Most simple diesel engine
- Thread starter LAMBCRUSHER
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
Well, I agree. A turbo is a must. But the thread was about the most simple diesel engine. And not having one, makes it more simple.
Same counts for the electronic diesel, I'm sure it's great, but it's not simple.
That's why I suggested the most simple engines I could think of, 3B, 2H and 13B.
I may indeed fit into the geriatric category but I don't fit into the retired category Dougal.
X2 here, I love my hj47, slow and all, she may be a pig, but she's my pig. A turbo would be fun, longevity and simplicity equal no turbo to me. More strain, but I may actually consider it one day.
If I want to go rip gear and haul tail, I'll get in something that does just that. This hj47 performsflawlesslyin my opion, as well as my buddies bj40, although it needs 2 more gears and a turbo to keep up with my slow na 2h. As to why I pick a 6cyl. Don't get me wrong, I am a turbo guy...
6 cylinder diesel motors just tend to work better as most strait six motors, many large industrial diesels are 6cyl including semi's, and the cummins 6bt has been a long reliable turbo motor with big power and cheap upgrades.... F
Whoops sorry
I also know of a few 2Hs over 500K. One of them is just now getting a turbo.
Of course, lets not forget Nissan Industrial's/Volvo's TD4.2. Many of them well over 500K and a few over 1M.
Crappy IDIs, eh?
and more than a few benz 300d (idi om603) sedans out there with million mile badges on them.
There are certainly mercedes cars with over 1,000,000 miles on them, but they ran through many engine rebuilds in that time.
Like the greek taxi, did 4.6 million kilometres (just under 3 million miles) and had three engines which alternated between running and being rebuilt 11 times in total.
Proverbial Longevity in 4.6 Million Kilometers
4.6/11 = 420,000km average between rebuilds. This is 24 hour taxi use (always warm etc etc) which is as kind as you can be to a an engine.
not to embarass you we will keep them to your high mileage standard set:
1984 Toyota Land Cruiser Wagon - British Columbia Cars For Sale - Kijiji British Columbia Canada.
1983 Toyota Land Cruiser BJ 42 - British Columbia Cars For Sale - Kijiji British Columbia Canada.
1985 Toyota Land Cruiser BJ60 Wagon - Alberta Cars For Sale - Kijiji Alberta Canada.
1987 Toyota Land Cruiser HJ60 - City of Toronto Cars For Sale - Kijiji City of Toronto Canada.
1986 Toyota Land Cruiser Diesel HJ60 SIX cylinder Wagon - Ottawa Cars For Sale - Kijiji Ottawa Canada.
simple enough.
now then coupled with John's post and the couple i owned with over 750K and you will have to do MUCH better than your post to prove that IDI are crap engines...
1984 Toyota Land Cruiser Wagon - British Columbia Cars For Sale - Kijiji British Columbia Canada.
1983 Toyota Land Cruiser BJ 42 - British Columbia Cars For Sale - Kijiji British Columbia Canada.
1985 Toyota Land Cruiser BJ60 Wagon - Alberta Cars For Sale - Kijiji Alberta Canada.
1987 Toyota Land Cruiser HJ60 - City of Toronto Cars For Sale - Kijiji City of Toronto Canada.
1986 Toyota Land Cruiser Diesel HJ60 SIX cylinder Wagon - Ottawa Cars For Sale - Kijiji Ottawa Canada.
simple enough.
now then coupled with John's post and the couple i owned with over 750K and you will have to do MUCH better than your post to prove that IDI are crap engines...
Interesting, none of them have more than 430,000km and most of them have rust issues so will never make higher miles.
To quote yourself from this exact same thread:
and then post up a bunch of links but none over 500K on them? and you have the gaul to call them high mileage?!?!
Have you noticed you're the only one referring to IDI diesels as ****? I'm not sure what you want those 4 asteriks to mean, doesn't matter really.
What I've said is IDI engines have weaker heads, precombustion chambers which can cause serious carnage, use more fuel, handle less boost and are harder to start. None of which have been in any way refuted.
taxi use? always warm yes, but an entire lifetime of stop-and-go driving that doesn't get over 25 mph isn't exactly what i would call "ideal", it's actually pretty hard use. i've been to greece, thessoloniki has horrendous traffic 24/7, just like athens. and that was a 240d (om616, 4 cyl. 2.4l n/a), quite a different engine than the 300d (om603, 6cyl. 3l turbo), which is the particular example i was citing.
on this side of the world, most of those million milers are in the southwest us, driven by travelling salesman types (long highway miles, and so flat you can watch your wife leave you for 3 days), and most of them have gone through only one rebuild. there are lots of those engines that have clocked 700,000+ miles before a total refit. mind you, they are getting pretty tired, anemic and oil-thirsty by that time.
not trying to join a s***-fest here, it's just that your comparison of di vs. idi engines longevity-wise isn't quite as accurate as you let on. yes di are more efficient, and yes they do run cleaner (i like my bj74). and as far as electronic controls go, a more "field servicable" non ecu engine is desireable for off-road/crawling type use. i think in the long run, it's a toss-up for longevity between a good idi engine and a good di engine. much of which depends on pm and driving habits.
honestly, if i could have got my hands on a 2kd-ftv engine and ecu, i would have put that in my faux-lux instead of a 3l+ turbo. i'm not against any practical technological advances for the internal combustion engine.
Taxi's outlive other cars by about 3x the mileage here. It doesn't matter where in the world you are, taxi's are all used for the same type of driving.
Honestly if there were documented million mile cars (or even million km cars) of any type the manufacturers would be screaming about it. With hearsay you hear of plenty, but the evidence just isn't there.
Di engines do not require ecu control. You're talking about two different things. Injection system and the control system can be combined either way.
