[95Z28A4]

The 24 valves as well as the later 12 valves have two turbo oil drain locations options; front and rear. Ours is positioned in the rear. Take a look at the attached photo that shows both oil drains and the rear engine mount. I assure you our engine is positioned correctly and that the transmission has been moved back the 2" you speak of. You can see the re drilled holes in the frame for the transmission cross member in my video.

View attachment 129136

I maybe mistaken, but I believe the dual oil returns for the turbo started with the STORM blocks. Both my 1998 12 valve and the 2000 Mexican block I have as a spare have dual oil returns.

 

[Snuggletough]

I maybe mistaken, but I believe the dual oil returns for the turbo started with the STORM blocks. Both my 1998 12 valve and the 2000 Mexican block I have as a spare have dual oil returns.

The 98 12 valves were that way and I loosely recall I have seen late 97's with the same.

All the service blocks came with dual drains from Cummins and Dodge. I have a VE 5.9 in one of my trucks that has a "56" block with dual drains.

My point had nothing to do with the differences in drains between blocks. The 12v and VP44 blocks are functionally identical sans a few small bits.

The 2003+ blocks are drastically different though. Those mounts will not fit a 5.9 commonrail or 6.7.

The picture from the passenger side looking at the mount shows the forward drain located above the forward edge of the engine crossmember. That didn't look right to me so I snapped a picture showing where it's supposed to be. Hopefully you get things sorted out before you ship a dozen of those mount sets out. lol.

 

[Jonesy's]

The 98 12 valves were that way and I loosely recall I have seen late 97's with the same.

All the service blocks came with dual drains from Cummins and Dodge. I have a VE 5.9 in one of my trucks that has a "56" block with dual drains.

My point had nothing to do with the differences in drains between blocks. The 12v and VP44 blocks are functionally identical sans a few small bits.

The 2003+ blocks are drastically different though. Those mounts will not fit a 5.9 commonrail or 6.7.

The picture from the passenger side looking at the mount shows the forward drain located above the forward edge of the engine crossmember. That didn't look right to me so I snapped a picture showing where it's supposed to be. Hopefully you get things sorted out before you ship a dozen of those mount sets out. lol.

I'm guessing there is some camera angle issues as our forward drain port is set rearward from the front of the edge of the crossmember.

Is the photo you provide of a common rail?

 

[char1355]

Yes, those are the STORM blocks. Those have extra engine mount holes as well as the dual turbo drains. The main thing you need to watch for is the blocks with the casting number 53 on the side which were made in Brazil. Those have a bad reputation for cracking. I understand that the #53 can appear on either side of the block near the front just above the oil pan. On some it's just below the oil filter and others it below the injection pump. See photos.

 

[Snuggletough]

Is the photo you provide of a common rail?

No.

 

[Jonesy's]

Yes, those are the STORM blocks. Those have extra engine mount holes as well as the dual turbo drains. The main thing you need to watch for is the blocks with the casting number 53 on the side which were made in Brazil. Those have a bad reputation for cracking. I understand that the #53 can appear on either side of the block near the front just above the oil pan. On some it's just below the oil filter and others it below the injection pump. See photos.

Great info. Thanks for the photos!

 

[Gumby79]

"Cummins castrated the dodge version to save the nonindustral parts in a dodge."
Agreed... starting in '89 with the lag master H1C not spooling 15 psi till after the 2500gov defuel point~2000rpm should have been spooled @1000-1150 w/peak tq ~1200 like the industrial versions not 1600.