: More "realistic" power increases / engine reliability / 160-200 hp



dieselcruiserhead
01-11-2007, 02:54 PM
More "realistic" power increases / engine reliability, etc...

Lee Alessi (McInfantry) & I were Bsing around back channel partially from some different threads about 4BT tweaking.. Both he & I were a little worried that hte threads with 350hp / 400 hp (not that there is anything wrong with them) but people start reading 400 hp or 350 hp and believe you can do that easily with a 4BT when I think both he & I don't necessarily agree...

Here is a thread where a guy blew up his Bosch VE pump at 320 hp because his (performance) injections (still) could not no release enough fuel..
http://www.dieseltruckresource.com/dev/showthread.php?t=84054

With an inline pump this may be different..

Lee was talking to another guy in another thread about 4BTs and tweaking, on IFSJA (International Full Size Jeep Association),
http://www.ifsja.org/forums/vb/showthread.php?t=61289 and this thread largely came out of it...

His big thing is that you can tweak that high but will it be reliable in the same fashion that our 4BTs are currently reliable (200K miles + usually)... He was saying if a 4BT gets less than 100K miles is it reliable? I personally don't think so..

I posted this up in response on that thread (http://www.ifsja.org/forums/vb/showthread.php?p=539734#post539734):



I'm on my second 4BT.. I think 250 hp is probably reliable with a 4BT but I'm not 100% sure.. I'd say I easily got well over 160 hp completely stock just by turning up the pump, but it is true, mileage went down drastically. Noisewise, in stock form with not too much fuel I think they sound exactly like a gen 1 (89-93) Dodge, maybe a hair louder but not much. When I turned up a lot and had a lot of fuel at idle, and gobs, I mean gobs of power bone stock, it sounded about that of an early 24 valve, loud as hell, almost bone jarringly loud.. anyway, I think about 250 hp max is about right out of a 4BT/rotary IMO, also without losing some relability. I previously would say about 200 hp except that I saw the dyno results that were up on the new 4BTswaps.com site at 183 hp completely bone stock other than fueling increase and that is not all the way up. With the right turbo and some cooling I think you could get it.

But that said, I must say honestly I agree with lee. It is not the HP that matters, its the torque. At 160 hp (which is less than my old *** saab), my FJ55 land cruiser wago, sprung over, 35" tires, 5500 lbs, HAULED ***. I got pulled over going 83 mph with lots of power to spare up the steelest freeway incline around here (we have some big long inclines here in Utah).. Cop was impressed enough that he actually let me go LOL. But that was when I had it turned up. I eventually went pretty close to stock, about 120 hp in the end (I had a 4BTA), I had a HX35 turbo on with the 12cm2 housing, and it powered my truck absolutely great, no loss of mileage at all except going up hills of course..

The guys wanting/expecting big HP can do it but it does take $$ and lowers your mileage significantly.. Stock 105 hp is 265ft/lbs. stock 120 hp is 305 ft/lbs, more than most stock V8s. Somewhere around 140-150 I think you reach 400 ft/lbs. That is more reasonable and won't compromise mileage too much at all.. My $.02 on it..



So my finaly $.02 is probably upto 250 hp but I think fuel mileage will suffer and I really don't know the results. I think 160-200hp is optimum and will not cuase much/any damage at all to a 4BT and probably won't affect mileage too much...

So guys looking to tow and large rigs etc, the motor will have to be really tweaked and the question is, will it still be reliable and cost wise still worth it?

Comments/thoughts?
Open discussion here, curious what you guys think... :smile:

hendricks
01-13-2007, 04:42 PM
well while i think just about every thing in your post is correct i think it is important to remember that these where posted in the performance section. If you are doing your conversion for economy or durability reasons none of what i have suggested would be practical. I want it to be understood that what i am building will maybe see the roads a half dozen times a year and i am doing it just for the reason of bieng different(and if i break it im ok with that). I see no reason that these engines cant be comparable to the 6bs in terms of mods and percent of power increase that can be had. However ask anyone with a 600hp dodge and they will tell you that the 500,000 miles seen in a stock engine is out of the question. Please dont see this as an argument just the other side of the coin.

