| Author | Message | ||
| Don (198.253.206.229) Rating: |
I have not heard anything good about these guzzlers...paired with a Allison MT42 6 Speed...safe to assume about 3mpg? Anyone out there with experience on these motors? I am looking for a MH for weekend trips - not long haul...but thinking these old gals may not be worth the trouble...thoughts? Seeing one listed on a '65 Flxible conversion... Thanks, Don | ||
| doughtebonifiedbusnut (136.217.0.198)
Rating: N/A |
Hey Don Most of those flex's have that motor in them. If I had a chance to pic up a nice Flex ( I'm assuming it's clipper)I would do it in a heartbeat. That motor is easely rebuilt and ver7y dependable the downfall is that it does eat a lot of gas but you said you wanted it for short haul so the gas should not be the deciding factor. Once again if the clipper is nice go for itOh by the way there is a beautiful flex for sale on the busses for sale board. If thats the one your looking at grab it its a great coach. If I Nwas not as deeply into my crown as i am I would buy it in a second | ||
| FAST FRED (67.75.106.163) Rating: N/A |
A new Ford REAL truck engine from the wreckers , with Allison automatic is very inexpensive swop for the Boat Anchor 534. The difference between 3 mpg and 7 to 9 mpg will pay for the swop very fast. FAST FRED | ||
| Don (198.253.206.182) Rating: N/A |
FF, "Inexpensive"...along what price line. Indeed it is the Flex on the bulliton board...tried to get up there this afternoon to look - but folks not around. Pics look nice - but where I am I do not have a shop I could use so I would have to pay for the swap out...and I don't have a clue what that would run me. Any insight isgreatly appreciated. Cheers, Don | ||
| FAST FRED (67.75.113.124) Rating: N/A |
Have seen the engine & tranny go for under 2K at local truch wrecking yard , from a 1 year old truck. These hae used to power many trucks that are under 26,000 lbs , so should be a scalded cat with an 18,000lb Flex. FAST FRED | ||
| Phil Dumpster (12.230.214.167) Rating: N/A |
If you don't want to do an engine swap, but are willing to do some tinkering, consider putting a newer/more modern aftermarket carb on that engine. The stock carburetors on most older truck engines were rather small and tended to run rich. Also consider making a set of headers for the exhaust. If you have a grand extra, you might want to consider an aftermarket fuel injection system. Most come with all you need and can be adapted to most any engine. You program it with a laptop computer and a serial cable. A bit cheaper but workable would be to get the computer and sensors and injectors out of a later model Ford pickup with a 460 (from a wrecking yard) and with the help of a wiring diagram adapt it to that engine. Fuel injection is going to save more fuel than any carburetor, computer controlled or not, could ever do. If the bus is geared so the engine spins at 3500 RPM at highway speeds, then you're not going to see much of an improvement with any engine until you change the rear axle ratio to something a bit more reasonable. | ||
| Johnny (67.241.166.145)
Rating: N/A |
The 534 is a huge gas hog-probably 3-4MPG. However, FF is off the wall--it's one of the strongest gassers Ford used. A 460 won't do much better (the 1992 F-350 tow truck at work gets 4-5MPG with OD & EFI), & will probably be down on power, unless built specifically for the application. EFI from a 460 will probably not work. If it sees lots of use, a conversion to a diesel might be worthwhile. For occasional use, don't bother. | ||
| FAST FRED (67.75.106.182) Rating: N/A |
"A 460 won't do much better (the 1992 F-350 tow truck at work gets 4-5MPG with OD & EFI" NOPE, My recomendation was to find a truck engine, FROM A REAL TRUCK!!!, you have described a car engine in a heavy pickup truck, usually sold to suckers, based on first low cost. Look at the F700 and up style REAL trucks to find a a genuine TRUCK powerplant, and genuine TRUCK tranny. FAST FRED | ||
| ralph7 (208.155.122.163) Rating: N/A |
534 Ford with stick 5-7 mpg,worhed good to 150,000 miles with little or no problems, plugs an oil changes-oil usage ok at qt.to 250mi in hard use [44,0000gvw all day long]. leave carb alone it's good easy to work on hope it is befroe '72. Engines after '72 had emission stuff,dist advance springs an carb internal parts different, but still a good engine. | ||
| Don (198.253.206.213) Rating: N/A |
