Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: 6.5 GEP NA or 5.9 12v NA?

  1. #11
    2 Star General erasedhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    666
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 90 Times in 52 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cucvmule View Post
    I would 6.5 the truck and keep it as simple as you can, cost. Take the 800 and freshen up some components.

    To neuter a 5.9 when already not impressive when stock, is a step back in the power category. Put some cash into the 5.9 in a rebuild and find a Dodge to put it in. A tired 400k motor would be better if you major it and then you can maintain for another 500k.

    There was a Man here putting a 292 gas into a CUCV that was a unique and interesting choice. I know that the 292 is a wise alternative for power and economy, plus an easier option to find compatible components.

    Good Luck

    Personally I don't care about power at all.

    6.5 Would be cheaper. Just comparing the two side by side, a 5.9 being an inline 6 is much simpler in design. But the conversion into a cucv would be costly.
    1986 M1028 w/ Dana 70HD Dually
    [SOLD] 1994 M998A1 w/GEP 6.5TD & 4l80e

  2. #12
    4 Star General sandcobra164's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    2,920
    Thanks
    162
    Thanked 2,625 Times in 1,065 Posts

    Default

    I think you've found your answer as to motive power. Now as to your statement of being limited on fabrication skills and budget makes me question why you want to put a manual transmission in. Do you have a currently running truck or is this a brainstorming session?
    84 AM General M923 "General Non-Sense"
    85 Chevrolet M1028 CUCV "Sarge"
    05 Silver Eagle M1102 (Sarge's New 4 Wheeler Hauler)

    Gone but not forgotten....
    71 AM General M35A2 "Big Trucks"
    87 Pribbs Manufacturing M105A2

  3. #13
    2 Star General erasedhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    666
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 90 Times in 52 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sandcobra164 View Post
    I think you've found your answer as to motive power. Now as to your statement of being limited on fabrication skills and budget makes me question why you want to put a manual transmission in. Do you have a currently running truck or is this a brainstorming session?
    I do have a currently running truck. 6.2, th400.
    Rusty as all ****, but low miles.

    Im mostly brainstorming for now since I still have a little ways to go paying off the truck.
    But my reason for a manual is really only because Ive had bad experiences with autos in military trucks. I just want something with extreme simplicity. As little moving parts and electronics as humanly possible.
    1986 M1028 w/ Dana 70HD Dually
    [SOLD] 1994 M998A1 w/GEP 6.5TD & 4l80e

  4. #14
    General
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Crystal City Mo
    Posts
    528
    Thanks
    1,389
    Thanked 441 Times in 232 Posts

    Default

    Well it seems that in your quest for simplicity economics are not a factor, but that is one of your requests. Almost anything is possible with cash behind the endgame.

    The CUCV is a simple economical truck to start with. So why make it complicated?

    An 80hp at the rear wheels, na diesel for simplicity, not concerned about power but want a manual. I believe that you have answered your own question. Now you want affirmation?
    Belt Fed Multi Barrel Motor Motivated

    Help From Above

    GAU 8 See You Next Time

  5. #15
    2 Star General erasedhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    666
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 90 Times in 52 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cucvmule View Post
    Well it seems that in your quest for simplicity economics are not a factor, but that is one of your requests. Almost anything is possible with cash behind the endgame.

    The CUCV is a simple economical truck to start with. So why make it complicated?

    An 80hp at the rear wheels, na diesel for simplicity, not concerned about power but want a manual. I believe that you have answered your own question. Now you want affirmation?
    I was mainly looking for information on a 5.9 swap in general.
    Would've been better just to say it was going to stay turbo, I could've spent less time trying to defend my stance.
    1986 M1028 w/ Dana 70HD Dually
    [SOLD] 1994 M998A1 w/GEP 6.5TD & 4l80e

  6. #16
    General
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Crystal City Mo
    Posts
    528
    Thanks
    1,389
    Thanked 441 Times in 232 Posts

    Default

    erasedhammer, honestly I like your idea. I believe that if you look around, maybe you tried already, do a search for the 5.9 you may find some good intel on
    Steel Soldiers.

    I have watched guy's at work do amazing things with the 5.9, but in Dodge Trucks, I surmise, to spend more time and bucks on a donor puller. They stay with the same chassis and use the money on repair or replacement on the 5.9 meltdown.

    The reason I believe in the turbo is you can use low boost pressure and still be economical, and have some useable torque to move a 6,000lb truck smartly.
    Belt Fed Multi Barrel Motor Motivated

    Help From Above

    GAU 8 See You Next Time

  7. #17
    2 Star General erasedhammer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    666
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 90 Times in 52 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cucvmule View Post
    erasedhammer, honestly I like your idea. I believe that if you look around, maybe you tried already, do a search for the 5.9 you may find some good intel on
    Steel Soldiers.

    I have watched guy's at work do amazing things with the 5.9, but in Dodge Trucks, I surmise, to spend more time and bucks on a donor puller. They stay with the same chassis and use the money on repair or replacement on the 5.9 meltdown.

    The reason I believe in the turbo is you can use low boost pressure and still be economical, and have some useable torque to move a 6,000lb truck smartly.
    Just lost the engine that I was looking at so I guess I'll have to keep an eye on stuff for now. Focus on cleaning the truck up and see which engine will be cheaper.
    1986 M1028 w/ Dana 70HD Dually
    [SOLD] 1994 M998A1 w/GEP 6.5TD & 4l80e

  8. #18
    4 Star General NDT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Camp Wood/LC, TX
    MVPA
    4954
    Posts
    7,215
    Thanks
    2,094
    Thanked 3,624 Times in 1,917 Posts

    Default

    The 6.5 TD in my 2000 Chevy K3500 has more power than I know what to do with. It will pull 20,000 lbs up a long hill easy and spin tires if I jump on the throttle. I wouldn't dream of replacing it with a Cummins.

  9. #19
    4 Star General sandcobra164's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Leesburg, GA
    Posts
    2,920
    Thanks
    162
    Thanked 2,625 Times in 1,065 Posts

    Default

    I understand distrust of automatic transmissions yet as society evolves I only have 1 manual transmission vehicle in my fleet of personal vehicles. The CUCV you have has a TH-400 transmission which boasts many accolades of reliability. It is not a weak spot and the 6.2 would not likely upset it in your quest for an economical vehicle. It will upset you in this application because it is not an overdrive transmission and does not have the torque converter lock up function. Even so, you could easily expect 17 mpg combined out of a stock M1028 if you roll mostly highway.
    84 AM General M923 "General Non-Sense"
    85 Chevrolet M1028 CUCV "Sarge"
    05 Silver Eagle M1102 (Sarge's New 4 Wheeler Hauler)

    Gone but not forgotten....
    71 AM General M35A2 "Big Trucks"
    87 Pribbs Manufacturing M105A2

  10. #20
    4 Star General
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Tisbury, Massachusetts
    Posts
    1,525
    Thanks
    143
    Thanked 388 Times in 258 Posts

    Default

    The 5.9 is a tight fit in CUCV engine compartment, and will take some fabrication. In the one I've seen motor is shoehorned in at an odd angle and the valve cover still almost touches the firewall. The truck is loud and rattly as all get out too.

    Don't get me wrong, I love my 6BT with NV4500, but it is in a '97 Dodge.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •