Give Cummins a push

[Kaninja]

And power? 141-168hp? The highest power version is ~45hp LESS than stock 1FZ-FE, which was barely enough as-is?

Yes it would be the 168hp version. Yes it has less hp but WAY more torque. Fuel economy would be at least 70% better. That means folks that typically need 3 jerry cans for overlanding expeditions could use 1 or 2 instead. Crawling with a diesel is even more rewarding. For hp, swap in an ls.

 

[SkyMall]

I posted this link a couple month ago when these were announced. I think Cummins is onto something here. If they're smart they'll resist the temptation to charge too much for these kits. Getting them out in the community and changing for maintenance and parts is the cash cow. I'm all over this if it's affordable. In that regard, I think it's worth considering the alternatives and how expensive they are.

 

[bloc]

Yes it would be the 168hp version. Yes it has less hp but WAY more torque. Fuel economy would be at least 70% better. That means folks that typically need 3 jerry cans for overlanding expeditions could use 1 or 2 instead. Crawling with a diesel is even more rewarding. For hp, swap in an ls.

I am swapping in an LS.

Torque doesn't pull a trailer or get you over a pass without being run over by a semi at highway speeds. Sure.. it'd be great for low-speed stuff.. but in the US most people have to spend significant time at 70+ and with the weight and wind resistance of most of these rigs 168hp would be pathetic, especially when you consider the amount of money these engines will inevitably cost.

The good bit is that a diesel will be MUCH better at delivering that 168hp non-stop.. whereas it's much harder on a gasoline engine to ask rated max HP for any real length of time.

Still, I think virtually anyone spending the multiple tens of thousands of dollars to get one of these installed would be really disappointed with 170hp when it's done.

Since you brought up LSs...

A 5.3 with AFM/DOD would significantly improve mileage, run on RUG, make significantly more power than stock, crawl GREAT, have parts available EVERYWHERE, could be done in a month from now, and save you $15k. Oh, but you'd have to carry 3 gerry cans.

Trust me. I LOVE diesels. Have swapped one into a 4runner, and had four TDI jettas. But for most people THIS engine isn't a good option for an 80-series cruiser unless you have an aversion to saving money and a hard-on to have a new cummins in a cruiser.

Edit: tuners could probably bump that 168 to 275. Now That would be interesting.

 

[Landseer]

I really like the idea of a Cummins crate engine in an 80 but the the I4 is under powered and the V8 is too big to fit in an 80's engine bay. If Cummins decides to slap 2 more cylinders onto the I4 to make an I6 with ~240hp and 550lbft of torque it would be a great match for an 80 series. Unfortunately the straight 6 option is probably going to be a version of the 6.7L which is just too big for an 80.

 

[HDJdreams]

I am really curious about the price for the 2.8 I4. A few years ago, Banks showed off their version of the EcoDiesel, the 630T, at SEMA. It was a built up version with a stand alone military grade controller mated to a 6L90. Sounded like a dream for swapping, it took them a couple of years to announce the price. About $30k for just the motor! For the price of the Banks motor and transmission, could almost buy a Tradesman EcoDiesel.

If the 2.8 is in the ballpark of $10k, it could come be feasible, if it is much more than that no way! As fat as power, it is right there with the stock HD motors in a lighter package. And I have no doubt that they can be easily tuned up to 200 hp and 400 ft-lbs.

I too hope Cummins offers the 3.8 I4! (More compact and way smoother than 4BTs) There is a big gap between the 2.8 and the 5.0. The 5.0 V8 is huge and over 900 lbs, might as well use a Duramax at that point. There are tons of Cummins I6 donors out there too, so neither the 5.0 or 6.7 are interesting to me as crate motors. But emissions legal 2.8 and 3.8 I4s would be game changers for 4x4 world.

 

[TNNPIG]

The cummins 2.8 repower package is about $7500 this info came from a source tied in with cummins that has already purchased one and is mid install as we speak !

 

[TNNPIG]

Of course im running a 4BD1T with 12lbs of boost on 35's with stock gears and A440F and getting 24+mpg! and all the power needed even while towing

 

[danthman114]

I like diesel for the fuel economy and you can, with clear intake, can run underwater. No distributor cap, wires, plugs.

 

[Bludozer]

And power? 141-168hp? The highest power version is ~45hp LESS than stock 1FZ-FE, which was barely enough as-is?

I agree and wish it could be more in the 250-300hp range, but keep in mind that if you dynoed your 1fz it would probably be even less than the 141 rated 4cyl cummins. I'm recalling a thread I saw where a guy had his dyno'd and it was in the 110hp range

I would greatly prefer more hp but 168 with all that torque could potentially be "enough."

 

[bloc]

I agree and wish it could be more in the 250-300hp range, but keep in mind that if you dynoed your 1fz it would probably be even less than the 141 rated 4cyl cummins. I'm recalling a thread I saw where a guy had his dyno'd and it was in the 110hp range

I would greatly prefer more hp but 168 with all that torque could potentially be "enough."

