58 Apache Bagged Cummins

[mongocanfly]

cummings 6bt specs....
http://www.cumminshub.com/12v.html

[mongocanfly]

cummings 4bt specs......
http://www.cumminshub.com/4bt.html

[joedoh]

thanks mongo, those are the specs I remembered. usually length is given without the accessories, its the overall block length with the water pump on it. 34 seemed unlikely to me because its got 6 4" pistons with at least an inch between them and at the ends, so 34" might be a block/head measurement but couldnt possibly be an overall.

Originally Posted by whitedog76

J
Looking at the bottom pic, appears to be a fan shroud.

yes, that one kept the stock fan. but the firewall recess is over 12", too. 4" for the fan wouldnt have saved that firewall.



thanks for your service IggyPop! and dont be discouraged by our flapping, if you still wanted the cummins you can do it! bird in the hand and all. or keep the dodge to tow the 58.

[whitedog76]

The 34" May not be realistic, but I don't think it's far off.

The bath-tub sized firewall recess looks to be a little much though too.

The front of those motors are a little busy, the later ones even worse.

For argument sake. Here's one in a 48 Ford and one going into an IH Scout.

[joedoh]

34 inches isnt far off, its 6" off according to the specs.

Originally Posted by whitedog76

For argument sake.

I dont understand your argument I guess, every single 6bt swap you yourself has shown has needed the firewall modded. I showed pictures of what a 6BT in a TF needed from a guy who actually did it and you dont think its accurate. I guess keep your opinion, a man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.

[RADustin]

Originally Posted by joedoh

thanks mongo, those are the specs I remembered. usually length is given without the accessories, its the overall block length with the water pump on it. 34 seemed unlikely to me because its got 6 4" pistons with at least an inch between them and at the ends, so 34" might be a block/head measurement but couldnt possibly be an overall.

no offense, but you speak straight from your a$$.

Some facts-

bore spacing is 4.75". So about 3/4" meat between cylinders.

40" length would include the commercial SAE adapter to the front space of the water pump. 1005mm OAL. Back of block to front of water pump is 34.25"(870.9mm). So the engine is 34.25" plus fan and such.

drawing snip attached.

[joedoh]

Originally Posted by RADustin

no offense, but you speak straight from your a$$.


bore spacing is 4.75". So about 3/4" meat between cylinders.

I was off by a 1/4 inch in bore spacing and speak from my a$$? you had to look up what I already knew.

when whitedog said 34" he was including the accessories, I said it wasnt possible. you looked it up as 34.25 without any accessories. thats how everyone runs these engines, right?

so if you and whitedog were buidling the truck it would have an unmodified firewall and no accessories. sounds practical. all to prove me wrong.

[RADustin]

Originally Posted by joedoh

so 34" might be a block/head measurement but couldnt possibly be an overall.

It's in plain text above. The engine is not 40" long.

the OAL of the cummins is 34.25". The alt sits next to the block, the furest protrusion is the water pump.

the 40" includes an adapter that is not used for the dodge based cummins.

so yes, you speak with no real experience. I understand you have read a few forum posts and this makes you an expert. But unfortunately, you don't actually know.

whitedog76 actually had the correct number, yet you talked him away from it. He even posted pictures showing his confusion, and you still talked him down from his belief.

[joedoh]

Originally Posted by RADustin

It's in plain text above. The engine is not 40" long.

the OAL of the cummins is 34.25". The alt sits next to the block, the furest protrusion is the water pump.

the 40" includes an adapter that is not used for the dodge based cummins.

so yes, you speak with no real experience. I understand you have read a few forum posts and this makes you an expert. But unfortunately, you don't actually know.

whitedog76 actually had the correct number, yet you talked him away from it. He even posted pictures showing his confusion, and you still talked him down from his belief.

I actually said 34" sounded like a block/head measurement, which it is. 40" overall sounded like the measurement I took with my own eyes when I measured a 12v cummins for a swap.

so go ahead and plan for 34" length to install one. shouldnt need any of my input to make it work, you have the technical drawing you googled for! building with pictures is real building!

edit: your technical drawing shows 882mm for the block and 123mm for the accessories. thats 39.6" overall, PLUS FAN.

[RADustin]

Originally Posted by joedoh

I actually said 34" sounded like a block/head measurement, which it is. 40" overall sounded like the measurement I took with my own eyes when I measured a 12v cummins for a swap.

so go ahead and plan for 34" length to install one. shouldnt need any of my input to make it work, you have the technical drawing you googled for! building with pictures is real building!

edit: your technical drawing shows 882mm for the block and 123mm for the accessories. thats 39.6" overall, PLUS FAN.

