C-series in a 1994-2002 2500?

[Moulder]

I know a while back there was a member that put a C-series in a Ford. Has anyone put one in a 1994-2002 Dodge yet? I will be moving back home to Missouri (in Houston now) and think this is a project I might want to take on. Of course this would be a long and drawn out process. At this point in time I only have access to Ford trucks to take measurements so that doesn't do me much good (one has a Cummins in it though ). Can someone give me the difference in length, height, and weight between the B and C motors and the measurements of the engine compartment? Would a Dana 60 front axle be up the task? What AUTOMATIC transmission (I know you should shift gears in a real truck) would be up to the task? I would like to get a discussion going on this if possible. Any ideas, comments, or criticism is welcome.

 

[therabbittree]

it could be doen but a sold my 2nd gen because i hated the overhang overt the engien in teh rear witha c series you'd need abody lift i think to compensate. . its a few inches either way compared to a b... as fro a auto iif you wee doing it and had $ i would try to get ac series with a allison 1000 world froma truck that had it factory and swap th ewhole trans ecm and other good in to the truck etc. I have thought about a 8. 3 p pumped with a mystery 6 spd trans for my truck i had a yard offer me one pretty cheap under a 1000 bucks with engine and trans. . it woould make my first gen run huh?. . i would need to divorce my t case though. . good luck

later

Deo

 

[Chester8420]

I have an 8. 3L cummins engine sitting at my shop right now. I have been wanting to do the same conversion for a long time. The engine weighs about 400 lbs more than the B, and it is larger, dimension wise. But "dimension wise" it will fit, with a little coaxing. But there's one HUGE problem. There's nobody that makes a transmission for it. Sure, you can get a semi transmission, but that ruins any hopes of drag racing it, and it makes it too hard for just anybody to drive. The biggest problems with a semi trans, is that they're heavy, they're difficult to drive, they take too long to shift, and they have too many gears. If I could find a company that can build me an automatic trans to withstand 700hp and 1600ft/lbs and it be relatively small, (allison would do nicely) I would do it. But nobody does. Nobody. At least, I can't find anyone. Everybody I talk too says that 1,600ft/lbs is too much. And that's a shame.

 

[therabbittree]

you can build a 540 allison to hold that power but is a non overdrive non lockup auto... and one build that strong is a special. you could use one of the newer allison s but they are big buts to get lock up and overdrive. . but you can drive semi trans fast- you skip the gears a 9 speed especially. . heck some of the truckers get there Big trucks in the 14's and 15 sec range shifting them... im looking at doing it in my truck.

later

Deo

 

[Chester8420]

Another crappy thing about the C-series is that it's so expensive. A decent crate engine with no alternator etc. will cost ya $9,000 at best. They are also hard to crank on just one battery. In cold weather, 2 batteries would be a must, and they better be charged good. C-series engines are known for breaking fan belts too. (maybe not too bad if you have a clutch) And fuel pumps. And water pumps. But at least they're all easy to change. And their air filters are HUGE! And the oil pan is HUGE. And it takes a VERY expensive oil filter, it's over a foot long. They don't run good when you first crank them on a cold morning, and they smoke like crazy until they get to operating temp. And the turbo is SO LOUD on them. They're just an all around loud engine anyway.



But on the good side... . They're a VERY strong VERY durable engine. The oldest one I have screams wide open all day long,(cotton picker) and we've never had any serious mechanical failures. The hobbs meter says 4,000hours and that's its second hobbs meter!! It still runs good. They make almost 900ft/lbs of torque stock. (300hp version) And they're nearly the same size as the 5. 9.



I called DTT yesterday, and they said that they might be able to build me a transmission, but their engineer was gone till Monday. So we'll see.