mcinfantry
01-13-2007, 09:46 PM
hendricks, the reason i had the discussin was the fact that, unfortunatly, people read your post, then start posting it as "truth" hence the ifsja arguement. the quick post form a guy that says "250hp is a really easy achievable goal"

thats the b.s. the real issue i see are all the people building this, or that and havent built or run a 4bt AT ALL. like i said, i ran stock 4bt mounts and cant figure out where all the internet experts keep saying vibes are intolerable. a better one is the old "a 4bt can produce 2/3 the power of a 6bt, since its the same motor, minus two cylinders. i really love that one. a 4 cyl crank, is NOT as "balanced" as a 6. thats why 6's run smoother. start spinning one around 3200 and 350hp, and i just dont see it lasting.

when you go to a 1972 chevy truck site no clown posts how he is going to build a top fuel motor pushing 5000hp and put it in his truck, only to have 20 other wannabes run around on the net saying "you can easily get 2500hp from a v6, since it really just 2 less cylinders"

again, its no attack on you, or anyone else. just trying to keep facts out there for those who really are building a streetable vehicle, not an internet keyboardcrawler.

tacoma
01-15-2007, 11:51 AM
Hater. :thefinger:

mooktank
02-01-2007, 10:55 AM
I run my 4bt up to 3200 and it's probably more balanced at that RPM than it is at 800! I need to have my idle turned up to keep the shaking down.

Personally I think the 4bt is a great engine and have seen people running 12s in the 1/4 with the engine in a ranger with a rotary pump.

I'm about to do some more pump tweaking and maybe some injectors then we'll see how it does.

JimmieD
02-08-2007, 07:36 AM
I've got some questions on this. Note: I'm just the keyboard pounder that Lee refers to as I only recently have my conversion up and running, and only know what I read on the net.

This thread begins by saying that 4BT's are good for only about 200,000 miles? I commonly hear 6BT's referred to as 'Million Mile Motors' and have seen numerous posts from guys that have run them into the 750+K miles, no problems. How come you say a 4BT is only good for 1/5 the reliable miles that a 6BT is? If this is true I just spent a whole bunch of money and several months of very hard work almost for nothing!

For towing and hard running it seems that EGT's are the #1 issue. From what I can gather there are several mods that increase performance AND REDUCE EGT's, like a better compressor side, more free-flowing exhaust, water/meth injection. With minor pump tweaks and 366 governor spring it seems that 140-150HP with lower EGT's is easily possible with this sort of mods. Do you feel this would lower reliability?

The installation of an aftercooler increases power with lower EGT's from what I hear. Seems like this would cause the engine to run longer miles, not shorter, right? Added to the tweaks in above paragraph I suppose a guy would be approaching 160-175HP?

Head porting lowers EGT's and increases power. This would not shorten engine life from what I know.

Seems to me, and I have no experience here, that an engine with improved compressor like HTT Stage II, 16 cm2 exhaust housing, a 366 spring, aftercooler, water/meth injection, minor pump tweaks, and maybe larger exhaust would be a strong performing and reliable engine for towing and performance? I'm talking about engine reliability and NOT VE pump longevity.

Do y'all see this as a good RELIABLE build for towing? I'm talking about a daily driver and frequent towing. That's not including the possibility of head porting added for those who can afford it. For my own use I'm not really after higher HP as much as improved torque but of course they're closely related.

crazydog
02-08-2007, 04:51 PM
hendricks, the reason i had the discussin was the fact that, unfortunatly, people read your post, then start posting it as "truth" hence the ifsja arguement. the quick post form a guy that says "250hp is a really easy achievable goal"

thats the b.s. the real issue i see are all the people building this, or that and havent built or run a 4bt AT ALL. like i said, i ran stock 4bt mounts and cant figure out where all the internet experts keep saying vibes are intolerable. a better one is the old "a 4bt can produce 2/3 the power of a 6bt, since its the same motor, minus two cylinders. i really love that one. a 4 cyl crank, is NOT as "balanced" as a 6. thats why 6's run smoother. start spinning one around 3200 and 350hp, and i just dont see it lasting.

when you go to a 1972 chevy truck site no clown posts how he is going to build a top fuel motor pushing 5000hp and put it in his truck, only to have 20 other wannabes run around on the net saying "you can easily get 2500hp from a v6, since it really just 2 less cylinders"

again, its no attack on you, or anyone else. just trying to keep facts out there for those who really are building a streetable vehicle, not an internet keyboardcrawler.

mcin,

Wow, I am getting famous for discussing my unproven theories on 4BT performance. You are correct I have not done it yet. But, as far as the two-thirds argument being invalid, how about taking two 1996 GM motors. The first being a 5.7 liter small block V8 that makes 250 horsepower from the factory and comes in half-ton pick-ups and suburbans. The second is a 4.3 liter V6 that makes 190 horsepower from the factory and comes in S10 pick-ups and Blazers. If you divide 190 by 250 you get .76. If you divide 4.3 by 5.7 you get .754386. So, the V6 makes three-fourths the power of the V8 that has the same bore and stroke, just two less cylinders.