Thanks for the thoughts...I suppose the problem is that I think my rig will get less use than I would like it to have - which is why I am leery of diesels...short trips and lack of use is not good for any machines - but from my limited experience the diesels fair much worse. Also - repairs are higher. FF - I will look in to the F700 swap and see what prices I will be looking at...again, will be looking to pay out for major work, so that is a huge consideration in purchasing... Phil - good point about the rear ratio - I will have to ask about that one...have a call in for more details but folks apparently are away for the weekend. Thanks again, Don | ||
| Johnny (65.224.20.161)
Rating: N/A |
FF, many, many, MANY F-600/700/800's (and even the big L7000/8000's) had 370's, 429's, 460's, and yes, 534's. The older ones (like the 1972 F-800 rollback at work) had the old FT engines (that one has a 2bbl 361FT, the 391 was also available). What, pray tell, is a "real truck engine"? A diesel? Sure, but the fortune spent converting will buy plenty of gas for that 534. They're gas hogs--any gas-powered MDT, & pretty much any big gasser in any truck, will suck down the gas--but they're plenty durable. Many are kind of down on power (like the previously-mentioned <200HP 361 2bbl in a 31,500lb GVWR F-800), but they last forever--that FT has never been apart, near as I can tell. | ||
| DaveD (142.46.199.18)
Rating: N/A |
We used to have an F-750 (if I recall correctly) at work that had a label under the hiood identifying the engine as a rebuilt 352 (not 351) cid V-8. In the last year or so before it was disposed of it could sit for weeks or even months and start on the first roll. I don't remember gas consumption being all that horrendous. Dave D | ||
| Johnny (67.242.221.91)
Rating: N/A |
That's actually a smaller version (smaller bore, same stroke, IIRC) of the 361FT in the F-800 I referred to earlier. It shared bore & stroke (4.00"x3.50") with the later Ford 351 V8's, but nothing else. A truck 352 would be mid-60's, I'd expect. And yes, that does mean that the various Ford "351" V8's are, in fact, 352ci. | ||
| FAST FRED (67.75.111.143) Rating: N/A |
"the 391 was also available). What, pray tell, is a "real truck engine"? A diesel?" Good grief NO , To swop to a diesel may require a different fuel tank , different rear end ratios and a custom exhaust.AS we;ll as motor mounts & radiator hookup. Frequently "Family Swops" (534 out 429 in) only require new motor mounts. The old 391 and later 429 are be real truck (not pickup truck) engines. If you have valve rotators , & stellited valves its usually a REAL GAS TRuck engine , and as noted will start after months of unuse without problems. For a little used RV this is FAR Superior to any diesel I have yet heard of. Cheap in the truck junk yards too! FAST FRED | ||
| Johnny (67.241.224.233)
Rating: N/A |
So, a 429 is a real truck engine, but a 460 (no more than a stroked 429) isn't? What planet did that come from? Considering the 429 disappeared a while back (I think 1982-83 was the last year), the 460 (along with the 370) was the main gas MDT powerplant. If memory serves, the 370/429/460 & the 534 are completely different engine designs. BTW, I can dig up 5-6 MDT 460's for every MDT 429 I find, rebuild parts are cheaper, & they make more power. I've seen TWO 429's in the last 5 years, & a good 20 460's. | ||
| FAST FRED (67.75.111.226) Rating: N/A |
The KEY is to read the code to find out which factory (car or REAL truck) plant assembled the unit. A 460 from a car is a different unit from the units in trucks.Although both are labeled 460. Confuse them at your expense. FAST FRED | ||
| Johnny (67.242.221.219) Rating: N/A |
Well, considering the many 460's that I've seen that started their service in MDT's (VIN-verified), they aren't hard to find. They're almost as common in MDT's as the 370's--and several dozen times moreso than the rather-rare truck 429. I grab every one I can--racers grab them (as well as most HD truck gas engines) as fast as I find them. Heck--I pulled 2 running 4-bolt, steel-crank 350's from Chevy C-30 chassis-cabs just last weekend, & have already sold both for twice what I paid. One thing hasn't changed in 30+ years: hot rodders still want truck engines to build. | ||
| Phil Dumpster (12.230.214.167) Rating: N/A |
