>J-L,
> I don't know why someone else would want the 2.5 (Iron Duke), but I know
>why I would choose it. Simplicity.
I agree completely with Kirk here. The old cast iron GM four &
Mericruiser engines are simple, rugged, about half again more powerful
without mods than the 2.25L engine, lighter in weight and gets better
fuel economy in proper tune. Most versions can fit without any body
modifications. And you can get by with using the stock gearbox and
drivetrain.
It is the simplest conversion out there and probably the cheapest in
general.
I think it is a natural for an 88. I didn't go that way because I drive
an expedition equipped 109 RV and 120-125 HP just wasn't enough to go
highway speed up long steep grades.
The in line six is a natural for a 109. given the extra weight. They
have lots of torque. A GM inline six requires very little effort into a
109 originally set up for a six. It takes 75-80% of the work of fitting
a V8 to put an inline six into a 109 with a four cylinder bay.
> The other opinion (yours) would likely be to simply fit the 250 or 300
>as you did. Great! I would love that as well, but it involves much more
>work which I don't have time or money for.
Converting a four cylinder bay to an inline six or V8 is not for the
faint of heart nor the thin of pocket book.
> My fear is the destruction of
>other parts of the truck under the torque these engines put out.
Once you get past the power of a stock 250 ci inline six you need to
upgrade the gearbox and the rear diff. The diff's a piece of cake but
the gearbox has it's own set of adaption issues.
It would basically take a modified flowed 9:1 LR head, larger dia exhaust
system, special cam and Weber two venturi carb & intake manifold to maybe
equal the stock output of the old Iron Duke engine. Cost wise the Iron
Duke may be cheaper.
TeriAnn Wakeman Marigold Ltd.
Santa Cruz, California Web design, site updating, testing
webmaster@overlander.net search engine optimization, graphics
and more
http://www.overlander.net/Marigold/index.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jun 12 2001 - 12:34:31 EDT