 

[Moulder]

I've been gone for a while, but now I am back and living in Missouri. I have been thinking about this project off and on and have a few more ideas. Would a built Dana 60 (with thicker axle tubes) and custom built 4-link bars (instead of the stamped stock ones) with air bags instead of springs work? Would that be enough to compensate for the extra weight? It would give a nicer ride as well, right? I am guessing that boxing the frame and adding extra crossmemebers would be necessary. Did the guy that was going to put the C out of the cotton picker in his 3500 make any progress? Any more information on automatic transmissions?

 

[Chester8420]

You can forget axle problems, and frame considerations until you find a sutiable transmission. You'll find that matching an automatic transmission and getting something to control it is gonna consume all your time. I have been researching this for a long time, but I've come to the conclusion that this is not very feasable. Nor practical. But I plan to continue my efforts. But it's gonna be hell trying to get a logical automatic transmission to fit behind the 8. 3L. The 8. 3 bolts to an sae 2 bell housing, and a lot of tweaking will have to be done to make it bolt to a chrystler trans. But it can be done. The problem, however, is to build the transmission to withstand the torque. It's pointless to put an 8. 3 in a truck, and leave it at "5. 9 attainable" power levels. The whole point to me is to have a high horsepower daily driver.



If you were to use a "semi" transmission and a divorce transfer case, you'd have a worthless truck that was VERY heavy, got poor gas mileage, be unreliable, and be entirely comprised of custom parts. Not to mention, expensive to work on and even more expensive to service.



I know a good bit about these engines and the project at hand, so if you want to give me a call, just e-mail me and I'll give you my number.

 

[JesseJ]

I'm a bus mechanic. We have a school bus with an 8. 3 C motor and it has an MT 643 Allison automatic behind it. No computer, manual valve body. That would make that portion easier at least. Don't know if it would be any lighter than a semi transmission or hold up to the power you want but it might be worth looking into. I can ask my transmission man how upgradeable the MT643 is and how much power it might be able to reasonably take.

 

[Chester8420]

Does it have o/d?

 

[Alphacowboy]

Over twenty years of design have made today's Allison MT 643 a tough, economical and flexible transmission. The four-speed on-highway MT 643 combines smooth performance and heavy-duty reliability for mid-range trucks and buses. It is so efficient in traffic and over the road that it has made automatics the transmission of choice in vocations such as beverage and pickup and delivery.

The MT 643 shifts smoothly through the gear ranges, with no interruption of power to the wheels. This helps improve trip times and provides excellent acceleration. A lockup mode in third gear helps improve fuel efficiency and engine braking at highway speeds.

found this info on that transmission... .

 

[Alphacowboy]

what about this transmission?

Allison MH 3000

Today's owners of larger, more luxurious motorhomes expect better performance, greater reliability, and less maintenance from their vehicles. That translates to increased horsepower and torque requirements. The Allison 3000MH is designed to provide more power to the wheels- wherever those wheels take you. With the 3000MH, larger motorhomes can accelerate faster on the flat or up an incline. That means cruising up a grade will take less time. Merging onto an interstate will take less ramp. And your vehicle will be much more nimble in traffic. An optional retarder delivers auxiliary braking on steep grades and helps improve vehicle control and reduce brake wear. The 3000 MH carries a five-year standard warranty. That kind of product quality assurance should provide not only greater peace of mind but greater resale value.

heres the spec sheet on it... . I dont know how big it is though... but its built for Motor Homes. http://www.atlanticdda.com/transmissions/3000mh_specification_sheet.cfm

 

[JesseJ]

The MT643 & 653 are mechanical valve body trannys, spec'd at 250 HP & 650ft. /lbs. torque. The 643 is a 4-speed and the 653 is a 5-speed. The 643's that I have shift 1-2-3-lockup-4. My transmission man said he is not aware of any beefier parts to put in those trannys but said they're probably out there, as common as they were. He said if the limits of the transmission were exceeded (HP/torque) that it would create more heat which could be alleviated with a big cooler. His concern was when you hit 4th gear in lockup and everything is 1:1. With too much power, he said a mainshaft could be snapped. They work well for our application but I don't know how you could physically fit one of those in a pickup, they are huge. I think the weight of both the bigger engine and the neccesarily bigger transmission eventually would be the kill point. You'll be adding lots of extra weight.