I am sure you find some problem with the logic in all of this though. The inherent differences in the balancing of the V6 and V8 in no way compare to the I4 and I6 or something else I have said will be wrong.

Let me say that I do not disagree with your hardline on getting facts to back up what is being said. I totally agree. There is plenty of subjective reasoning going on and some people may get misled if they do not have the facts. So, keep searching for the facts, but try not to keep people from theorizing too much. Discussing different ways to increase power may lead to some new ideas and expand someone's knowledge base.

nevrenufhp
02-08-2007, 05:33 PM
I would say 250hp is a stopping point for reliability. That's where the marine hp level stops, and it's a ton of power for a 4 cyl anyway.

Joush
02-08-2007, 06:43 PM
and besides as performance enthusiast i myself would like to the max torque one of these little beauties make.

nevrenufhp
02-08-2007, 06:57 PM
and besides as performance enthusiast i myself would like to the max torque one of these little beauties make.I am too, that's why I'm not going to use a 4BT. I'm going with a DT466 fom IH to put in an F350 pickup. Sure, you can make a 6BT make that kind of power, but everybody seems to be doing 6BT swaps these days.:rasta: Lots of work? Absolutely, but it's a good challenge.:smokin:

Joush
02-08-2007, 07:58 PM
i would use 4bt in my ranger so i think my diesel choices are limited. lol
and i agree that there are too many 6bt swaps.

JimmieD
02-09-2007, 12:19 AM
One BIG difference in the Marine 4BT: seawater aftercooler! No way you can provide that much cold water to a land based vehicle. A reliable power limit for a Marine engine may be far less reliable in a vehicle without unlimited cold coolant.

Charles
02-09-2007, 07:58 AM
Not Useful Information

tacoma
02-09-2007, 12:25 PM
well..... more torque at the engine means more torque at the wheels. I'd say it's a valid question.

And I mean in a real-world, same axle ratio type scenario, not gearing the lawnmower up or down to get the same Ft.lbs.

:thefinger:

dieselcruiserhead
02-09-2007, 02:29 PM
Another semi real world application issue, torque even stock for these motors is killer as we know.. @ 150 hp: 265 ft/lbs. @ 120 hp, 305 ft/lbs. More than a V8. Plus it comes on from idle. At stock or close to it, I always described the motor as borderline "unstallable", it almost has a wall of torque. With the cruiser though its a daily driver, I do wheel it.. My buddies say I am like 100 or 120:1 when I am at about 60:1, because of the "wall of torque" as I call it :grinpimp: .. Idle over anything, down to even 400 rpms, "the wall" is sort of how it won't stall. One of the coolest things ever.. Also,only thing I have broken ever is a Birfield (front axle CV joint) which is pretty common regardless with Toyotas regardless off road... Again at these lower numbers, 160-200 hp, torque will get upto over 400 ft/lbs but that is over kill. 160 hp from a 4BT, even in a heavy ass truck, is screaming power IMO.. At 200 hp, it sounds like a early 24 valve, loud and clattery as hell, borderline bone jarring.. Or at least if you have it tuned to get that power off idle.. Which I recommend, but again your mileage goes way down. We really need to post up a fuel adjustment thread somewhere :dustin:. This was all stock too, 4BTA with air-air intercooler, with reasonable EGTs...

Joush
02-09-2007, 10:13 PM
im liking these 4bt's more and more:grinpimp:

hendricks
02-10-2007, 06:09 PM
once again i will state exactly what it is that my intention is with my motor. I am not building for reliabilitly or logjevity, I am building what most consider a street rod and if i break it-guess what i bought it. with that being said I have a couple of thoughts. If i was trying to do as most on here are I would not consider pushing one of these motors over around 200 becouse at some point any engine will reach its limits before it becomes "tempermental". While i do think that mcinfantry's views are concervative, especially in a performance thread, I have to agree to some point. I dont think that anyone reading my post should use my build as an example of how to make a daily driver. I will also say that i do take personal the refrence to a keyboard crawler (im assuming that was aimed at me). I may not have built a 4bt before but im a long way from being new to this type of work. And if we get the attitude that the people not having finished there project yet are some how less worthy to show there ideas, I think you will see many good ideas overlooked or not brought to the table. build your motor for what you think is needed. If building a rock crawler think gearing not power. If your building a commuter think mpg not power. If you cant afford to break it I suggest you leave it where the 200 engineers at cummins designed it to run. ok rant over:pissed:

