I have a Chevy C65 1976 model. It has a gas 427, and 5 speed with two speed rear end. It uses a LOT of gas. I have an opportunity to upgrade to a fire truck. It is a Top Kick GMC 1990 a bit heavier. It has a Caterpillar 3208 naturally aspirated 10.4 litre V8 coupled to an Allison automatic. Automatic is not my preference, but I'll live with it if it is dependable. It has 31000 miles, and an unspecified amount of sitting still running. These small town fire trucks, if bought new are usually pretty nice, and a long way from worn out. Anyone with any advice? Willie
The last of the 3208's weren't bad engines, with 31K miles and no doubt some pumping and idle time, it wouldn't scare me too badly. That said.. which Allison trans does it have? 545 or 600 series? That's going to be the game changer. I worked on trucks with the 3208 and 545's and well it wasn't pretty, but they were easy to pull and rebuild. 643's or 653's were much more reliable. Believe it or not, some Turbo 400 parts could actually make a 545 more reliable, Forward clutch plates come to mind IIRC.
I'm not sure which Allison.
That is the 64 dollar question. I would find out which one and then go from there. A 545 might be fine for a service truck or anything else around 26K or less, but not to tow a dozer or backhoe around.
1990 would be toward the last of the 3208's. Naturals could be set from 170 hp to 230, a turbo one will be 230 or 250. I used to have 2 in my 25 ton grove cranes, I've since changed them to 8.3 cummins. 3208's start really easy in cold weather. I had better luck with the natural I had than the turbo, but the two cranes they were installed in were both right around 50,000lbs, which is really too much for a 3208. I would get around 4-6 years out of them in that application. If you're just making a small box dump out of it, you should be fine, its just not a 425hp 3406. If the automatic gives you fits, it wouldn't be hard to find a small box rt or rto613, or even a 9513 and put behind it. Cut a hole in the floor, maybe a support bracket, and get the driveline remade. I guess more important to me, would be if it is hydraulic brakes, or air brakes. If it was hydraulic, I probably wouldn't be interested.
If it has a MT 653 or 643 and it is in your price range, shifts up and down smoothly on a test drive and has clean looking ATF in it, you'll never look back. The 653 would be preferable to me because of the low 1st gear. In the ready mix biz, a good way to ruin a driver is let them drive a truck with a Allison, you'll need a club to make them drive a standard transmission. Chances are it will be geared fairly low, maybe 65 mph top speed.
I don't think you would find a 500 series behind a 3208. I did not hate the 3208 much back in the day but nowadays I would be worried about that dinosaur/pig of a motor no matter how few miles. Around here all fire trucks with these kinds of year/specs were 55.000 mph at governed RPM.
It has air brakes, It is labeled 250 HP. I have to think a 10.4 litre will have adequate torque. This won't be an oval track racer, but I'd hope to avoid 20 cars behind me as I climb each hill. Could a governor be overrided? Could the engine be turned up?
There are different rpm settings, but its just changing where the stop lever is at on the throttle linkage, there's nothing different in the motors. If I remember right, they came as 2600, 2800 or 3000 rpm settings. It's not a stout motor for like adding big injectors or anything. What's your gross weight now with the dozer loaded up- probably not over 30,000lbs are you? Truck and dozer together? That's great that its air brakes, and you'd also have air if you went to a manual. The manual trans would deal better with sitting around, if you don't use it all the time. Plus 9 or 13 speeds in the hills of VT is much nicer than a 4 or 5 speed allison. I wouldn't swap until the allison gave you trouble, then decide if you wanted to change or rebuild the allison. The 3208 would be much better on fuel than the 427 gas, and you probably won't care if it only goes 55. I actually didn't mind mine so bad, its just I was asking too much out of them. The turbo motors are quieter than the natural's, but both were smooth running motors. I'd take the 3208 any day over the later 3176 and 3126's. Those later ones are expensive to work on and much less reliable. Plus you have to have a cat man close by to hook his computer to it, which is also really expensive.
I used to maintain a fleet of 20 IH S-1850 trucks with 545 Aliisons behind 210 HP 3208's pulling single axle semi trailers. the engines weren't much trouble, but I got good at rebuilding 545's.