 

[Alphacowboy]

The MT643 & 653 are mechanical valve body trannys, spec'd at 250 HP & 650ft. /lbs. torque.

this is what it says on the spec sheet though...

MH 3000 Specification Sheet

SPECIFICATIONS

Motorhome Rating

Gross input power 1 370 hp (276 kW)

Gross input torque 1 1200 lb-ft (1627 N·m)



thats way more than 650!



Personally, I want to find a class C chassis that needs a body, and use my Dodge cab and fenders on it. Might take some work, fiberglass and time, but I think it would be a sweet project, I just dont have the time to do it, or more importantly, the money.



I hope Dodge does hit the 45-5500 market, and maybe even a 6500, and drop a larger cummins in it. Nothing I personally need at this point, but who knows, maybe some day. I know there is plenty of guys that would like a different option than whats out there currently.

 

[MMcCallie]

Might look into what some racing semi trucks run for a transmission. Like the ones that race Pike's Peak. Air or hydraulic shift? Also, the newest Ford Super 60 front axle is the biggest and baddest stock Dana 60 i know of. I think you're going to have to divorce your t-case.



I remember seeing pics of an older Ford a few years ago. It had an 8. 3 and i believe a 9 speed manual transmission. Got 19 mpg and made a bit over 400 hp if i remember correctly. The truck sold for close to $20,000. It seemed exciting but since the 5. 9 is capable of over 1,000 hp, the smaller of the two was more logical and simpler for me.

 

[therabbittree]

the mt 643&653 is different then the 3000 series trans. . the 643 &653 are the older mechanical trans the 3000 is the newer electronic trans

Later

Deo

 

[Chester8420]

It seemed exciting but since the 5. 9 is capable of over 1,000 hp, the smaller of the two was more logical and simpler for me.

True, but you can't push the 5. 9 hard for long before something blows, unless you drop some serious dough into it. And you can forget it being a nice running daily driver. The 8. 3 will be a challenge to say the least, but if I ever get a truck, I'll be on my way! We'll see if it turns out to be a piece of crap or not!!

 

[Forrest Nearing]

True, but you can't push the 5. 9 hard for long before something blows, unless you drop some serious dough into it. And you can forget it being a nice running daily driver. The 8. 3 will be a challenge to say the least, but if I ever get a truck, I'll be on my way! We'll see if it turns out to be a piece of crap or not!!

where are you getting this info?

 

[CGriffith]

If you were to use a "semi" transmission and a divorce transfer case, you'd have a worthless truck that was VERY heavy, got poor gas mileage, be unreliable, and be entirely comprised of custom parts. Not to mention, expensive to work on and even more expensive to service.

Chester you need to limit your input to things you actually know to be true.

I owned the C series ford for a couple of years which had a 9 speed OD roadranger in it or a "semi transmission" as you call it. It also has a divorced t-case. Overall the transmission combination work very well. The truck weighed less than 8k and got 18mph unloaded. While not light I wouldn't call that heavy. I see no need to worry about things being expensive to service as the bigger transmissions and clutches go 500k in big trucks. I think a manual trans would be the only way to go. Parts for big autos would be cost prohibitive for me.



The major problem with the 9+ speed trans is you need to have really good clutch linkage. The ford had a hydr clutch but it wasn't strong enough to make the clutch brake work well. I think the problem could be solved with some work. Another thing to think about is your final drive ratio. The C engines really like to run between 1400-1800 rpm for crusing. With an OD ratio of . 73 and 3. 54 gears your only doing 73@1800 which is too slow for me sometimes. As far as I know, no one makes gears highers than 3. 54 for reverse rotation D60s. I have heard of a 13speed that has the gear splitter turned around to give a od ratio of . 65 but I haven't done the reasearch on it. I thought the 9 speed was fun to drive. You could drive it like a 5speed for everyday or only use the top 4 gears for drag racing.