JimmieD
02-10-2007, 11:47 PM
My 4BT in a fullsized Dodge Town Wagon just got really driveable a couple of weeks ago. I still haven't driven it that much but every time I do I'm simply amazed at the power/torque in this LITTLE 4 banger! As mentioned, the off-idle "...wall of torque..." is astounding! I live in the mountains and it's like somebody is going ahead of me flattening them out before I get there.

I will be turning it up a little for more towing power but even bone stock this is one amazing little engine. Can't really imagine what one would be like with 140-150HP and 400+ ft lbs of torque, YIPES!

mooktank
02-11-2007, 01:32 AM
If you're looking for a hot rod, I'd go with stiffer valve springs and a 4000 rpm gov spring. Crank the pump, twin turbos, and big injectors and you're golden.

dieselcruiserhead
02-12-2007, 12:48 AM
Henricks don't know if it helps, and I agree with all this and your point of views here... I personally don't have "negative" views about people building or that haven't run the engine yet, we were all there...!

My only point was that what I got was a little different than I expected, and my original point that I was siding with Lee on is there is all this talk of high HP motors and that "it was really easy to get to" and "it doesn't affect mileage" and that these aren't necessarily correct... But this is also my opinion too, having never gone performance to those levels either, only dinking with the fuel screws and some minor turbo stuff...

And also given my earlier comments about what 120 and ~150 hp feels like real world application even in a big heavy truck, pretty powerful. Again its about the torque! I couldn't imagine how powerful a 250 hp 4BT would be, probably over 600 ft/lbs, knock your socks off... So that's all...!

beer






once again i will state exactly what it is that my intention is with my motor. I am not building for reliabilitly or logjevity, I am building what most consider a street rod and if i break it-guess what i bought it. with that being said I have a couple of thoughts. If i was trying to do as most on here are I would not consider pushing one of these motors over around 200 becouse at some point any engine will reach its limits before it becomes "tempermental". While i do think that mcinfantry's views are concervative, especially in a performance thread, I have to agree to some point. I dont think that anyone reading my post should use my build as an example of how to make a daily driver. I will also say that i do take personal the refrence to a keyboard crawler (im assuming that was aimed at me). I may not have built a 4bt before but im a long way from being new to this type of work. And if we get the attitude that the people not having finished there project yet are some how less worthy to show there ideas, I think you will see many good ideas overlooked or not brought to the table. build your motor for what you think is needed. If building a rock crawler think gearing not power. If your building a commuter think mpg not power. If you cant afford to break it I suggest you leave it where the 200 engineers at cummins designed it to run. ok rant over:pissed:

Charles
02-12-2007, 08:09 AM
Not Useful Information

JimmieD
02-12-2007, 10:54 AM
Still a little confused by all that Charles. One of the key features of diesel torque production is its OFF-IDLE TORQUE, but that seems to be missing from your description. Without those figures a comparison to a gasser is somewhat futile.

The difference between dyno engine torque and dyno rear wheel torque is friction losses through various drivetrain components. You can accurately compare engine torque to engine torque, and rear wheel torque to rear wheel torque between engines, but not much good to try to compare engine torque to rear wheel torque, or either or both torque to horsepower. Apples to oranges.

On a gasser engine the two of HP and Torque will merge at 5252 rpm for almost any engine ever built. That figure is irrelevant to a diesel because they'll never see that kind of rpm's. In almost all cases of a streetable diesel we're talking 3000 rpm's max, or maybe 4000 rpm's with a governor opened up. Much of the work is done between idle and 2500, with 2000 as the 'sweet spot' on most 4BT's.

Any gasser dyno chart will show that nobody's home until the upper band of the rpm range as far as horsepower goes: NO POWER. The torque is going to be somewhat similar, requiring some much higher than idle rpm's to realize full potential. Again, max HP/Torque merge at 5252 rpm's on a gasser dyno chart.