It is amazing how slow these motors are for how big they are. Take my word for it, it will be slow. But it will get the job done. It is not as bad as its 1970s/1980s competitors, the 8.2 Detroit, 9.0 International, some Cummins V8 I have never seen, those were real awful. 250 was pushing it for this engine, you don't want to go there. A truck that old, just use it a little while to make money to buy a truck more to your liking, don't try to hot rod a 3208. Also they are not real good on fuel. Smooth and quiet, I wish they still made them like that. The model between the awful electronic ones and the 3208 was the 3116. They have their own set of problems but they strike me as a much more modern engine than the old pig 3208. I don't have much experience with the 3116, kind of skipped over them. In 2018, which would you rather have?
I'm 61 years old. This is my last truck. I won't use it a lot. I put 2000-3000 miles a year. Truth is I can't get some jobs without a truck, but it won't make money. If the backhoe needs to be somewhere, or if a load of sand is needed, I was always frustrated with haulers who couldn't fit me into their schedule. For me, owning a truck is about convenience, not profit. I can learn of a ditch that needs to be dug 2 hours before completion, transport a machine, leave my son in charge of digging. By the time I've returned with a load of sand, the ditch is ready. Saving a fortune, and hiring a trucker might take a week, and the sand gets dumped at a time, and place that makes it inconvenient. I, or a builder I depend on for work buy a machine 100 miles from home, I don't have to beg a trucker, who will do it at his convenience, not mine. I make no pretence this will make money, except in a very indirect way. It replaces a truck that is less user friendly.
The 3116 was 170HP and up, 6.6Liters, so not a direct replacement for a 3208. I wouldn't want any electronic engine "sitting around" so your good choices are fairly limited. I'd prefer a "throwaway" parent bore block like either of these, vs a "real diesel" sleeved dt466 or cummins 8.3 with 30 year old O rings between my antifreeze and oil. Really, what are the chances you're going to rebuild something like this anyway? The 3116 was at least a mechanical fuel system, no heui or common rail, definitely more modern than anything that came before it IMHO. The injectors are similar to the old detroits, but the control rack is more complicated. Hopefully you don't ever have to mess with it, is the best thing you can say about it. I've heard they had a weak bottom end, and they had a terrible reputation in boats, almost 350HP in marine was too much for what it was.
I hear 250 HP printed on the engine tag. I read 245 described as the horsepower on my gas 427 I have now. I've never understood the difference between similarly rated gas and diesel engines. I do know those I've driven were very different horsepower. I estimate torque in my present 7 litre gas engine at 300 foot pounds. I believe the 10.4 liter Caterpillar diesel is near 1000 foot pounds. How these numbers translate to moving a truck, trailer and load down a road, I am not qualified to understand. Clearly, the diesel will need less gear reduction losing less energy in the gear train. Otherwise, how should they compare? Vermont is hilly moving north and south. moving east and west it's downright mountainous. Towing 10 tons is painfully slow in very low gears with the gas engine both climbing, and descending a mountain. On my twice a year trip hauling blocks for the tractor pull, I weigh 42600 combined.
Power is power but to get full power out of the 427 you have to have it wound up almost 4000 RPM I think. If you drive it in a reasonable range it will have much less power. The 3208 also feels more powerful because it has a high torque rise. The lower the RPM the more fuel the pump gives it which keeps the go-forward relatively constant. Torque spec I just found for the 250 model shows 640 @ 1400 which I find more reasonable than 1000.
If this new truck has a good Allison 600 series, you can still manually shift it down as needed for compression braking. You will find out the auto is not a bad choice when you get some experience with it. They are long gone now, but I knew of a fleet of harvest trucks that had 6V-53 Detroits and Allison 653's running at 52K gross with actual Jacobs engine brakes. The combo worked pretty well if the drivers understood how it all worked.
1000 was a number somebody gave me from estimate. And yes the engine is near 4000 RPM climbing a hill. I shift down as speed lugs down to 3000. Below 3000 the sudden loss of power is pronounced. It runs about 50 MPH on level ground at 3000. The slightest hill loaded will require downshift, and more than 3000 to maintain speed.
They had nice operating characteristics for the day, power peak at 2600, torque down to 1400, that is a lot of operating range. One other thing to consider is that no exhaust brake is allowed. So without a transmission retarder you are kind of out of luck. You can downshift but all it does is make a little more noise.
I imagined this big displacement diesel would be much more capable of engine braking on long hill descents than a gas 427. I know there is no Jake brake, but it weighs loaded 28000, not 80,000. Will the transmission downshifted be as capable as a manual once manually downshifted? I'd hate to have only the air brakes.