Other things to think about is, even with a 2" body lift you will need to run 4-6" of suspention lift with 35" tires. I don't mind that set up but some do. You will need to cut down the oilpan so it will clear the front diff too. I think a D60 is plenty strong. I don't think this type of truck would have any more weight on the front axle than a truck with a plow on it.

I think is would be a really cool project but for me the truck would have twins and put down 800hp. The only trans that could take the 2200+ftlbs that comes with that kind of power is a 13 or 18 speed. The Ford I had was making a little over 300 with a HX40 on it and it had bad high EGT problems along with bad turbo lag. The whole thing was poorly set up.

I have a bunch of pics of the underside of the Cseries ford. If somebody is serious about this project, I could email them.

 

[therabbittree]

CGriffith I have some of the old pics but I would be very very intereted in seeing the pics you have. I have a place that says they can get me a whole 8. 3 witha 6spd trans cheap like $500. . and its been playing in my head fro a while. .

Your truck was pretty awesome!. . I you can please send the picture you have to this email address

-- email address removed --

Thanks amillion

Deo

 

[Chester8420]

Chester you need to limit your input to things you actually know to be true.

I have several 8. 3's in various machines. I know a lot about them. I also know how much fuel they burn an hour at certian loads, and they burn a lot more than a 5. 9 under every situation. Hence my fuel mileage apprehensions.



Also, I was speaking of an automatic transmission, as per the original poster. I could see a manual being relatively easy and a lot cheaper. Most automatics today are electronic, and getting them to work with a fabbed up truck will be tricky, and transmission companies are not willing to work with an individual, unless you go with dodge or ford transmission that a company specializes in building. But then you run into problems mating the sae2 bellhousing to the chrystler,(or ford) transmission pattern. That's not to mention the flexplate. So any way you look at it, it's gonna be expensive. A modified 8. 3 would likely break key components of the vehicle, and make it necessairy to buy/fab replacements, or improvements. Also I was speaking of the increased cost of servicing the machine. 6 gallons of oil, VERY PRICY oil filters etc. . Not to mention the cost of buying an engine, and rigging up the transmission and transfer case, and having custom driveshafts built etc... If you snatch an 8. 3 and a manual trans out of a semi, and put it in a pickup, you'll have a pickup with a semi engine and trans. If that's what you want, fine. But for me, I want a truck that drives/rides like a new one, just stronger and better.



Another thing to conisder, and "CGriffith" touched on it, was the relatively low rev limit of an 8. 3L. The highest figures I've seen on the commonrail engines is 2300, and 3 of mine are governed to that rpm. Now I have a cummins rep's assurances that it will handle 3,000 for a while, but I feel like you might be in uncharted waters with that. At least, I don't know of anyone.



Now I never claimed to be an expert on putting 8. 3's in pickups, but I do have a few of these engines, and I know their ups and downs. My newest 8. 3 is in a MX285, and at idle,(if I remember right) it burns 3+ gallons/hour. Not exactly the best on fuel, but granted it idles at 900rpm, and it has a hydraulic pump that runs all the time.

where are you getting this info?

From the folks that can't crank their trucks on a summer day without ether, and have let it warm up for 10 minuites before they go anywhere, and have to put their foot on the gas to keep the truck from stalling when they turn on the a/c. Are you saying that you have a 1,000hp daily driver 5. 9? If you do, I would love to go for a ride in it!



I wasn't trying to start a war, Just giving my opinions on the ups and downs of putting an 8. 3 in a pickup. It seems sensless to do it without the hopes of increasing it's horsepower and torque above that easily obtainable with a 5. 9. If you weren't interested in doing that, why go through all the crap? Just get a 5. 9! :-{}



To all 5. 9 owners that might take offence at wanting a bigger engine: Chill out, It's still a CUMMINS!!!!!!