On the other hand the diesel is pushing a great deal of torque at maybe 1200 to 1500 rpms, and has very good torque almost immediately off idle, though not max of course. Most guys that burn up diesel clutches right and left, that aren't racing or sled pulling etc., do so because they don't have a clue how to drive one. Gasser: rev it up, let out the clutch. Diesel: let out the clutch, do what ya want, no pre-rev! Why? OFF-IDLE TORQUE production!

The way I see it diesel's are built for torque output with horsepower coming along for the ride in NORMAL daily use, including big rigs. Gassers on the other hand are usually built for horsepower with torque production coming with it. It's very hard to even find info on how to build a high-torque gasser as almost all performance info is related only to horsepower. I know, I researched, and had to figure it out myself!

A side-by-side comparison of similar displacement gasser and diesel HP/Torque curves will tell volumes, with relevant torque at RPM's showing the difference.

Charles
02-12-2007, 06:16 PM
Not Useful Information

Joush
02-12-2007, 07:29 PM
yea a diesel will make more torque than a comparable gas engine just cause it is the design of the engine. besides you need torque to make horsepower

Charles
02-12-2007, 08:48 PM
Not Useful Information

tacoma
02-12-2007, 09:35 PM
I couldn't imagine how powerful a 250 hp 4BT would be, probably over 600 ft/lbs, knock your socks off...


I can tell you that a 252hp/610ft.lb 6bt feels pretty damn snappy in a fullsize GM truck. Nearly all of that power is on the ground from just about right off idle.

anyway, back to you regularly scheduled thread.

dieselcruiserhead
02-13-2007, 01:20 PM
no big deal but these engines are only about 105-120 hp.. As I mentioned earlier, feels like a V8 on the highway.. But it is still 105-120 hp peak, even with the turbo. My only logical conclusion is its the torque. I am not an engineer but I had a feeling Enzo Ferrari probably knew something about engines and power when he said "horsepower sells cars, torque wins races," correct? :grinpimp:

Charles
02-13-2007, 03:13 PM
Not Useful Information

jessejames88
02-13-2007, 08:10 PM
ok i'm new here and i'm thinking of a 4bt swap cause it seems to be relativly simple... what do these 104hp versions run like?? a 350 tbi??? i want a truck capable of decent mpg low 20's and able to tow my car to the track occasionally so since this is the performance thread i figure you guys might be a lil more knoledgeble... i want to put a 4bt in a 94k3500 reg cab stripper 14 bolt rear dana44 solid axle swap up front. i have an nv4500/np241 combo not sure of the ratio in the diffs but probably 4.10. my two engine options are basicly 350tbi or 4bt.
ok the question i cant get answered on the other page is can the 4bt out perform the 350 tbi in mpg and pulling power??? hope you guys can give me some help and i realize my goals my need some mods/tuning but is it possible????

Charles
02-13-2007, 09:47 PM
Not Useful Information

jessejames88
02-13-2007, 11:59 PM
haha great! no "built" 350 here bone stock 88 5.7 tbi gas guzzler!! from my 2500 it was slug but it got the job done and only got about 14mpg highway...and it had a computer i hate those things!!! i'd like to "turn up" the 4bt a little though, and then start with mods as $$$ permits eventually get up around 400-450tq with an air to air setup, but off the bat it will have 3.5 turbo flange back to some 5" turnout stacks cause i got it laying in the shop from my W900 KW that should help keep the egt down a little thanks again!!

dieselcruiserhead
02-14-2007, 12:40 AM
yeah TBIs really are suprizingly inefficient in my opinion.. Vortecs and TPI later are noticeably better I think...

jessejames88
02-15-2007, 03:06 PM
how do you tell the difference between the rotary and inline pumps??? a few guys around here have 4bt/th400's laying around up here

dieselcruiserhead
02-15-2007, 03:54 PM
rotaries look like a distributor more or less. the inlines are a big block with a series of fuel ports going to the injectors that are inline with each other.. Here is a photo of an inline style setup.. This is a Bosch "A" pump for a generator, not applicable for on road as far as I can tell...

Dougal
02-20-2007, 01:03 AM
While leafing through the "cummins industrial engines" book at work today, I noticed they advertise their 4B's as coming in ratings from 90-200hp.

The folder I had was quite old so the highest output engine was the 4BTA with the usual 130odd hp (or whatever).

There was also a note saying that most engines were governed to 2500rpm, but special applications had options. Maybe the 200hp is just a 4BTA which revs higher.

