1970, 335 Cummins, hp/tq v/s '01 5.9?

[mwilson]

Bill

Dont know for sure JUST ASKING I have read some of your posts it seems you dont think much of the DT466 motor or is it just me thinking wrong. I love my International truck and the DT is a runner for what it is. Its not going to set the trucking industry on fire but it has been a great motor to me.

I think Bill was stating is the DT466 was his default choice in engines even though the 9. 0L was a "bigger" engine. He would not spec a 9. 0L over the DT without having a very good reason. I don't think anyone can argue that the DT466 is one of the best medium duty engines ever offered.



Mike.

 

[BIGNASTY]

Dont mean to change the subject here but Mike I going to have to make a change on my International I have a 9 speed and I cant use the clutch any longer whats the big thing to change it to an Automatic

 

[mwilson]

Dont mean to change the subject here but Mike I going to have to make a change on my International I have a 9 speed and I cant use the clutch any longer whats the big thing to change it to an Automatic

Big, what year truck is it??? Electronic engine???



Mike.

 

[BIGNASTY]

Its a 99 the motor is a DT466E

 

[Bill Stockard]

I think Bill was stating is the DT466 was his default choice in engines even though the 9. 0L was a "bigger" engine. He would not spec a 9. 0L over the DT without having a very good reason. I don't think anyone can argue that the DT466 is one of the best medium duty engines ever offered.



Mike.

Yes, Mike. The 9. 0L was strictly a price engine I used against a Detroit V8 Fuel Pincher, and was a better engine than the Detroit. If a customer ever owned a Fuel Pincher, a DT 466 was an easy sell. The biggest problem I had trading for a Ford or GM medium duty truck with a Fuel Pincher was where/who to wholesale it... no one wanted them.



Did you know the DT466 came from the Construction Equipment Division and not the Truck Division? Yep, it began as a dozer engine and was later used in farm tractors as well as trucks. I imagine the DT466 was an influence on Cummins when they designed their competetive C-series engine.



Bill

 

[Wayne M.]

Hey. This is some party here!

Big. I see no problem to put an older Allison 500 or 600 series hydraulic trans behind your DT. We ran that combo in a series of ours that was always overwight and abused. Aces. Mike, you agree? Shouldn't be too expensive. A few series before the DT, there was a 8. 2 fuel pincher in the trucks. All I can say is BOAT ANCHOR.
My input on the B vs. 855 is; what are the torque specs on each engine at full steam @1000 rpm?
Mike, what 9L engine was that?

 

[BIGNASTY]

I just figured I didnt want to go to the hassle of putting up with the NEW EXHAUST CRAP on trucks FIL/BIL/Son and Wife JUST GET A NEW TRUCK!!!! YOU ACT LIKE YOUR BROKE, I dont want one with the problems that are going on, my old Inter-trash-inoal can and does run just fine on the Home made BIO that we make in the warm months and it can run any diesel with no problems. So why buy a new truck. I know NOTHING about the auto trans in this app. so thats the reason for asking what would be needed I have a place that I can get used/rebuilt/new Allison transmissions I just need the numbers of the one to get. Unless its so expensive to make the conversion ill stick with what I have.

 

[Wayne M.]

BIG. you're on a good path. Just check all the ratios. The final in your niner vs the Allison. You should be good tho. IMHO, just look at the closest 466E Ihopper school bus and see the setup.

 

[BIGNASTY]

Didnt think about that. Our shool bus is just about the same as my truck with a bus body on it. I go down to the school district shop and talk to them.

 

[Wayne M.]

Didnt think about that. Our shool bus is just about the same as my truck with a bus body on it. I go down to the school district shop and talk to them.

I don't think you would want the newer "world" trans as it may be too expensive. Get the exact model trans. Prolly an at 543.

 

[mwilson]

Hey. This is some party here!



Big. I see no problem to put an older Allison 500 or 600 series hydraulic trans behind your DT. We ran that combo in a series of ours that was always overwight and abused. Aces. Mike, you agree? Shouldn't be too expensive. A few series before the DT, there was a 8. 2 fuel pincher in the trucks. All I can say is BOAT ANCHOR.

My input on the B vs. 855 is; what are the torque specs on each engine at full steam @1000 rpm?

Mike, what 9L engine was that?

Wayne, I do agree that may be the easiest way. If BIG stays with a fully hydraulic unit it will be a lot easier to deal with and won't have any need to be tied to the engine ECM. I don't know what he may encounter with the flywheel, might want to go to LKQ for that.



The School Bus suggestion is an excellent idea, he may learn a lot right there. If you could find an entire bus that was a Navistar chassis, older DT466 power with a fully hydraulic auto transmission for cheap you would have a fighting chance of getting everything needed for the conversion in one shot.



9. 0L Navistar engine listed about halfway down the page here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_International_Harvester/Navistar_engines



Mike.

 

[BIGNASTY]

Thanks all for the help the wife said not to hurry SHE CAN DRIVE IT :-laf:-laf

 

[Wayne M.]

Yes mike. The old V8 school bus engine. Popular before the DT466. A real mosquito killer. I think you'd have better luck with the 345 or 501 gassers.

