WTA location recommendations

[millsroger]

AC is full width, trans, engine and PS stack is on drivers side to about half way across, leaves passenger side available for heat exchanger. I live where I need to haul water to underground tank. Normally I use an 86 Ford 350 CS with a 500 gallon tank. This morning I slid the tank to the Chevy and did the run. Also pull a trailer with a 1000 gallon tank. That's a 4000 lb load plus the truck, and a 10000 lb pull. 2000 ft clumb in about two miles on a gravel road in low range. Temps stayed right on the tstat at 85 degrees ambient with AC on. Point is that I think I got some BTU room for the added heat exchanger. Mechanically it's not quite as thick as the combined stack is so will fit nicely. Intercooler is 4.5 x 5.5 x 14 and will sit above the driver's side valve cover. System is rated for 600CFM with a 1 lb drop at max flow. Chart says IAT will hold ambient +15 at 18 psi boost with 1100CFM fan. Way better than I need but I don't trust specs much anymore.

 

[Turbine Doc]

Millsroger,

I copied your last post to here from electrical, as probably more fitting to discuss ICs here than in electrical area. I don't think underhood anywhere is good idea as it is so hot in the engine bay, since this is a WTA cooler we are talking about ever consider under the bed or in the bed for real estate to mount the cooler.

Anyone here messed with WTA ICs with 6.5s with some been there done that tips ?

I ran a under bumper ATA IC for a long time before getting a better turbo that is not as restrictive as the GM turbo, I now with mods can pull if I choose to 18,000# for short trip without the IC or any post turbo cooling, I do have a WMI kit that I will install one day I supposed but just since modifying the truck to where I am now I've not required post turbo cooling thus far.

I've not played with WTA coolers myself so I don't have recommendations on sizing of those yours looks like it will do okay where are you mounting the heat exchanger that cools the water after it has cooled the post turbo air charge, 18psi on a GM X turbo is pushing a LOT of boost and really working the engine hard to make the turbo work there. Your heat load on the IC will be less with a better turbo. Not knowing your budget or fab skills hard from a single post to advise which is best way to go.

Have you done any other mods that aren't shown in signature??? Open exhaust and gutted/removed cat if you haven't done that will help immensely reduce restrictions to the "breath-ability" on these trucks, and free flowing air in & out are crucial to getting the most from the 6.5.

Tim

 

[millsroger]

The numbers are what the system can handle, not what I will be running. Gmx is only good for 45 lb/min at a 2.25 PR, or about 290 HP at 3400Rpm. That's it's absolute max without going over the turbo RPM limit. Truck has 245K on it and I won't be doing any performance mods until after I need to O'haul it. It did get new filter, GP's and shop matched Bosch injectors as soon as I got it.

Only mods to the truck are a diode jumper from the lift pump relay coil to the GP relay output, a button from +12 to the ODB1 pin G for priming, (my own versions), and a Glow Plug overide solenoid patterned from one on this site.

Will be adding EGT, Manifold pressure and IAT gauges on the post. Gonna get a baseline for a before and after the IC install on a stock engine and ECM. Then easy things like getting rid of the soot trap.

IC setup is my own, not a kit, not new to spin fizzies just my first diesel.

 

[millsroger]

To clarify something that would prolly be asked--stock injectors rebuilt with Bosch innards, was told he set them for 1800psi, max flow 5L and "narrow idle pattern". Don't know specifics and he just smiles when asked.

 

[skypilotj]

I see you are in oregon. who is your injector guy? I have a new set of indonesion Bosch in the box still. I want them worked over before I put thim in. We have a shop here in Eugene that does them, but I get mix reviews from others on thier work.

 

[WarWagon]

Don't care what the GM specs are for the turbo. It simply isn't worth being on the engine over 2200 RPM. It chokes the exhaust and heats up the intake air like crazy around 14PSI boost and pushed higher just makes more hot air than air movement. This causes you to loose power and have the fan kick in. Will cost you 3MPG. I have run hills with a trailer where 4 Low was used to try and keep things cool.

Going to the ATT and the same 7% grades with a trailer has IAT's around 275 vs. over 300. The cooling fan ran less, I got 3 MPG better and ran 55 MPH vs. 43 MPH. My EGT's dropped to 1100 with the ATT vs. 1300 with a GM3 same fueling. Aka the limit of fueling with the GM3 and the A Team Turbo can use more fuel if I want to throw it at it. 1/3 turn on the DB2 if I recall correctly.