Driverswanted
03-03-2007, 06:55 PM
I just got back from my Dyno run and here's some real data. First, you can see that I've put in the Bosch 190's, an HY35W, 3200rpm spring and have the fuel turned up just short of runaway. My wastegate actuator is not hooked up to the boost air and not tack welded shut.
This is the difference in my setup from stock.
These are of course numbers measured at the rear wheels. I am waiting on an e-mail of the graph from Twisted Innovations because their printer was so low on ink that my graph was very light. I may pencil trace it later and scan it for another post here.
The interesting thing is how my peak torque point is shifted up to 2300 rpm; not the ~1750RPM you see on the stock engine dyno graphs. One might be able to assume that is due to the HY35W.

Peak H.P. (rear wheel) was 181 @ 2,800 RPM. Peak Torque (rear wheel) was 363 @ 2,300 RPM.

Boost pressure on the last run was 26.5 psi, just 0.5 psi short of may last recorded max, so I think they put on a fair load for my test. The test was performed in 1:1 gear (4th, more like 1:0.80 because of the oversized tires) and I could see the boost climbing rapidly around 2,000 rpm.
Just wondering if I should have tacked the wastegate shut. One tech there said those wastegate flaps don't seal all that well with just the actuator spring pressure.


Assuming a 15% loss through the drive-train this becomes at the Flywheel:
Peak H.P. = 208
Peak Torque = 417

Assuming a 16% loss through the drive-train this becomes at the flywheel:
Peak H.P.= 210
Peak Torque= 434 Ft. LB.

To describe the curve a little more, there is a very fast rise in torque from 1,700 to 2,300 rpm going from 160 ft. lb.s up to 363 ft. lbs.

Just corrected an RPM number here. Had the wrong RPM for max H.P.

Mikel
03-03-2007, 10:39 PM
Very interesting stuff.:) How does the truck feel powerwise?

dieselcruiserhead
03-04-2007, 12:07 AM
wow that's great... What kind of mileage think you are getting?

Driverswanted
03-04-2007, 05:37 AM
Very interesting stuff.:) How does the truck feel powerwise?

It really has awesome acceleration from 2000 rpm and above. I changed my tire size from 28" up to 31.6" to put that acceleration at 60-65 mph. Below about 1800 and about 45-50 mph I may have to use 4th gear for simular acceleration.
Now I never owned an OPEC FRIENDLY gas V8 truck before so I don't have a seat of the pants comparison to a gas V8. The dyno guys said my numbers were better than rear wheel numbers from a standard 360 cube v8 engine. I'd like some feedback on that once I scan in the graph. Maybe someone has a RW HP/torque curve from some gasser to post here.
I can say that I can accelerate up any highway hill I've gone up, with my 5,000 lb. boat behind it.
It settles into 2,000-2,100 rpm really nice. As soon as the ice and snow melt off my drive I plan on putting the boat behind it for a load test on the highway and hills.

Driverswanted
03-04-2007, 05:41 AM
wow that's great... What kind of mileage think you are getting?

Hi Andre. I will reload the tank and use it back and forth to/from work this next week for that test. The only cautionary statement I am going to make is that the winter fuel is still at the pump stations and that will lower the fuel mileage numbers slightly.

Driverswanted
03-04-2007, 06:04 AM
Interesting thought here. My performance feel was best represented by the torque curve. Even though the H.P. was only 135 or so at 2,000-2,100, that was where it really launched fast and was indicating that the torque was more responsible for this.

Twisted Innovations just emailed the rest of the runs to me. Some of those were lower because the technician was easing into the pedal due to some early problems with their optical tachometer sensor. I will post those if there is anything interesting to see there.

[B]BTW. I have some awesome video of the runs. Sounds like a plane engine running up to full throttle.[/

EDIT: P.S. I added the link to the video of the run in a lower posting here.

mcinfantry
03-04-2007, 07:38 AM
after looking at the numbers, i dont know if id keep the 3200 springs, unless you find you wind it that far. (i have never driven one at 3200rom, just a guess)

is there a use for the 3200 springs?

JimmieD
03-04-2007, 08:11 AM
No expert here, Mcinfantry, but from what I'm told the 3200 spring really helps with some setups. The NV4500 I use has quite a long gap between 3rd/4th. Not normally a real big deal, but when towing it can kill ya. You want to keep your speed and momentum up, yet you have to drop 10 mph if you downshift to 3rd, not good. Supposedly the 3200 spring allows just enough extra revs beofre defueling to make up the gap. Might not matter with other tranny ratio spreads.