882.1-134.1+123=871mm(34.29in). but who's counting.

at any point you can admit to spreading false information and look less like a jackass.

If you don't think you can build from drawings, don't go look at my build thread of my '76. It'll scare you how accurate they are.

[joedoh]

Originally Posted by RADustin

8
at any point you can admit to spreading false information and look less like a jackass.

funny, I was going to say the same thing to you! apparently part of the engine doesnt exist either in real life or on the drawing.




you have doubled down, now you dont need accessories OR a starter. your cummins swap will be under two feet long in no time.

I looked at your build thread, nice work! I am an engineer by trade too. if I read a drawing like you do (subtracting a part that didnt agree with) I wouldnt have a job very long though.

[RADustin]

Originally Posted by RADustin

40" length would include the commercial SAE adapter to the front space of the water pump. 1005mm OAL.

Originally Posted by joedoh

apparently part of the engine doesnt exist either in real life or on the drawing.

as mentioned, that is the SAE adapter. The dodge conversion parts to use the cummins are very proprietary. Any drawings found on 'google' will be of the cummins in its natural environment; some kind of industrial use. Industry has agreed to specific bellhousing bolt patterns, all driven by SAE.

The dodge transmissions have the direct to cummins patten in the bellhousing, not needing the adapter. Fritolay ordered a bunch of cummins 4bt powered bread trucks which had a GM turbo400 adapter, much thinner than the SAE. This has since been knocked off and recreated for other transmissions as well. Evenso, the dodge unit can be built to be the strongest.

I'm putting together another comparison of cummins, gen IV 5.3, LBZ duramax, and the mighty 235 as time allows. I'll post some screenshots shortly.

[RADustin]

the adapter plate has no bearing on firewall depth, or overall engine length.

[joedoh]

Originally Posted by RADustin

the adapter plate has no bearing on firewall depth, or overall engine length.

it sure does when it hits the firewall. unless you carve it out, which has been my point.

[RADustin]

I would typically refer to that area as the transmission tunnel.

Man you should quit being an engineer and argue in court. You seem better at that.

[joedoh]

I have done a stint as a patent engineer, which requires some legal training.

the point is, that for anyone who wants to install one of these engines, I say plan for 40" plus the fan, you say plan for 34.29" total. of the two of us, who would get thanked after the install? even if you showed them the drawing that shows the 34.29" spec?

I laid on a cummins and got my measurement. I wouldnt say it if I hadnt

[whitedog76]

Just to clarify an earlier post.

Originally Posted by whitedog76

I know the short 235 is 30" from bellhousing to water pump. From research, the Cummins is 34 to the water pump, minus the fan.

[joedoh]

you forgot the part that attaches to the trans. the cummins is 3 feet tall, its long stroke means the crank will be higher than a 235. even mounting a shallow trans mount that RAD says they make, can you see any situation not having to plan for it? so is it 34 inches long? or 34 inches PLUS the trans mount? because an LS is measured to where the bellhousing mounts. so is a 235.

and yes, you did say without the fan. there seems to be some confusion but that 55 TF I posed a picture of has a fan and a big firewall bulge, that isnt built bigger than it needs to be. I just dont see how thats disputable?

[whitedog76]

Solutions to a problem...

[joedoh]

Originally Posted by RADustin

I prefer to report the actual numbers and let the user decide how to fluff them. As an engineer I would assume you would appreciate precision.

nope. nope nope. being technically correct is the best kind of correct, but what you are describing is, if someone asked how long an engine was and you gave them a dimension, and then they found out they needed the extra for the trans mount because the cummins mounts higher in the engine compartment to clear the front suspension, you saying "well you just asked how long the ENGINE was". wont be a lot of solace. in reverse, they will be losing 5 inches of footwell they thought they could keep.

in the same vein, I did shipping layout work for china containers and if I gave a dimension I knew wouldnt possibly fit because it was exactly the correct answer, it would be revealed as they loaded the container and it would be my last day on the job.

