Generally engine swaps on antique trucks are not an issue though. Also generally, newer engine in older vehicle ok, but no the other way around.

bigblockchev · #8 03-01-2011, 08:21 PM

I have a 95 suburban with a chipped 6.5 diesel in it. I can't imagine it with half the power it has, it already has trouble getting out of it's own way. You are talking a 6000lb vehicle, That is a lot of work to produce a vehicle that is slower than heck. A small pickup like a Chev s10 or Ford ranger would probably be Ok or even somewhat of an improvement over the stock 4 banger. Just my humble opinion. If you must have a diesel to put in it a Cummins 4BT is a good choice , lots of belhousing options available. Cheers Dan

smiffy6four · #9 03-01-2011, 08:32 PM

I'd vote for a Cummins 6BT 12v; the 4BT is a fine motor, but usually costs more due to being less common. I have a 63 GMC step van & I'm considering putting a 300TD motor (+intercooler from a Volvo 740); however, the torque of a larger motor is probably worth going for. I have a Chev 6.2 non turbo diesel that a buddy fudged into a motorhome and it does 29mpg and is very driveable! I'll most likely use it for the powertrain, since it's complete, from radiator to axle.

rscurtis · #10 03-01-2011, 08:36 PM

The 617 is going to be a lot underpowered. Put 6- 300# passengers in your D or SD and see how it feels. You will need all the engine's HP on a regular basis, so get used to seeing 4000+ RPM. At that speed, you're beyond the engine's lowest BSFC.

My 300D will do about 30 MPG on the highway. My '03 Dodge, which weighs twice as much, has twice the displacement and almost three times the HP, gets 80% of that mileage at the same speed. Some of this is due to drivetrain efficiencies ( Lockup TC, overdrive) and some is the result of the efficiency of a modern engine with no emission controls. It also has a much larger drag coefficient.

I wonder how the truck would do with the 617 engine. You can forget about using OD or never having to exceed 1850 RPM. You can also forget about the truck's 24 MPG while the 617 is constantly running at 3500+ RPM.

charmalu · #11 03-01-2011, 08:42 PM

Here is a little all GM powered Suburban.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IrNW94kOtc&feature=related

Charlie

smiffy6four · #12 03-01-2011, 08:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rscurtis

The 617 is going to be a lot underpowered. Put 6- 300# passengers in your D or SD and see how it feels. You will need all the engine's HP on a regular basis, so get used to seeing 4000+ RPM. At that speed, you're beyond the engine's lowest BSFC.

My 300D will do about 30 MPG on the highway. My '03 Dodge, which weighs twice as much, has twice the displacement and almost three times the HP, gets 80% of that mileage at the same speed. Some of this is due to drivetrain efficiencies ( Lockup TC, overdrive) and some is the result of the efficiency of a modern engine with no emission controls. It also has a much larger drag coefficient.

I wonder how the truck would do with the 617 engine. You can forget about using OD or never having to exceed 1850 RPM. You can also forget about the truck's 24 MPG while the 617 is constantly running at 3500+ RPM.

It's a true story.

I had a 95 Dodge 1 ton 4x4 dually that did 24mpg, empty or loaded, pulled like a train and cruised at 60mph @ 2000rpm(4:10 gears, 5spd stick)

I'm thinking the 300td motor would look better in a jeep.

vstech · #13 03-01-2011, 09:03 PM

a F100 would be a better match.
the 250 empty is about the same as the SD, but that bed and suspension is built for HAULING...
the 100 is 300 lbs lighter, and has a lesser spring setup.
http://www.oldride.com/library/1966_ford_f100.html
better choice!

Stretch · #14 03-02-2011, 04:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vstech

a F100 would be a better match.
the 250 empty is about the same as the SD, but that bed and suspension is built for HAULING...
the 100 is 300 lbs lighter, and has a lesser spring setup.
http://www.oldride.com/library/1966_ford_f100.html
better choice!

X2

250 too big unless you want a show truck with (small lightweight) naked women in the back