Sure hope it works when I install it, 'cause that's why I got it...

Driverswanted
03-04-2007, 09:35 AM
I agree JimmieD. When I take my NV4500 3rd and 4th gears up to 3,000 to 3,100 it seems to only drop back into the best torque point when I shift up to the next gear and that makes a difference in the driveabilty while towing a load.

matt2matt2
03-04-2007, 09:47 AM
Is the reason why your HP and TQ curves are shifted up in the rpm band because of the different IP timming you are running?

mcinfantry
03-04-2007, 11:26 AM
ok, i understand, i was just curious. i didnt see a use from the graph but i see the one from your answer.

Driverswanted
03-04-2007, 02:11 PM
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8962253160090988261

I uploaded the dyno run to google videos site. This link should work but you can search for "Cummins 4bt dyno run" also. Oh. It sounds like an airplane taking off on my computer not a jet engine like I said earlier.

Driverswanted
03-04-2007, 02:29 PM
Is the reason why your HP and TQ curves are shifted up in the rpm band because of the different IP timming you are running?

You are probably right. I checked some of my records and Piers Diesel Research indicated pretty much the same thing when you start advancing the pump timing.
BTW, If anyone knew Pastor Bob AKA Bushwakr over at the TDR site, he passed away. I know he gave me a lot of valuable information and he spent hundreds of hours documenting many of the sticky posts over there that are the gospel. I will certainly miss his wisdom in the forums over there.

Mikel
03-04-2007, 10:09 PM
Driverswanted, are you using an intercooler?
Thanks.

Driverswanted
03-05-2007, 04:58 AM
Driverswanted, are you using an intercooler?
Thanks.

No. But that's next on the list. Looking for one that is maybe 24"x 12" x 4". Some time ago I figured somehow that I might gain about 10 hp with an intercooler.

hendricks
03-06-2007, 06:33 PM
have you considered using one from a 93 ram with the 6b

Driverswanted
03-07-2007, 05:19 AM
I owned a 91 Cummins equiped Dodge with intercooler. I think the large frontal area intercooler should see direct frontal exposure to the air blowing through the grill. I don't see the large diesel intercoolers getting good flow through the entire surface area unless you go and add some more top, bottom and side shields to funnel the air through all that surface area. I have opted for an aftermarket intercooler rated for 40-45 psi, 800 scfm; with 1 psi drop at my maximum 28 psi boost. It is 4" thick and will be directly behind my grill openings; not shadowed by anything. In my case a 24" wide intercooler was ideal. I did have to settle for 12" of vertical height on it because I could not find an ideal 16" tall unit. I think the 4" thickness will more than make up for the 4" of vertical height it is lacking. I will also add plates all around the intercooler to force that frontal air pressure through the intercooler.
Maybe this will add another 10-15 hp. I may do another dyno run after adding the intercooler and welding the wastegate closed. I'm really happy with the performance right now, I just want to make sure my EGT's don't go too high when I pull with a load in the summertime.

Mikel
03-07-2007, 05:40 AM
I think the 4" thickness will more than make up for the 4" of vertical height it is lacking.

Radiators and intercoolers lose efficiency as they become thicker (in other words, twice the thickness does not mean twice the heat transfer). The extra thickness sees progressively more heated air and does not draw heat out of your intake air as efficiently.

Driverswanted
03-07-2007, 06:51 PM
That makes sense. I hope to offset that issue by moving the air through it faster. Also, a large surface intercooler is shadowed and surely seeing slow air flow zones. Efficiency is seriously compromised there too.

LincTex
08-23-2007, 11:16 AM
There is a lot of great discussion on theory in this thread, but not much practical application. All I really gathered was that you can get to around 200 HP for a practical max limit while still getting good mileage and longevity. Does anyone else have any dyno numbers they wish to post? I think a spreadsheet of dyno numbers, mods, and fuel mileage would be a nice thing to see put together.

mcinfantry
08-23-2007, 12:22 PM
im with you. theory. no numbers, no real long term figures. matter of fact, havent seen too many of the theorists post in a while.

DarylB
08-23-2007, 02:56 PM
im with you. theory. no numbers, no real long term figures. matter of fact, havent seen too many of the theorists post in a while.