[RADustin]

Originally Posted by joedoh

nope. nope nope. being technically correct is the best kind of correct, but what you are describing is, if someone asked how long an engine was and you gave them a dimension, and then they found out they needed the extra for the trans mount because the cummins mounts higher in the engine compartment to clear the front suspension, you saying "well you just asked how long the ENGINE was". wont be a lot of solace. in reverse, they will be losing 5 inches of footwell they thought they could keep.

in the same vein, I did shipping layout work for china containers and if I gave a dimension I knew wouldnt possibly fit because it was exactly the correct answer, it would be revealed as they loaded the container and it would be my last day on the job.

man you're something else. It's ok to be wrong. It really is. 'technically correct' vs correct. That's a new one.

so you take a dimension which is known(fact) and add your opinion on to it(some amount of fluff), and label it as 'technically correct'.

in your 'technically correct' answer you assume the cummins will interfere with the front suspension and assumed this will cause it to move up. You assumed a different oil pan arrangement can't be fitted. What if these aren't valid assumptions? Maybe the bare number with no safety factor was just fine and the user can see how to best apply margin? oh man, riveting.

the best part is you then argue that your 'technically correct' value, shot from the hip while 'laying over the top' is more correct than an engineered drawing.

thats epic. I will have to share this with co-workers and friends. They will get a kick out of it.

he wasn't wrong, he was technically correct. Did you try this argument in college? I bet the instructors loved it.

when I took my PE, if I would have failed I guess I could have petitioned the board on being technically correct. They would have still giving me my license right?

wow. Enjoy your time bud. I now understand all of your posting.

[whitedog76]

Man, I was just trying to say that I thought it was possible...

I didn't see where the large firewall recess was necessary, but I like how the builder in question handled it. Top notch hot rodding.

http://67-72chevytrucks.com/vboard/s...=640042&page=9

[RADustin]

Originally Posted by whitedog76

I didn't see where the large firewall recess was necessary, but I like how the builder in question handled it. Top notch hot rodding.

this is one of the issues of using a late model frame.

He kept the stock engine mount to front wheel centerline dims intact. Which lead to the engine being shifted back a little far and a deeper firewall recess.

had he scooted the engine further forward obviously the firewall wouldn't need to be so deep. but that would be more frame modifications....

ton of ways to skin the cat, pick one and make it work...

[whitedog76]

Originally Posted by RADustin

ton of ways to skin the cat, pick one and make it work...

That was the point I was trying to make all along...

Thanks for the back up though.

[joedoh]

Originally Posted by RADustin

man you're something else. It's ok to be wrong. It really is. 'technically correct' vs correct. That's a new one.

its a quote from futurama haha

Originally Posted by RADustin

the best part is you then argue that your 'technically correct' value, shot from the hip while 'laying over the top' is more correct than an engineered drawing.

when I was a newbie I worked a project for ECS on a bizjet cabin stretch. we had lots of engineers working on it, and lots of guys leading it each with 10-20 years in the business doing thermo, crunching numbers, modeling it in V5, measuring emissivity of cabin parts to determine how long it would take to get to max temp, and how long it would take the vapor system to cool it down. they spent a couple months on the equation, it was massive. we went to a hot airfield, measured the humidity and temperatures through the whole test. the equation wasnt even close. the reason why it wasnt close is because doing everything in a theoretical environment couldnt capture what was actually happen in the real world. the guys with all the experience shrugged and said "this is why we test".

I remembered that all through my career, to look beyond what the print shows. at my last job I was responsible for setting up an airflow lab using CFD modeling, the machines, the employees, everything. and the very first project we did was determine the offset, the difference between the modeling result and what could be expected in a real world test. because marketing would run with the CFD results if we let them.

the print can be extremely detailed and your model can have lots of hours in it, but at some point you have to lay on the engine and take some measurements, go to the body and take some measurements. this is what a test looks like, what has been missed will be apparent. you keep saying that the measurement is what you show on the print, but as a guy who crawled around on a cummins measuring where things fit and what needed done to put it in a new chassis, I can tell you that the trans adapter would be almost as tall as the original 235 valve cover when mounted high enough in the chassis to not interfere with the suspension. your solidworks models are lined up on the crank it looks like, if you raised the cummins I bet that would be the result. no matter if that adapter is 1.5 inches thick or 5 inches thick, it will be there.

Originally Posted by RADustin

thats epic. I will have to share this with co-workers and friends. They will get a kick out of it.

I bet more than a few of them have seen futurama. I have been (and still am) pretty successful in my engineering career, so your opinion (or your friends and coworkers) doesnt really mean anything to me. I have tried to pay you proper respect for being an engineer, I havent tried to be insulting. be sure when you show them my comments you show them yours, when you are belligerent and unyielding and insulting. I have known a few engineers like this, its not uncommon, but that is your problem, and theirs, in the real world. this is just a screen I have to read, like a print.