Toyota for example made idi engines that were ecu controlled and idi engines that were mechanically controlled. They made di engines that were purely mechanical and di engines that were ecu controlled.
yes, i was just talking about why a non ecu engine might be desireable. not whether or not di engines are ecu or not. i understand the difference between the fuel system and the engine control sytem.
Wheels keep turning: More than a million klicks on this Mercedes — AOL Autos Canada
they do exist. and benz does crow about it on occasion.
Wheels keep turning: More than a million klicks on this Mercedes — AOL Autos Canada
they do exist. and benz does crow about it on occasion.
What do you think they mean by "neither the engine nor the transmission has been altered in any way"?
It's a strange choice of words. Other articles on the same car use the word "modified" instead of "altered".
I wonder what has been done? Repairs aren't modifications.
it must be a conspiracy contrived for the sole purpose to discredit you.
they exist, get over it. like i said, not trying to engage in a pissing match.
they exist, get over it. like i said, not trying to engage in a pissing match.
no, what you said was "For longevity I would cross the IDI engines off the list straight off." and yet you have no proof of short term life span of the general IDI.
rust issues in Canada is an accepted fact which has no bearing on engine life. the average Cruiserhead patches and repatches a cruiser for years and keeps on driving them. making a bases for engine life on this is...well... ignorant.
HJ60, Ron's truck, 556,000 km last time i saw it. original owner, never rebuilt
HJ60, Glens truck, 516,000 km last time i saw it. original owner, never rebuilt
at least a dozen BJ40/42s i owned personally had well over the 500,000 km on them when they sold.
but
what kind of proof can you give to a non-believer? you have a disgust and hatred for the IDI and a "fall down on your knees" worship for the DI. so be it
but
to make a statement like yours is insulting to every IDI owner out there that is living proof that the IDI can last, even outlast the DI engines.
Kiwi buddy, your ignorance is showing again.
rust issues in Canada is an accepted fact which has no bearing on engine life. the average Cruiserhead patches and repatches a cruiser for years and keeps on driving them. making a bases for engine life on this is...well... ignorant.
HJ60, Ron's truck, 556,000 km last time i saw it. original owner, never rebuilt
HJ60, Glens truck, 516,000 km last time i saw it. original owner, never rebuilt
at least a dozen BJ40/42s i owned personally had well over the 500,000 km on them when they sold.
but
what kind of proof can you give to a non-believer? you have a disgust and hatred for the IDI and a "fall down on your knees" worship for the DI. so be it
but
to make a statement like yours is insulting to every IDI owner out there that is living proof that the IDI can last, even outlast the DI engines.
Kiwi buddy, your ignorance is showing again.
geez, you guys take it personally, maybe take it to chat as it's a lot of name calling.
he asked for the simplest engine, not most reliable.
now a DI head without precompression chamber cups would seem simpler than a DI head without, hence my recommendation to get a DI engine. although rare, a precup failure is catastrophic. this will never happen in a DI engine.
of course there are upsides to the IDIs, but keeping ON TOPIC...
I'd equate the complexity of a turbo with the IDI head. that makes the DI toyotas 12HT and 13BT with the inline injection pump would then equally as complex as the IDIs. it's rare for a precup to drop and for a turbo to fail (although turbo failures are not catastrophic).
you can then choose between a relatively sluggish engine that dies at altitude (IDI) vs. one with pep which can handle altitude changes (DI).
so, (1)2H(T) or (1)3B(T) are the simplest.
everyone wins!
he asked for the simplest engine, not most reliable.
now a DI head without precompression chamber cups would seem simpler than a DI head without, hence my recommendation to get a DI engine. although rare, a precup failure is catastrophic. this will never happen in a DI engine.
of course there are upsides to the IDIs, but keeping ON TOPIC...
I'd equate the complexity of a turbo with the IDI head. that makes the DI toyotas 12HT and 13BT with the inline injection pump would then equally as complex as the IDIs. it's rare for a precup to drop and for a turbo to fail (although turbo failures are not catastrophic).
you can then choose between a relatively sluggish engine that dies at altitude (IDI) vs. one with pep which can handle altitude changes (DI).
so, (1)2H(T) or (1)3B(T) are the simplest.
everyone wins!
simple is one thing,
simple and reliable should go hand in hand when discussing an engine
simple, reliable and parts availability is another serious concern. as the years pass more and more parts are becoming obsolete and harder to find used.
it really is just that simple.
simple and reliable should go hand in hand when discussing an engine
simple, reliable and parts availability is another serious concern. as the years pass more and more parts are becoming obsolete and harder to find used.
it really is just that simple.
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2008
- Threads
- 96
- Messages
- 2,930
- Location
- Freensville
- Website
- www.poolpartydeathmachine.com
to the OP:
This may be a bit of a sacrilege, but have you looked into non-Toyota diesels?
Don't get me wrong, I've seen a few of them and really loved them, but parts in the 'States are hard to source, and growing ever so difficult. What about a Cummins motor? They're pretty much the single most long-living motor made in the USA, parts are affordable and can be found just about anywhere, and conversions have been done.
There are others: the Powersmokes are too big, the Durmaxes are too fussy and big, and the old 6.2's are a gamble for quality, but Cummins has a consistent product with good quality management and a record of adaptability.
A little food for thought.
This may be a bit of a sacrilege, but have you looked into non-Toyota diesels?
Don't get me wrong, I've seen a few of them and really loved them, but parts in the 'States are hard to source, and growing ever so difficult. What about a Cummins motor? They're pretty much the single most long-living motor made in the USA, parts are affordable and can be found just about anywhere, and conversions have been done.
There are others: the Powersmokes are too big, the Durmaxes are too fussy and big, and the old 6.2's are a gamble for quality, but Cummins has a consistent product with good quality management and a record of adaptability.
A little food for thought.