Quote:

---

That engine stock wouldn't turn those times would it? Unless he's geared? And/or has other mods, maybe?

---

No maybe about it; my best guess on stock would be an 18 second quarter!

Dave

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

On a different note, a little over a year ago I dropped a 6BT/727 in my girlfriends `89 2wd 150 Ramcharger. I used 1 ton front coils and cut 1 1/2 rounds off. It sits the right height and rides nice. 23 mpg everyday.

---

I am thinking about doing almost the same, 85 D100. One thing I am on the wall about, do the 1/2 ton wheel bearings hold up? And how is the front tire wear? What tires are you using? Crossmember changes needed?
Not planning any heavy use, trips to the dump, maybe some light towing.
A friend bought the perfect donor Saturday, 93 D250 CTD/518, very rusty. $1300, I think I can get a deal. Runs and drives.
Thanks

---

I would use all the suspension, driveline and related components from the D250. The Cummins is over 1100 lbs fully dressed and routinely trashes front end components, ball joints, shocks and tires in my 1 ton trucks. No way I'd run a 5.9 CTD without having load range E tires, either.


Dave

---

Quote:

---

i've thought about it in the past but just can't justify the cost (right now). I like the sound of a 68 dart, 5.9 CTD, with od and something like a banks system to push it into the 700+hp range and pull over 20 mpg. I've seen a duramax in a 68 impala beat the pants off a Lambo in a 1/4 mile

---

EXACTLY! I've seen two different chevelle's, both with Duramax setups.... that walked all up AND down both sides of WHATEVER they were racing. I mean, it didn't really matter what they were racing, but for what it's worth, one car appeared to be in the 700'ish hp range, geared, and done up right, but it didn't matter. The smack down was laid before the guy finished racing and then drove his Muscle diesel home to the tune of around 25 mpg. Crazy.

It seems that the Duramax is probably the most feasible setup right now to do this (while being able to make serious power),

I'm gonna stay true to my Mopar faith right now (trying to stay Mopar all the way through), but I still won't lie in saying that I might, just might, consider doing something like a Duramax setup down the road......

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

i've thought about it in the past but just can't justify the cost (right now). I like the sound of a 68 dart, 5.9 CTD, with od and something like a banks system to push it into the 700+hp range and pull over 20 mpg. I've seen a duramax in a 68 impala beat the pants off a Lambo in a 1/4 mile

---

EXACTLY! I've seen two different chevelle's, both with Duramax setups.... that walked all up AND down both sides of WHATEVER they were racing. I mean, it didn't really matter what they were racing, but for what it's worth, one car appeared to be in the 700'ish hp range, geared, and done up right, but it didn't matter. The smack down was laid before the guy finished racing and then drove his Muscle diesel home to the tune of around 25 mpg. Crazy.

It seems that the Duramax is probably the most feasible setup right now to do this (while being able to make serious power),

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

i've thought about it in the past but just can't justify the cost (right now). I like the sound of a 68 dart, 5.9 CTD, with od and something like a banks system to push it into the 700+hp range and pull over 20 mpg. I've seen a duramax in a 68 impala beat the pants off a Lambo in a 1/4 mile

---

EXACTLY! I've seen two different chevelle's, both with Duramax setups.... that walked all up AND down both sides of WHATEVER they were racing. I mean, it didn't really matter what they were racing, but for what it's worth, one car appeared to be in the 700'ish hp range, geared, and done up right, but it didn't matter. The smack down was laid before the guy finished racing and then drove his Muscle diesel home to the tune of around 25 mpg. Crazy.

It seems that the Duramax is probably the most feasible setup right now to do this (while being able to make serious power),

---

Sad as it is, this may be true. The Cummins makes so much torque at such a low rpm, and does not rev very high, it makes for a difficult engine to drag race with. Whereas the Duracrap has much more in common with a muscle car V8, higher rpm capability, lower inital torque, V8 design, etc...Sucks, but it seems more adaptable than our favorite brand Cummins.

---

Sort of; the DM IS a better an easier choice to put in a car, but not because of the low RPM/High torque of a Cummins, but because the DM is shorter, lighter and lower. I can't imagine the butchery that would have to be done to a Dart to put a 5.9 Cummins in one!
There are many Cummins powered drag vehicles that do quite well and it is certain that it is FAR easier and cheaper to get big power out of a turbo diesel than a gas motor.

...even my daily driver puts out over 400hp and 800 ft lbs and gets almost 20mpg in a 8338 lb dually 4x4. Not bad!




Dave

Quote:

---

The DM is the hot ticket right now for drag racing. They're well ahead of the PS and putting a hurt on the CTD.
Where the CTD really shines is in HEAVY work. When the guys are building all-out pulling trucks the CTD is still the engine to beat.

The DM is certainly easier to stuff in a car than a CTD. Just like a 350 is easier to swap than a 440.

I have no interest in a 350 or a DM so I'll stick with a CTD.

---

I agree with all that, though I would still caution that the suspension and tires need to be able to properly handle the massive weight of the CTD....


Dave

Quote:

---

The DM is the hot ticket right now for drag racing. They're well ahead of the PS and putting a hurt on the CTD.
Where the CTD really shines is in HEAVY work. When the guys are building all-out pulling trucks the CTD is still the engine to beat.

The DM is certainly easier to stuff in a car than a CTD. Just like a 350 is easier to swap than a 440.

---

Quote:

---

I saw. That Monte carlo at MMW a few years back but he left not long after he got there

I almost forgot that thEre was a 68? Dart with a diesel in it....

---

Quote:

---

The real answer is WHY WOULD YOU EVEN BOTHER? Why would you put a 1200 lb low-rpm engine into a car designed to go fast and handle, at least a little?

If you're looking for fuel economy GET A DIFFERENT CAR!

The prices of any MOPAR muscle car have gone so high that to bastardize one with a Diesel engine makes no sense whatsoever. When you can't even get close to a decent E-body builder for less than $8,000, you tow your musclecar to wherever you need with your Cummins Diesel truck! Maybe, just maybe in an Imperial it would make sense. But there have got to be better Diesel engines for automotive use than that Cummins. And no musclecar deserves a smoker. Period.

R. (I feel better now)

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

The real answer is WHY WOULD YOU EVEN BOTHER? Why would you put a 1200 lb low-rpm engine into a car designed to go fast and handle, at least a little?

If you're looking for fuel economy GET A DIFFERENT CAR!

The prices of any MOPAR muscle car have gone so high that to bastardize one with a Diesel engine makes no sense whatsoever. When you can't even get close to a decent E-body builder for less than $8,000, you tow your musclecar to wherever you need with your Cummins Diesel truck! Maybe, just maybe in an Imperial it would make sense. But there have got to be better Diesel engines for automotive use than that Cummins. And no musclecar deserves a smoker. Period.

R. (I feel better now)

---

Feel better about what, being an idiot? Let him do as he pleases.

Im going to scrap my 90 dodge and put its CTD in a 51 ford truck, some say thats blasphemy.

I have a friend who would LOVE to try to put a CTD in a roadrunner. I think its interesting and would love to see a finished product.

---

A '51 Ford truck (assuming you put all the related HD stuff in); great! A roadrunner? ...doesn't make any logical sense at all but it's his car I guess....


Dave