A little Ford trivia for you guys - all FE and FT big block Ford engines after 1966 or so have "352" cast in the front of the block on the driver side, with the exception of the 427 side oiler which was a unique block, and the 428 Cobra Jet which was the next revision of that block, clearanced for a longer stroke. The FE engines were the 331/352/360/390/427/428, while the FT engines were the 361 and 391. FT engines differ from FE in that the block deck is a little taller, the pistons have an extra compression ring, the crank is forged steel, and the valves have rotators and hardened seats. All of these are "Y" block design, where the cast iron skirt of the block extends below the center line of the crankshaft, and some even have cross bolted main bearing caps with four bolts per cap, two in the conventional sense and two additional bolts going through this skirt and into the cap from the side. Back to the subject at hand, specifically the 534, the only reasonable mods you could do would be what I suggested above. Perhaps add to that having a new camshaft ground for it which would have the same profile and duration of a modern motorhome cam. The big problem is age. You can find high performance parts for, say, a Ford FE engine but they will cost more and selection will be more limited. For the FT and the 534, the situation is even more grim. Perhaps swap meets where older parts are traded would be where you could find stuff. Going to a more modern or popular engine solves much of the aftermarket availability problem. Small block Chevys are cheap to tinker with because high performance parts for them are common and competition keeps prices down. I still say adapting the fuel injection system from a late model (i.e. 1996 or 1997) Ford 460 would be the best single improvment you could make for that engine, along with a good rear end ratio and a free flowing exhaust system. It does mean making some parts yourself, but if you are knowledgeable about working with metal and have the tools and time it's definately workable. It isn't brain surgery. Failing that, at least a good aftermarket 4 barrel carb like an Edelbrock (which is really a Carter AFB) or a Holley Double Pumper would be a good start, with the intake manifold opened up to accept the bigger carb and an assortment of jets available to find the proper size. It would be a cheap (under $350) improvement over the stock carb. Whatever you do, if you want to keep that engine and improve fuel economy, you will have to make a set of headers for it. I doubt you'll find any NOS headers laying around, but you never know. The bottom end of FT engines are for all intents and purposes indestructable. As long as the bearings have oil, you will not have bottom end problems. The main weakness of these engines is the oiling system. The oil passages run from the oil pump to the cam bearings and the hydraulic lifter feeds, and then to the main bearings. A standard "hot rodder" mod when an engine is apart is to chase all of the oil passages with a suitable drill bit to open the passages up as far as possible. A more esoteric trick is to mimmic the side oiler block (which solved this problem but didn't allow for hydraulic lifters) by adding an external oil passage with tubing on the right side of the block, drilling carfully into the existing main bearing oil galleries and brazing the tubing into place. In either event, an aftermarket high volume oil pump is essential. | ||
| FAST FRED (67.75.101.234) Rating: N/A |
Phil , I think Don is willing to do an engine swop , just cant be a really expensive solution. What modern Ford truck engine should he be looking for & how will he know when he has found it? (my simple method is to see what tranny is bolted to it) Suggestions for Don to upgrade 40 years? FAST FRED | ||
| Phil Dumpster (12.230.214.167) Rating: N/A |
7.3 power stroke out of a mid 90s pickup. It's a Navistar engine, but it would be almost a perfect fit to that Flxible. 