No, our 1FZs are almost certainly not making less than 141hp at the crank, unless severely disabled. Sure, one may have been dynoed at 110, but that must have been at the wheels.. and any engine swapped in will have its own drivetrain losses. If you go with a manual it'll help a lot, but the transfer case (gears, not efficient) and axles are still going to hurt things with ANY engine.



But... my point is that with the ridiculous cost of these setups my gut is telling me that even stock wheel horsepower isn't going to be worth the money.. and 168 at the crank will struggle to overcome a 45hp deficit even with a more efficient transmission and fresher engine in the mix.

And, I just realized.. add the cost of taller gears (if they are even available) to get the most of that freeway mileage. Even 315s with stock gears won't get you close to ideal freeway RPMs for a diesel with the overdrive ratios commonly available.

 

[bigredmachine]

I figure with the Mud discount, $500 ought to have it installed and purring like a kitten.

maybe a group buy can knock down the price to about $400 installed

 

[rbdave]

I'm an idiot.
Here's the link.
Cummins Repower Survey - Cummins Engines

I voted for the inline 6

 

[Kaninja]

Having traveled with a combined 18,000 lbs. (Trailer / 4 horses / Wife & Kids) 4,000 km's across Canada with only a bone stock 215hp (1996 6BT), I would think most would be very happy the motivation 168hp & 440 lb.ft of torque would give our 5,500 - 6,500 lb FZJ80's. No they won't lay a strip down the boulevard, but I am pretty sure they will move an 80 easily down the road, over a hill, etc.

Having said that, I would give everything up for a fully mechanical diesel option.

 

[bigredmachine]

also voted I6

 

[Bludozer]

No, our 1FZs are almost certainly not making less than 141hp at the crank, unless severely disabled. Sure, one may have been dynoed at 110, but that must have been at the wheels.. and any engine swapped in will have its own drivetrain losses. If you go with a manual it'll help a lot, but the transfer case (gears, not efficient) and axles are still going to hurt things with ANY engine.



But... my point is that with the ridiculous cost of these setups my gut is telling me that even stock wheel horsepower isn't going to be worth the money.. and 168 at the crank will struggle to overcome a 45hp deficit even with a more efficient transmission and fresher engine in the mix.

And, I just realized.. add the cost of taller gears (if they are even available) to get the most of that freeway mileage. Even 315s with stock gears won't get you close to ideal freeway RPMs for a diesel with the overdrive ratios commonly available.

No doubt it will be absurdly expensive, this is all a hypothetical for me. It's very possible that I am getting hp at the crank/at the wheels mixed up I cant remember what exactly was said in that thread (nor can I find it.)

For this to be a viable option I would think it would have to be the same or less than an LS swap and I'd imagine they wont come close to that.

 

[mechanist]

As I remember, the donor vehicle had to be same class as recieving rig. I E a 1 ton engine could not be installed in a SUV?

True, but some of the w250 trucks were only rated at 6200 - which, I thought, was why it could be done. Am I wrong? Can I not bring a 12v 6bt cruiser into CA?

 

[smoltz]

Anyone heard anything on this? Looks like they are moving ahead with the 2.8L but no pricing details yet. Seems like the 2.8L is right on the edge of what I would deem acceptable for power for the 80. I know folks are saying it's lighter than 1 HDT, what about 1FZ-FE. How does the 2.8 compare weight wise?

On paper, looks like it's down on power, up on torque. I'm sure fuel economy would be much improved but my gut says that as an overall solution, an LS would have a lot better performance with only slightly worse mileage.

 

[Landseer]

Pickup truck with the 2.8 Cummins gets the equivalent of 28mpg
Range and Specifications - Foton Passenger and Light Commercial Vehicles

 

[Kaninja]

Anyone heard anything on this? Looks like they are moving ahead with the 2.8L but no pricing details yet. Seems like the 2.8L is right on the edge of what I would deem acceptable for power for the 80. I know folks are saying it's lighter than 1 HDT, what about 1FZ-FE. How does the 2.8 compare weight wise?

On paper, looks like it's down on power, up on torque. I'm sure fuel economy would be much improved but my gut says that as an overall solution, an LS would have a lot better performance with only slightly worse mileage.

Cummins ISF 2.8 is approx 475 lbs. 1FZFE is about 584 lbs.

Today diesel is $.20 / liter cheaper than regular unleaded where I live. It's been cheaper for about 2 years now.

 

[shocktower]

I really like the idea of a Cummins crate engine in an 80 but the the I4 is under powered and the V8 is too big to fit in an 80's engine bay. If Cummins decides to slap 2 more cylinders onto the I4 to make an I6 with ~240hp and 550lbft of torque it would be a great match for an 80 series. Unfortunately the straight 6 option is probably going to be a version of the 6.7L which is just too big for an 80.

Here is what a 6BT looks like in a FJ80