Originally posted by squirrel
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Diesel to E85 conversion
Collapse
X
-
Last edited by SuperBuickGuy; December 3, 2018, 04:21 PM.Doing it all wrong since 1966
-
A Diesel w/o turbo (or some form of charged intake air) is like a day without sunshine. Diesels NEED charged air, so much so that in LSR there is no penalty for using a turbo or blower in Diesel classes. They recognize that it's just SOP to make a Diesel go anywhere - and, of course, so many come from the factory with one. Can't figure out why GM didn't build these w/turbo in the first place.
And Dan B - no reason to be "not a Diesel fan." They make great power, are amazingly stout, and generally get better MPG than a similar gas engine. They don't need to be smokey or stinky if built right (the new ones are not). I'd guess you just aren't familiar with them but you weren't born knowing all about gas engines, either.
DanLast edited by DanStokes; December 4, 2018, 07:50 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by DanStokes View PostA Diesel w/o turbo (or some form of charged intake air) is like a day without sunshine. Diesels NEED charged air, so much so that in LSR there is no penalty for using a turbo or blower in Diesel classes. They recognize that it's just SOP to make a Diesel go anywhere - and, of course, so many come from the factory with one. Can't figure out why GM didn't build these w/turbo in the first place.
Dan
Come on Dan, you too?Doing it all wrong since 1966
Comment
-
Detroits didn't use the blower to make boost...but some of the later ones had a turbo to make boost (in addition to having the scavenging blower).
As much reliability trouble as they had with the 5.7 and 6.2 without boost, I think it was wise not to have turbos on them!
My fabulous web page
"If it don't go, chrome it!" --Stroker McGurk
Comment
-
Originally posted by squirrel View PostDetroits didn't use the blower to make boost...but some of the later ones had a turbo to make boost (in addition to having the scavenging blower).
As much reliability trouble as they had with the 5.7 and 6.2 without boost, I think it was wise not to have turbos on them!
as for the 6.2s.... I've turbo'd 2 of them, how many have you turbo'd?Last edited by SuperBuickGuy; December 4, 2018, 10:36 AM.Doing it all wrong since 1966
Comment
-
of course they're different motors....everyone knows that.
I haven't turbo'd any of them. Do you still have the ones you did?
My fabulous web page
"If it don't go, chrome it!" --Stroker McGurk
Comment
-
You put the 5.7 and the 6.2 in the same 'no turbo' bucket.... so you're saying that you've found that they aren't the same? whoa, google is good.
You missed the current Suburban? the one I put an oversized turbo on?
Or are you saying that if I sell the turbo truck or suburban that I forget all I learned with them.... not sure I'm following you. Or I because I sold several that those new owners transferred the knowledge to you?
Heck, I've owned enough turbo 6.2s that I can talk about my experience with all of the available (and no longer available) turbo options. Banks, ATS, GM....
Doing it all wrong since 1966
Comment
-
Originally posted by squirrel View Postwith a drill and a tap, you might be able to get a spark plug in there? But that's a hell of a lot of compression for even E85. I expect there's enough meat on the tops of the pistons to take some metal off and drop it down to 13, maybe?
neat idea!
Doing it all wrong since 1966
Comment
-
With a 5.7 - the Oldsmobile motor - you simply bolt gas heads on, pull the vacuum pump out and replace it with a Oldsmobile distributor.
not so with a 6.2 because there is no gas head for them and if you look at the head above - those little eyebrows are where the glow plugs reside. They do not enter into the combustion chamber - so if you were to put a spark plug in there, the spark would have a terrible time igniting the mixture because it'd have to somehow get up and into that chamber. The chamber is designed to protect the glow plug from the combustion because if it gets too hot, it'll melt the glow plug, drop the end into the motor and bad, bad things happen next (picture dropping a nut in a motor for similar damage).
again, there's not cheap way of making a 6.2 into a gas motorDoing it all wrong since 1966
Comment
-
I was just curious to know if the turbo 6.2 was something worth keeping around for a while.
My fabulous web page
"If it don't go, chrome it!" --Stroker McGurk
Comment
-
no more or less then any other old vehicle. I like cheap, the 6.2 gets that in spades, cheap to buy, cheap to operate, cheap to maintain. There's so little that can go wrong with them, however, like anything else how they're treated does affect longevity.... never overheat them and it'll last a long timeDoing it all wrong since 1966
- Likes 1
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by DanStokes View PostA Diesel w/o turbo (or some form of charged intake air) is like a day without sunshine. Diesels NEED charged air, so much so that in LSR there is no penalty for using a turbo or blower in Diesel classes. They recognize that it's just SOP to make a Diesel go anywhere - and, of course, so many come from the factory with one. Can't figure out why GM didn't build these w/turbo in the first place.
And Dan B - no reason to be "not a Diesel fan." They make great power, are amazingly stout, and generally get better MPG than a similar gas engine. They don't need to be smokey or stinky if built right (the new ones are not). I'd guess you just aren't familiar with them but you weren't born knowing all about gas engines, either.
DanPreviously HoosierL98GTA
Comment
Comment