16 miles per gallon would be a reasonable expectation with such an engine/bus combination. A few years ago I tested a 1997 F350 pulling a large cabin cruiser at freeway speeds. The combination weighed around 20K, acceleration was great, even with the automatic 4 speed. If a gasoline engine must be used, I'd recommend most any big block gasoline engine from any medium duty truck or school bus built in the mid 90s, and use whatever transmission it has. I would avoid any V10 engines on the market, as well as the Triton line from Ford. A Chevy 427 truck engine would also be a good choice, but it's smaller 366 brother would work as well but not be as powerful. Too bad the small block Chevy is too small for this application. It's probably the cheapest V8 out there. The big problem with recommending any particular engine is that it is easy to make a recommendation, but implementing it is another matter. I have never seen the engine compartment of a Clipper so I am not familiar with how much space is available. Does the coach have to keep the stock transmission because of a custom case design? Which way does the engine turn? Cooling system capacity of the radiator(s) in the coach? All of those questions are variables which may be limited in what can be changed, or what the owner of the coach can do to change it. When you get into this sort of work, the costs can add up quickly. Witness those who have converted their MCIs and Eagles to use the Series 60. Sure, you can find the engine on the used market for less than $5k, but you may end up spending another $15K to $20K to make it work in your bus. The cheapest solution, if that 534 engine is in good condition otherwise, would be to make improvements to it. | ||
| Johnny (67.242.221.196)
Rating: N/A |
First, let me recommend running away from a PowerStroke diesel swap as fast as you can,. unless you like spending the rest of your life running wires. The earlier (1987-94) 7.3 IDI diesel would be much better. Second, & really doubt a 460 EFI system would even come close to working on a 534--a universal EFI system from Holley would probably work better. | ||
| Don (205.56.145.34) Rating: N/A |
Everyone, Appreciate all the posts - lots of typing and knowledge. Based on what I am seeing - I will have to take a look at the set up and bring it to someone who think they can work a swap. I know that I will not be able to do it - so I would be paying (likely out the nose) to get it done. I have not been able to talk to the owners yet...they may have already looked into it and opted to sell instead...but they may have more to add. Will let you know what I find out. Thanks again, Don | ||
| FAST FRED (67.75.110.83) Rating: N/A |
The GOOD NEWS is for what you want you DONT need a Bus shop, or "diesel" $pecalist. The swop is similar (although with a different tranny) to what the car nuts are doing already. That increases the source of conversion folks about 500 times , and should cut the swop labor price to a grand or two MAX!!! Enjoy, FAST FRED | ||
| Phil Dumpster (12.230.214.167) Rating: N/A |
Johnny, the DI Powerstroke engine has enough improvements to warrant the extra brain damage to transplant it to another vehicle. The computer controls are actually kinda neat to tinker with, sorta like DDEC systems but not as shrouded in secrecy. As to fuel economy, Powerstroke beats virtually all of the alternatives - 7.3 IDI would give perhaps 11 or 12 MPG, gasoline with EFI 6 or 7 MPG at best, with gasoline carbureted at 4 or so MPG. Powerstroke would be in the 15 to 16 range. As for a 460 EFI system, the EEC-IV system is documented and readily available cheaply since it is in so many vehicles. The attribute which makes it workable on just about any engine is that it is adaptive, it learns how the engine operates and conforms itself to those parameters. Ford designed the system this way to account for manufacturing tolerances of various components (allows low bidder to supply sensors and servos without regard to tight tolerances) as well as to compensate for engine wear. The initial constants programmed into a PCM for the 460 are close enough for the 534, and the adaptive parameters when the system operated in closed loop mode will allow it to work just fine, and give better fuel ecomony than any carbureted intake system would. If you are technically inclined and know how to program an embedded system, you can even reprogram the PCM to do whatever you want. It uses a Ford proprietary version of Intel's 8096 16 bit embedded microprocessor made by Motorola, and executes the same instruction set. Provisions have been made on the PCM to allow the stock program to be disabled and new software on an external ROM to be executed instead. Even with the stock 460 program, a 534 using the EEC-IV or EEC-V system will run much better, more efficiently, and cleaner than the stock 1965 era setup. Here's a link to EEC-IV/EEC-V information - http://acc-electronics.com/cloud/tc_eec.htm The big problem with a universal system like the Holley EFI is the cost - EEC-IV or EEC-V can be put together from a well stocked junkyard for less than a tenth of the cost of a new aftermarket system. | ||