Lots of ways to waste money on a 6.5 - and it is a waste of money trying to make one work hard until you get rid of the restrictive turbo. I have a pile of 6.5's I sent to scrap metal trying to work em hard with the factory turbo choker...

Depending on the RPM you run in 4 Low there are several turbo choices out there.

 

[millsroger]

Hi war,
My 'thing' here is simple, making it as reliable as is possible with what's in it. My truck is rated for 9,000 GVW and 10k towing, that's about as heavy duty as a 2500 gets. I wouldn't even think to load heavier than that, especially with the 6.5. The 6.5 is simply not built for heavy use in the first place. Even stock many of this engine series don't make it very long. Fortunately, I have one of the better ones with no issues. I think the only reason it has survived to 245k is specifically due to the fact that it was NOT modified or abused. Why anyone would push it to 14psi or higher is beyond me. Am surprised that they don't come apart the first time, let alone live very long at that kind of pressure. It's no wonder you have gone thru lots of engines.

You can change turbo's, exhaust, prom's, and do all the "tweaks" you want but it is still a 6.5 engine that was designed over 20 years ago for economy and EPA, NOT long distance towing. They have some basic faults that can be dealt with for good economy and long term reliability and that's where my head is at with this truck. Once I have figured them all out I will drop in the crated AMG 6.5 and 4L80E that came with it.

Here are a few things I have learned about the 6.5 so far, only certain casting numbers will run very long, coolant temps above 210--bad news, #8 cylinder cracks, #2 blows head gasket, main bearing web cracks, harmonic balancer dies--destroys crank, stock fan and clutch hub inadequate, standard radiator marginal even without a load, standard glow plugs quit and swell up-can break off or jam in head, glow plug controller timing problems and flakey, injectors leak and have lousy pattern, several issues with IP, fuel filter canister has too small an outlet, lift pump control issues, engine oil cooler line problems, electrical grounding problems, exhaust manifolds flow poorly, exhaust crossover does not blend properly, exhaust from turbo back restrictive, waste gate design crappy, waste gate control flakey.

Did I miss anything??? And yet they were made for 15 years, maybe more. Last point, GM had to put the soot trap on the 8600 GVW and up so, to not have it plug up right away, they needed to get high EGT's to clean it out, only it didn't work very well for that or the rest of the system.

 

[millsroger]

Oh yea--forgot the PMD relocate issue.

 

[buddy]

I would probably put the water cooler under the truck with a fan on it. Your external trans cooler probably helps quite a bit to keep the radiator cooler, but I wouldnt want to add heat to the radiator. Then your underhood temps could be higher as well. In 94, you got a 90GPM water pump, and its not very well balanced, so although the drivers head may be 195F, the passenger side could be 20F hotter. And if you drive through 100F days it could get pretty bad.

If you do put water heat exchanger on the front, I would suggest getting the latest GMT800 130GPM water pump from the 2000 6.5 engines with spin on fan clutch and a DMAX fan. In 1997 GM increased the flow to 130GPM and used a 9-blade steel fan, but the larger composite fan is better at idle. The 2000 6.5 water pump is superior though.

And I agree with WarWagon. The compressor map might show that it can do 45lbs/min, which it is actually pretty close with the air at 320F, but it has other detrimental affects. The exhaust restriction is mainly why the compressor is so ineffficient, basically around 70% at 2.25 PR and 3400rpm. So youre having to cool the air, because the turbo is a heater to begin with. Its not a good setup, and intercooling is a bandaid and actually bad unless you are only going to run about 10psi of boost max. Which is more than enough for stock fueling.

The engines can handle more than this, so dont think they explode at 14psi of boost. I run mine well over 20psi on a stock engine. The turbo may be one of the most contributing factors to those failures. So the recommendations to replace it can make the truck more reliable, even at higher power levels. Modding them makes them more efficient, and doesnt necessarily harm them. factory fuel starvation from low flow LP and restrictive fuel filter manager will also limit the fueling available to the IP at high demand, but I wouldnt consider that a built in safety feature.

 

[millsroger]

Thanks, Buddy,
That's really good info, will be looking for the 2000 water pump straight away. My fan clutch is still working but not 'biting in' like it should so a good time to replace it. Think I will dig down to the balancer while I got it open, prolly replace it just for ducks. Anybody making a good one??