I'll get flamed for admitting this: I prefer an automatic in a pickup, or my everyday van. I'm less busy when driving. I can then better pay attention to driving. After years of driving it, I'm now able to smoothly upshift split shifting through all ten gears. I use all ten when downshifting for hills, but slowing for an intersection quickly there just isn't time. I do that as a five speed. I am a bit concerned as the only automatic medium duty I've ever driven was a rented moving van. It was awful! a complete dog!
. With the 28,000, the 3208 will be fine. If you could manage the 42,600 with your current gas engine, the 3208 will be much better (but it will still be a load). It's still not going to drive like a car. I guess it comes down to how fast do you want to go, and how much fuel do you want to burn to get there. a 3208 will be better than your current gas rig. A 8.3 cummins is a little more torque than the 3208. A m11 is even better. A N14 at 350hp will drive like a car with 28,000 lbs. My 500 hp detroit with just the lowboy (empty/no load) will sit you back in the seat when you get on it at 34,000lbs ( I always think "rocket ship" when I kind of get on it empty). You're still going to have to down shift on hills, and drive it similarly to what you do now, it will just be a little faster. I would guess hills that you pull at 15 mph now, you could pull at 25 with the 3208, but your not going to pull it at 45-50. My shop hill is about a 19 percent grade. Its around 3/4 of a mile long the one direction, and I would walk it in 3rd gear (9513 trans/ 6.14 rears) with my 3208, with the 50,000lb crane. I ran it with the 3208 for 6 years, and that's what both cranes had in them from the factory, and the one crane has been in this area its whole life (its a 1977). I think my terrain would be similar to yours, we have a lot of short steep hills, you probably have some longer hills than I do, but nothing like they see out west (8 percent grade for 11 miles etc.). The 3208 you are still going to have a line of cars behind you on a big hill, but if you want to roll with traffic, you will have to go bigger in hp in really steep hills. In my area- the dump truck guys who want to roll- all run big block 3406, 855/n14 cummins, detroit 12.7, and they run with traffic on the hills at 50,000lbs. I think I would take a 3208 before a 3126. Easier to work on, and less expensive when you do. No fancy equipment to run overhead, no need to have a computer for diagnostic. 12v fuel solenoid and a start signal wire is it. I had a 3208 get one of my operator's home, with 2 pistons in pieces (dropped a valve- pieces from it went to the next cyl- but it was still running- sounded terrible, but it got home). We have mostly narrow 2 lane (some more like 1 1/2 lane) blacktop in my working area. No shoulders. If a electronic motor has issues, you are stopped right there. I don't have a parking lot, or shoulder, or place to pull off. Generally a mechanical motor, will develop a miss, or no power etc, but its going to get you home. No sensor throwing a code and stopping you while the motor itself is fine. For ease of diagnostic, and getting back running, I'll take a mechanical motor over a electronic motor every time. But my situation isn't the same as everyone else's. I don't run a terrible lot of miles, I'm not more than a hour or so from my shop, and I work on most stuff myself. I'm not worried about milage/ fuel usage very much, and I bid no work and charge by the hour.
Agreed. The 3126 is heui which is sensitive. The 3116 is complicated, not especially sensitive though, and is the one that needs the fancy overhead equipment, BUT no computer, only a solenoid and starter wire. (Cmark has informed me that both the 3116 and 3126 came with either the mechanical unit injectors, or the heui system, but in US trucks I see the 3116 mechanical or the 3126 heui) The only thing I'd have against a 3208 is the V8. If you want to stick with a six, the little cummins 5.9 is available in lots of old fords, or a brazilian ford six would be a good way to go, depending on the condition you found any of them in.
As for the question about the automatic, yes you can downshift it just fine. If it is a steep hill you go down in whatever gear will hold you back. Downshift until it is running ~2600 RPM and holding however slow and however low of a gear that may be. It will be just like the uphill, slow, but it will get you there. If you are lucky the transmission may have a retarder on it but probably not.
I bought it. Driving home I climbed over the Green Mountains. It accelerates slowly, but climbs mountains at highway speed. Downhill, holding power is much improved over the gas engine.
31000 Miles, 600 hours on pump, If you know anybody who wants a nice fire body, or a C65 cab & chassis send them my way.
Sweet looking truck. We got nothing like that over here, in that size class it's all Japanese cabover.