Here's a theory post for ya:

4BT Stock

NV4500

I tow a 12k lb trailer and get 25mpg. 35mpg unloaded in a 7000lb truck. :jester:

Mikel
08-23-2007, 03:59 PM
Here's a theory post for ya:

4BT Stock

NV4500

I tow a 12k lb trailer and get 25mpg. 35mpg unloaded in a 7000lb truck. :jester:

What setup do you have?

mcinfantry
08-23-2007, 04:24 PM
theory? thats fact. now the poster was asking about 200hp motors. stock, is yours 200hp?

LincTex
08-23-2007, 10:50 PM
I tow a 12k lb trailer and get 25mpg. 35mpg unloaded in a 7000lb truck.

I would be happy with that, as long as it wasn't a slug in the acceleration department.

Dougal
08-24-2007, 11:31 PM
I would be happy with that, as long as it wasn't a slug in the acceleration department.

Here're your choices, mark on this line where you want to be.:grinpimp:

High MPG______________________________________________B listering Acceleration

mcinfantry
08-24-2007, 11:38 PM
Here're your choices, mark on this line where you want to be.:grinpimp:

High MPG______________________________________________B listering Acceleration

that doesnt make sense. according to people who are undoubtedly MUCH smarter than me, you can "turn a few screws" and get 250 reliable horsepower for free that doesnt burn more gas.

it SHOULD read:

high mpg/high hp/reliability/bistering acceleration________________________________stock
:happyfinger:

Charles
08-25-2007, 12:38 AM
Not Usefull Information

mcinfantry
08-25-2007, 12:41 AM
the only similarity between your 7.3 and the 4bt is that they burn diesel and have turbos, why do you keep posting about its performance on a 4bt page?

Charles
08-25-2007, 12:53 AM
Not Usefull Information

mcinfantry
08-25-2007, 01:00 AM
im not chain pulling. i want to see your 4bt. your souped up 4bt.

my srt8 charger puts out 420hp and runs 175mph. it gets 21hwy. and its stock. come ride in that sometime.

Dougal
08-25-2007, 01:01 AM
it SHOULD read:

high mpg/high hp/reliability/bistering acceleration________________________________stock
:happyfinger:

How about this one then.

Lots of power and using it/ terrible MPG___________________lots of power, not using it/ good MPG.

:happyfinger:

Charles
08-25-2007, 01:11 AM
Not Usefull Information

Charles
08-25-2007, 01:12 AM
Not Usefull Information

mcinfantry
08-25-2007, 01:42 AM
yep, mine has a factory warranty, carries FIVE adults too.

get back to building your 4bt, im waiting!

morning151
10-21-2009, 12:05 PM
ok im kinda new to the 4bt and the 6bt... cummins diesels... know about the 95-02 PSD's... but any way... i want to put a diesel in my ranger... but i want it in there so i get 200K out of the motor... like the cummins and PSD's do... there is a guy in Ga. that has a work PSD that he used as a test truck for new programers and propain and all that stuff... and he just just shy of 800K on his truck... he got 798 and change... heres the vid... i know im getting off topic for a bit but i want to get a 4bt or 6bt in my 93 ranger and have something thats not really expencive and something that will last... also with this what is the diff. with the 4BT and the 4BTA and all the alters in them... thanks...

JimmieD
10-25-2009, 09:06 AM
The last post before yours in this thread was in June of '07 I think? Good old thread, nice to take the way back machine for a ride!

This website has changed, as all do. There's now HUGE volumes of info archived on most any swap. I suggest going back & reading through various Buildup threads in that section, there's several Rangers as I recall. Once you've studied some prior builds most of your questions will be answered.

The 6BT is a whole bunch of metal to fit in your engine compartment, check on the dimensions & weight. It's too much for a Ranger in my opinion once you add bellhousing, clutch, trans etc.

m11-9mm
11-21-2009, 03:30 PM
It really has awesome acceleration from 2000 rpm and above. I changed my tire size from 28" up to 31.6" to put that acceleration at 60-65 mph. Below about 1800 and about 45-50 mph I may have to use 4th gear for simular acceleration.
Now I never owned an OPEC FRIENDLY gas V8 truck before so I don't have a seat of the pants comparison to a gas V8. The dyno guys said my numbers were better than rear wheel numbers from a standard 360 cube v8 engine. I'd like some feedback on that once I scan in the graph. Maybe someone has a RW HP/torque curve from some gasser to post here.
I can say that I can accelerate up any highway hill I've gone up, with my 5,000 lb. boat behind it.
It settles into 2,000-2,100 rpm really nice. As soon as the ice and snow melt off my drive I plan on putting the boat behind it for a load test on the highway and hills.

Any updates?