| Johnny (67.242.221.168) Rating: N/A |
Have you ever seen the WIRING a PSD requires to run? I'm not exaggerating when I say it looks like the wiring for the Enterprise! A turbo IDI 7.3 will be pretty close to a PSD for power (actually, the late IDI's with the dealer-installed aftermarket ATS & Banks turbos had MORE power than the non-intercooled PSD), should match it in mileage, & will do so for about half the cost and less than one thousandth the hassle. Also, any, and I truly mean ANY truck shop can deal with an IDI...not so the computerized PSD. | ||
| Phil Dumpster (12.230.214.167) Rating: N/A |
Yes I have seen the wiring, and it's the price you pay for electronic fuel injection on that engine. No matter what, you can't beat the performance or the fuel economy of that engine over its alternatives. Some people look at the SFI system on my Ford inline 6 and think it looks like the Enterprise. Commectors carrying a hundred wires, sensors all over the place, including four in the exhaust, but the benefit of all of that is an engine that keeps the EPA sorta happy, and keeps me really happy with 21 miles per gallon on the freeway. Internal diagnostic capabilities to make troubleshooting the system easy are a nice side effect as well. | ||
| Phil (204.89.170.126) Rating: N/A |
My experience with the Power Stroke is 50,000 miles in a 1999 F250 4X4 Supercab. Empty I got 16-17 MPG. Pulling a 27 foot 9,000 pound fifth wheel, 8.5 MPG. Your mileage may vary!!!! Lots of power but mileage was not its strong point. My 37 foot, 22,000 pound Monaco with 260 HP Cummins gets 11.5 under similer conditions and speeds. | ||
| Peter Broadribb (Madbrit) (65.73.177.137)
Rating: N/A |
I've got a '91 F-350 dually crew cab with a normally aspirated 7.3 diesel automatic 2 wheel drive and get 14 to 16 on the freeways at 80 mph. I get between 8 and 10 mpg with a 7000 - 9000 lb gross enclosed trailer behind it. Not as much power as a Power-Stroke, but the mileage seems close enough to me. Of course, put the same trailer behind my 440 powered Apollo and it gets 4 - 6 mpg, but it only gets 7 on a good day anyway....... LOL. Peter. | ||
| Rick White (Ipn) (206.176.148.173)
Rating: N/A |
I have a '93 F250 SuperCab normally aspirated 7.3L with a 5spd & 3.73 rear end. Empty I get 17-18mpg @ 70-75mph. Pulling 7000# at the same speeds with the A/C I get 11-13mpg. I also have a '01 F250 Crewcab PowerStroke 7.3L w/Automatic (I forget which rearend but not 4.11). At the same speeds I am seeing 18-19mpg. What is wierd I have seen mileage as high as 20-22mpg when I run long streatches of 80-85mph. Having both trucks I can tell you there is a big difference in Power and responce in the 2001. My only disappointment is the fuel mileage. I was hopeing to see the 20-22mpg at the 70-75mph speeds. I guess I would have had to keep the stick to get the mileage but the Automatic is so much nicer in traffic :^) Rick Oh Both trucks are 2WD. | ||
| Johnny (67.242.221.15) Rating: N/A |
You're all comparing apples to rutabegas--drive a 7.3 IDI turbo, not a NA 7.3 IDI. My 1992 F-350 4x4 has the IDI with a dealer-installed ATS turbo, a 5-speed, & 3.73 gears. Before I installed the Reading utility body, I was getting 17-18MPG in the winter, & 19-20 in the summer. Now, with the heavier body & more drag, I'm getting ~18-19. I have over 320,000 miles on it. The extra stuff for a PSD is simply not worth it. Check with www.thedieselstop.com (was Ford-diesel.com) about it--the one constant about anyone who has done a PSD swap: They'll never do another one. | ||
| FAST FRED (67.75.111.165) Rating: N/A |
The orig Flex Clippers had straight 8 Buicks so there is enough room for most anything. Nicest I have seen was diesel conversion (he did use the coach enough to justify huge job) that had Intl DT 466 with turbo. 250 to 300 HP makes these 16,000 to 18,000 coaches FLY. (Equal to 1000HP in an Eagle) And he clained 12 to 15 MPG , which I believe from the tiny frontal area and sleek design. FAST FRED | ||
| Tony H. (Bluegrass) (216.207.2.147)
Rating: N/A |
I owned a 534 gas engine and It got about 3 MPG In a 10 ton dump truck, I am so glad that you are getting that kind of milage, I bet that you still believe In Santa Clause to. | ||
| Johnny (67.242.221.210) Rating: N/A |