 

[Gonzo 1066]

Just as a point of reference, Years ago when we were farming we bought a International Harverster 4X4 tractor called a 4386. It had a IH DT 466 ci engine in it rated at about 200hp. We twisted the pump for both fuel and some RPM. I suppose it was in the 250 to 275HP range. Pulled the plow or disc quite well, however every 1500 hours we had to pull the head to do valve guides and at about 5000 hours it needed a major overhaul. When it was ready for the second overhaul we pulled the 466 and swapped in a Cummins M11 that is about 671 cubic inches. We set that engine at 300hp and the difference was astounding. Where the 466 throttle would have to be pegged all the time when lowering the plow. The M11 could idle into the furrow and when the plow was fully in the ground we would open the throttle with no groaning or smoke. The M11 is still running in that tractor 18 years later and has NOT been touched. Lesson learned, Longer stroke, bigger cube, slower rpm=more pulling power and longer life.

 

[Wayne M.]

Getting back to the OP, Torque is torque weather it's a big or small engine or tightening a bolt. it's how you develop the torque that's the debate here. Gonzo above gave an excellent example of using the proper engine for the task. I have experience with the M11- we used it in 25 yard collection trucks, and would give the chassis a twist with just a blip of the pedal. As I mentioned before, we've used the DT466 (as well as the C8. 3, fuel pincher, and other "medium" engines) in our 20 yard trucks. There just wasn't the instant torque response the bigger engines (especially the M11) gave. We have Komatsu WA380 loaders. Even though they have 5. 9 ISBe power, it's just too much machine, and the operators are always complaining about them. Similar 5yd machines we have/ had use C8. 3 power and see no complaints, such as the beloved Case 821.
Another example can be witnessed in sportsman Drag Racing, Watch an NHRA Stock class meet. You'll see a 283 powered '55 chevy screaming through the traps at 11,000 RPM's, and then a 454 powered Chevelle doing the same thing, going faster at 7500 RPM's. Both engines being at the same level of maximum tune, following the same rule limitations.

 

[Bill Stockard]

Just as a point of reference, Years ago when we were farming we bought a International Harverster 4X4 tractor called a 4386. It had a IH DT 466 ci engine in it rated at about 200hp. We twisted the pump for both fuel and some RPM. I suppose it was in the 250 to 275HP range. Pulled the plow or disc quite well, however every 1500 hours we had to pull the head to do valve guides and at about 5000 hours it needed a major overhaul. When it was ready for the second overhaul we pulled the 466 and swapped in a Cummins M11 that is about 671 cubic inches. We set that engine at 300hp and the difference was astounding. Where the 466 throttle would have to be pegged all the time when lowering the plow. The M11 could idle into the furrow and when the plow was fully in the ground we would open the throttle with no groaning or smoke. The M11 is still running in that tractor 18 years later and has NOT been touched. Lesson learned, Longer stroke, bigger cube, slower rpm=more pulling power and longer life.

When I first saw a 4366 with a DT466 (210-hp), I thought, Wow! That's a lot of tractor for a little DT466! It held up better than the I-H V800 at 300-hp. That's the tractor that definitely should have had a Cummins in it. My brother was looking for a big 4-wheel drive tractor at the time thoughtfully shied away from it and bought a 310-hp 855 cid Cummins powered Steiger instead.

The Cummins powered Steiger was like your M11 powered tractor. Lower the plow into to the ground at just above idle and then advance the throttle. The only thing hs has had done to the engine is replace the old seeping head gaskets.

Bill

 

[Bill Stockard]

Yes mike. The old V8 school bus engine. Popular before the DT466. A real mosquito killer. I think you'd have better luck with the 345 or 501 gassers.

Wayne,



If you look at that link Mike posted you'll notice a something familiar (displacement) about the V549 gasoline engine, the DV550 that idled on four cylinders and ran on eight (what a disaster!) and the 9. 0 liter diesels. The 9. 0L performed a bit better than a V345 and burned about half as much fuel.



Bill

 

[RodMorris]

If the horsepower and torque ratings are from a dyno, that's at WOT and pulled down until it won't run anymore. How many engines are driven that way on a daily basis? The bigger engines will produce more power at a lower rpm at less than WOT than the smaller ones.

 

[SRay]

From what I've read so far, cummins has a 370 hp 5. 9l marine diesel in boats and whatever machine needs it. The 8. 3 and 855 with the same hp and torque would weigh too much and lower the boat's capacity or be too large to fit in or whatever it's needed in.



Transport trucks usually only run 30% of their power on the hwy. The rest is for hilly areas were power is needed or speeding up.



I'm sure the 5. 9l would have less life than larger engines, but with good maintence and keeping the engine cool, proper turbo or turbos, it could still go a long way. And likely better on fuel with less internal friction. I think for the most part the 5. 9 cannot meet emissions as its working harder for smaller displacement and emission levels would likely be higher.



My 5. 9 at 15% with manual transmission (I think) driveline loss, is likely making 325 hp @ 1,850 rpms/1,083 tq @ 1,450 rpms at the flywheel. If only the factory clutch could handle it without burning up.



While on the load dyno, the old goat is smoking a lot at full power which means a better turbo is needed or twins than the hx35.



I'm sure it depends how the engine is setup that also determines engine life.

 

[Wingate]

The hp/tq ratings on our engines are not based off of a continuous duty cycle... . Pull one of our little 5. 9L engines over to full power on a dyno and leave it... . it wont take long to start having issues. It would be interesting to put the current GM and Ford offering along side the Cummins... Im 100% confident of the outcome, but the Ford and GM guys would cry foul... . Im not sure if there is an industry standard for the duty cycle of the large OTR engines, but I can tell you from experience that when we put one on an engine dyno, it would be pulled to rated hp/tq and left there for 4 hours. Non-highway and industrial diesels and NG engines are rated at 100% duty cycle. .