Looks clean, rust free and best of all no CPU or emissions garbage to deal with....
Looks nice willie b. Good clean body and not much for miles/hours. Glad it ran good for you. Looks like 20 inch rubber? If you have trouble finding tires, the military still uses them (11.00r20), and I've bought some as surplus, that were like brand new. I have a local guy to me, that is always buying used/ worn out/ wrecked trucks and parting them out/ scrapping what's left. He has bought some fire trucks in the past, and I've seen him cut up some pretty good looking bodies for scrap (there's quite a bit of aluminum in them). In my area, you might get it sold to a farmer hauling water to some cattle, but that's about the only used market for the bodies by me. Jack up the body and drive it out from under it? Then do the same with your flatbed?
I knew of a large farm that used a fire body like that as a combination Fuel/Lube truck. They used the water tank as a fuel tank and built custom oil tanks to fit the hose bed. Very slick setup with lots of polished aluminum.
I've always had a soft spot for the old American cab overs, especially the Jeep 1 ton, and the bigger IH grain trucks. As laws evolve, manufacturers respond. On a couple occasions, snub nosed trucks have had a legal cargo advantage. I'd consider a Japanese cab over, but they have zero tow rating. This truck will have an 8 ton dump body, plus tow a 9 ton trailer, mostly not simultaneously. The big displacement (10.4 litre) should handle the hills better than a 5.2 litre Japanese.
I think you have a good truck there... I've always been partial to that body, one of my first service/welding trucks was a similar Topkick with the 8.2 liter turbo Detroit. I know everybody hates those more than the 3208 but it did a good job for me over the course of 5 years.
10% of Vermonters make maple syrup (pronounced surup). If you pronounce it any other way, you aren't allowed to label it Vermont Maple. This time of year they fight to have a 1000 gallon poly tank on a truck. If we move fast enough to plant the tank on the old truck, it'll sell. I'm a welder. I lust for aluminum stock. It is very expensive. Most projects I dream up get cancelled due to the high cost of material. If worse comes to worse, one of my customers buys 6061 aluminum to melt for castings.
Funny, I needed six 10.00-20 radial tires, heavy Load range G for my present truck. I called ALL the local tire dealers. Nobody would touch them. "they don't make them anymore" Everybody wanted to sell me 11.00-22.5 wheels to fit new tires. Each dealer would sell me $1200. in new wheels to put available tires on it. A couple years ago, I was in Maine, blew a tire on the camper. The tire dealer was inordinately helpful. Out of curiosity I asked about truck tires. He said he couldn't have them "until tomorrow". I ended up hauling new tires from maine, asking my usual dealer to mount them. They were the same brand they sell. "Why didn't you buy these from us?" I replied "I tried. You said they don't make them anymore".
It turns out an Allison accepts a PTO as other truck transmissions do. Anybody know where a used PTO for an allison 643 might be found? Willie
https://www.heavytruckparts.net/det...artname=PTO&make=MUNCIE&model=PTO&searchnum=2 https://www.heavytruckparts.net/det...EA-PARKER&model=SPOTTER/YARD-MULE&searchnum=8 https://www.heavytruckparts.net/det...EA-PARKER&model=SPOTTER/YARD-MULE&searchnum=8 https://www.heavytruckparts.net/det...name=PTO&make=MUNCIE&model=TJ5000&searchnum=8 Some are cable shift, some air, some have hyd pump, some are just pto, I didn't know what all you needed.
If you wanted to sell it see if a local MX track or dirt track is looking for a water truck.
Nice looking truck Willie. Just curious about this statement. Our single axle Hino GH has a 16000kg or 17 ton gvm and is rated to tow the same amount. Only has 250hp though, so you don’t point it at too many hills with that sort of weight.
I'm curious about the engine they use. Typical Oriental cab overs we see seem to have three litre diesels. A few have 5.2 litre turbo diesels. Those I've seen tow ratings for are very low! Keep in mind these trucks haven't been on the market many years. A low mileage used one, rurt free is still $12000. I'm replacing a similar weight truck with a 427 gas engine. I've not seen tow ratings for these trucks. Truck without trailer is rated at 28000 LBS I'm presuming a 9 ton trailer is legal behind this. In another forum (WW) a chart printed by Cummins shows required HP for 65 MPH in an 80,000 truck. It rates 250 HP Cummins as minimum. This truck when grossly overloaded will weigh half of the semi weight Cummins rates. I certainly understand it won't be a powerhouse. I only hope to be less a public nuisance than I am with my 427. VT is up hill both ways. East/West hills are as steep as 15% grade. If I can crawl over them at 20 MPH instead of 10 MPH I'm a happy man!