Didn't mean to 'go off' about the GMx, I know it's not a good one for more HP, about maxed out as it is. My experience has taught me that you don't just throw on a bigger turbo and turn the key. From what I can see, there are turbo's that make better use of the existing exhaust flow but, as you stated, unless that is cleaned up you can't really get very far, by that I mean the input side of the turbo.

Thanks for the input on the basic engine, most posts about it are not so encouraging about how tough it really may be.

 

[Twisted Steel Performance]

Some of the idea of different turbos, water mist injection, open exhaust isn't all about more power, these things allow the motor to breath and work less for the average owner.... adding a water - air cooler is more work than a mist system, and cost about the same, both have there place and could be used together, staying with the GM turbo is.... well not the best way to help the motor I think... as for the HB, if you plan to keep the truck, and or replace the motor, I would spend 400$ and get a Fluidamper over a stock unit...

 

[WarWagon]

Somehow for reasons beyond my control I found myself with a 1993 6.5TD, a 28' cargo trailer and a parts delivery route that went up 7% grades. Doing 33 MPH on these grades is slow enough to get you run over. Thus the need to push what the factory offered. My point is you can work these engines hard if you make some radical changes. I have 50K extreme beat it to death use on a 1986 6.2 bottom end plus the original 30K of military use it had. i even dropped a 1/4 worm clamp down the intake and changed the heads and pistons over that adventure.

I know the turbo is a problem now, but, I did not know back then. Everyone has written off these engines for hard work. They are still in use by the military likely because they were the low bidder. The aftermarket solution was turbomaster and more fuel. Gets some results but same near gas engine MPG loaded.

Changing the turbo gets better MPG while loaded. As said above the engine is not working as hard for the same hill climbs as shown by improved MPG and less cooling fan use.

So there is a lot you can get out of a 6.5 esp if you 'unload' the engine by getting rid of the factory turbo. This elusive fact is becoming common knowledge for the few people left that will work a 6.5 vs. use it as a daily driver. Even as a DD it is a joy to have a top end from the engine.

GM is known for ruining the diesel market with the 5.7. So imagine for a moment that, yes, they screwed up some design aspects of the 6.2, 6.5, early Duramax, and LLY, engines badly. Cost cutting, bad design, wrong engine for application, pick a scapegoat. Simply ask what good is a fuel filter and look again on what GM used and the issues resulting from no water separator etc.

In any case I may use a little too much shock treatment to help others think outside the box. Just think about what 3 MPG over 550 miles a day cost me in extra fuel wasted and maybe my attitude is understandable.

 

[millsroger]

Doing those things that correct inherent issues or improve the basic systems is where I am starting. A number of things are listed on this site that are already in process. Have only had the truck for a little over a month. Started with new sensors, the GP's and injectors, the GP controller overide, and lift pump to WTS mod. These are just to get it to start and run as well as a "stock" system can. The later model water pump, fan, harmonic balancer and PMD relocate are to solve known issues, (and thanks for the reccommendation on who makes a good balancer).

Then I will be adding the gauges and get my own "plot" of how well it is doing.

A 3 1/2" SS down tube to muffler is on the way, crossover, high flow muffler and tail pipe are next. When installed I will do a new comparison.

Then the IC and a comparison. I thought about Air to Air and water mist but my personal choice is the water to air IC.

When I get to that point I will think about a turbo change or perhaps some exhaust manifold work.

 

[Turbine Doc]

When I began my 6.5 journey in 2000 with my 1st 6.5 I was told it had to have a IC, yes with the GM turbo you need one because it is so inefficient at higher power loads, since going ATT my IC is on my shelf, and knowing what I know now I would have gone with it as a mod long before some of the other mods I've done over the years.

To top my worries off I was told by some knowledgeable folks back in the day my 98 "oil squirter" block was the worst of the worst, that was at 36K miles, I'm at 230K on it now and my "at risk" engine with bolt on stuff only thus far still pulling strong as ever and on par with an unmodified DMax.

I have (2) 98 6.5s one in a burb and the other in a K1500 truck would not trade them for a DMax because os the simplicity to maintain them and availability of basically low cost parts should I ever have a catastrophic failure.

 

[NVW]

You're on the right track, the exh. is the first step in letting it breath.