If it will fit, I suggest a Cummins B (5.9 litre). This is used in everything from Freightliner MDT's, to shuttle buses, to pusher motorhomes, to Dodge pickups, to boats. 500HP from one of these (while keeping typical Cummins rock-solid durability) is as close as the phone...there are plenty of DAILY-DRIVEN (200,000+ mile) Dodge trucks running more than that. I didn't realize there was room for an inline-six...I figured everyone was suggesting a V8 for packaging reasons. | ||
| Peter Broadribb (Madbrit) (208.186.36.44)
Rating: N/A |
Johnny, What does the 5.9 need to make 500hp? A total rebuild or a rechip? I thought you needed to start with the larger 8.3 to make that sort of hp easily. What sort of torque do you get with a 500hp 5.9? Peter. | ||
| FAST FRED (67.75.106.182) Rating: N/A |
The only problem with he Cummins B (5.9 litre). is you can hear them as far away as you could hear a Harley!!!! Although they have a reasonable reputation and are really cheap , the insane amount of noise coming out from a running unit is enough to turn ME off them forever!! FAST FRED | ||
| Tom Caffrey (Pvcces) (64.114.233.144)
Rating: N/A |
Amen, Fred. The noise is part of the reason for the economy. Very high pressure rapid injection makes them rattle like hell. Tom Caffrey PD4106-2576 Suncatcher | ||
| Johnny (67.242.221.17)
Rating: N/A |
"What does the 5.9 need to make 500hp? A total rebuild or a rechip?" Somewhere in between. The stock bottom end is ample, the head is OK (but, for an engine-out repower, a new head gasket couldn't hurt). IIRC, you need (for the pre-24V mechanical engine) new injectors, tweaked injector pump, and maybe a modified turbo. I think the 24V will run 350-400HP with just a chip, but are WAY more spendy. Try the turbo diesel register for Cummins stuff--there's a lunatic fringe there running O-ringed heads with gasketless nitrogen seals (like an Indycar), twin turbos with insane boost (100+psi), propane...and pushing 8-900HP. On a stock bottom end. Yes, the ISB is THAT overbuilt. 450-500HP from a Cummins is child's play. A 5.9 B/ISB is certainly no louder than a 2-stroke Detroit "screaming Jimmy". | ||
| Peter Broadribb (Madbrit) (65.73.229.4)
Rating: N/A |
All this talk about horsepower, is fine and dandy, but what about the torque. That's what actually moves that 48,000 lbs down the road and up those hills. Peter. | ||
| Johnny (67.241.166.159) Rating: N/A |
According to FF, the Flex Clippers are ~18K...and Dodge owners who hotshot regularly gross half-again that (some run 30,000+) on a Cummins-powered Ram 3500. Torque on a tweaked 5.9 is anywhere from 600+ to over 1400lb/ft on the wilder engines. Roughly, a B will have torque equal to about twice the HP...not exact, but it will give you a ballpark number. | ||
| Mark R. Obtinario (Cowlitzcoach) (206.163.13.86)
Rating: N/A |
I have been following the discussion and have decided to stick my oar in. In my experience, the Ford 534 is best used for a boat anchor unless you happen to own your own oil well. In school bus use, hooked up to an automatic, we were pleased if the bus avereaged more than 2 MPG. I have seen them in 10-wheeler flatbed dump applications where 1 MPG was typical. Since the Clipper originally left the factory with a Buick straight 8, almost any inline engine will fit back there. Probably the easiest swap would be to the Cummins 'B' or 'C' engines, the DD series 50, or the IHC DT466. If you want to get adventuresome, some of the more less common engines will fit as well. I am thinking of the engines in the Ford Cargo, the Isuzu, Mitsubishi, UD, Mercedes-Benz, Volvo, and Mack tilt cab trucks. Any of the inline diesel engines would be a better and less expensive choice than almost any gas engine and most diesel V-type engines. The nice thing about the Cummins 'B' and the IHC DT466 is both engines are available without electronic packages. While I would be the first to admit an electronically controlled engine will produce more power with fewer emissions on less fuel, the down side is swapping all of the electronics into an older vehicle can be problematical. Regardless of which power package you choose, most can be found in a wrecked donor truck for just a few $K. Since the Clipper was a built for revenue service, if the body has no rust, it will keep going just about forever. With the right power package it will take off like a rocket. Good luck and happy trails. Mark O. |