Thank you! I'm not well informed in this world. The fact that a simple installation PTO unit is available for this truck is VERY GOOD NEWS!
The vast majority of Japanese cabovers in the US are four cylinders, just because the the medium duty market is dominated by domestic makes. There is no domestic equivalent of a 4 cyl fuso,npr,UD etc. Also, the short wheelbase and turning radius are not as valuable outside of a very few downtown areas. The double frames are terrible for rotting out in the rust belt. Right behind the cab, way too much in the way to even think about fixing them.
What drives the water pump?
It has a big gearbox I'll describe as a transfer case. The driver chooses wheels, or pump. I believe the pump bolts directly to said gearbox, but can be uncoupled from it. The tonnage of this gearbox is reason to remove it, and I can't tailgate spread material if I can't simultaneously drive, and dump.
"Split shaft PTO" Very common for high horsepower stationary operations like fire pumps, air compressors, concrete pumpers, and even drilling rigs. I'm sure there's even more applications. These are the ones I have seen.
Our particular truck has an 8 litre turbo intercooled six and a nine speed Eaton synchro box. As Delmer says, the difference here is that Japanese trucks dominate the rigid truck market and have proven to be very reliable and long lasting. Most Jap makers have prime movers up to about 420hp, but this end of the market is mostly all American and Euro.
RZucker, or one of the other members would be a better source than me, willie B, but I think you will need to at least pop the side cover on your transmission. I think a few allisons have the side plate, but no pto gear inside. I think I remember a buddy with a used transmission, and he needed pto, but the one he got used didn't have the gear. His choices were different trans (with the gear), or a complete disassembly of his trans to add the right gear drive. I think the used transmission was from a school bus, and that busses were usually ordered without the gear. If the allison in yours was spec ordered without the gear, because they had the split pto, your transmission may not have it. But I don't know enough about that model transmission to tell you.
That's a good point. Most every 600 series I have installed a PTO on has had the PTO drive gear... except for one that came from a school bus. That was an easy fix, gear, snap ring, seal ring and gasket for the front pump housing and throw in a convertor hub seal for good measure. But I did have the trans on the floor as I was replacing an old 5 speed in a Ford midsize cabover.
Thank you. I'd hate to buy a PTO & pump only to find it won't work.
Is your current pump mated to the PTO, or driven with a shaft?
Current pump uses a short shaft with two universals from left side of transmission. I had considered a belt drive with electric clutch on the engine, or an electric pump like modern one ton machines use,
Truck would most likey have midship transfer case PTO. Pump operator would arrive at a call place truck in neutral and place PTO switch to pump. With foot on brake then place transmission to drive or 4th to send power to pto. Normally only truck with a pump and roll capability would be a foam unit.
Having the shaft drive pump will give you the option to keep your original pump and put it where you want it. Again, its a matter of matching the pump rotation and speed ratio of the PTO. With the auto trans I prefer the hydraulic shifted clutch PTOs, but that's just my preference. Had a GMC Brigadier water truck with an Allison and it was nice to just flip the switch and start pumping on the roll.
Still studying. The Chelsea/Parker 221 series I believe will fit. There is limited space to mount it beside the transmission. I'd prefer to replace my old pump as it uses a packing on the input shaft instead of a seal, and it needs frequent replacement, or it leaks. I've found used PTO-pump consolidated units, they seem a risky purchase, Will they fit? Will they leak? Will they work? My son has found a new belt drive pump. It uses two belts. My engine front pulley has stacks of belts already on it, there isn't room for more without hitting the fan. I'm not sold on sharing belts with any of the belt driven units already there. Still unsure what to do next.
Was wondering how the progress was going? I can take some pics of the electrically engage/disengage pto on the allison in the 79 international bobtail dump if that may be of help? It connects to the dump bed hydraulic pump using a short driveshaft.
Right now, it's buried under two feet of recent snow. This is usually spring in VT. It's too tall for the garage door. Once the fire body is removed, it'll fit.