6.4L Cummins Build Complete and awesome.

Cflanery88

Cflanery88

New member
Joined
Feb 4, 2016
Messages
536
After over a year without being able to drive my truck its finally driveable.

My truck is a 2006 Dodge ram 2500 QCSB with about 220k on it. Last year the engine decided it had enough of the stock bottom end and broke cyl#5 rod which made a couple windows in the 5.9 block,

Engine now is Std bore, 6.7 block, 06 5.9 head that I drilled for the steam holes, VP 5.9 crank, Wagler .080 longer rods, Mahle 6.7 Qsb pistons w/.030 flycuts, Hamilton 188/220 cam, 110# valve springs, extreme pushrods, Arp 625 headstuds, Arp 14mm main studs, and I had engineered diesel machine the block and make a custom girdle to tie the mains into the block. Everything ran Standard so I run Mahle H series main and 12v rod bearings, .020 over 6.7 ISB rings that I filed to fit with .020 top ring gap, .030 second ring gap, and .018 oil control which I ran the standard oil control rings out of the box. Piston to wall is .0075, For fuel I'm using the same 150% BMS Exergy injectors out of my 06 which I dropped off to Exergy be checked and cleaned, PPE dual fuelers, 20 gallon fuel cell, and an Airdog 165 dual feeding the cp3s. Air is being forced in by a single s475/87-1:0 A/R charger with a Billet wheel installed by Chris himself at Engineered Turbo. Charger is mounted on a BD T4 manifold flipped utilizing a Stainless diesel second gen swap kit and turbosmart 45 wastegate, and BOV.
Tuning is being handled by Lavon at firepunk diesel.

Photos to come if I can ever figure out how to post them.
 
beautiful build sheet!!

have you measured enough drive pressure to justify the waste gate yet?
 
Cflanery88 said:
After over a year without being able to drive my truck its finally driveable.

My truck is a 2006 Dodge ram 2500 QCSB with about 220k on it. Last year the engine decided it had enough of the stock bottom end and broke cyl#5 rod which made a couple windows in the 5.9 block,

Engine now is Std bore, 6.7 block, 06 5.9 head that I drilled for the steam holes, VP 5.9 crank, Wagler .080 longer rods, Mahle 6.7 Qsb pistons w/.030 flycuts, Hamilton 188/220 cam, 110# valve springs, extreme pushrods, Arp 625 headstuds, Arp 14mm main studs, and I had engineered diesel machine the block and make a custom girdle to tie the mains into the block. Everything ran Standard so I run Mahle H series main and 12v rod bearings, .020 over 6.7 ISB rings that I filed to fit with .020 top ring gap, .030 second ring gap, and .018 oil control which I ran the standard oil control rings out of the box. Piston to wall is .0075, For fuel I'm using the same 150% BMS Exergy injectors out of my 06 which I dropped off to Exergy be checked and cleaned, PPE dual fuelers, 20 gallon fuel cell, and an Airdog 165 dual feeding the cp3s. Air is being forced in by a single s475/87-1:0 A/R charger with a Billet wheel installed by Chris himself at Engineered Turbo. Charger is mounted on a BD T4 manifold flipped utilizing a Stainless diesel second gen swap kit and turbosmart 45 wastegate, and BOV.
Tuning is being handled by Lavon at firepunk diesel.

Photos to come if I can ever figure out how to post them.
Click to expand...


Why ditching the twins?
 
Thanks for sharing this information. Awesome build spec!

Any videos or first drives?
 
Thanks Guys, I have to replace my line for my back pressure gauge due to it getting pinched under the dash so once that's fixed I will get an accurate reading. I ditched the compounds due to them being to small(63mm over ht60) and needed the money at the time. May end up with compounds or triples in the near future but for now a single was a lot easier(less fab work) and faster to get the truck running. I don't have any video but I have pictures.
 
You actually put together the build I've been dreaming of for years... Awesome man !
Sub'd.
 
How was the clearance on the wastegate with the BD Manifold Flipped up? When I was doing mine it looked like there was going to be clearance issues with the hard coolant line that runs down the block.
 
Dom_c13b said:
How was the clearance on the wastegate with the BD Manifold Flipped up? When I was doing mine it looked like there was going to be clearance issues with the hard coolant line that runs down the block.
Click to expand...

I deleted that cooling line when I deleted my torque converter cooler. The
only coolant lines present are those for the radiator, the fleece coolant bypass, and the line off the head to the heater core and the return from the heater core which is a 5/8ths coolant hose now rerouted around over towards the fender. Clearance wasn't an issue.
 
I'm building mine out of a mix of junk and go fast parts, and it still is a money pit

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk
 
Drive pressure is running about 5-8lbs higher than overall boost pressure without the gate. cruising its at a 1:1 ratio.
 
Its a fun ride. In tune 5 don't really catch traction in any gear and even at 65mph roll it still scuffs the tires and never stops pulling. Had a couple good pulls tonight to 145mph and 4200rpm and it wanted to keep going.
 
Do you see any problem with using the .020 rings in a standard bore? (Probably not since that's what you did...)
When I put standard rings in my standard bore at .008 ptw my gaps were a little wider than max spec.
 
chris lang said:
Do you see any problem with using the .020 rings in a standard bore? (Probably not since that's what you did...)
When I put standard rings in my standard bore at .008 ptw my gaps were a little wider than max spec.
Click to expand...

I didn't have any issues. theoretically thinking about it it doesn't make sense to shove a wider ring into a smaller hole due to the ring no longer being a perfect circle. But honestly the ring tension seemed to be about the same I just had a lot more ring filing to get the .020 rings in the hole lol. The Std ring gap measured .018 top ring and .045 second ring at .0045 PTW std bore, once I sent the block back to the machine shop to get my .0075 PTW top ring gap was over .025 and the second I think came in right around .054 end gap. I ordered a set of every ring pack available offered by Mahle which was the isb rings in std and .020 and the qsb rings in std and .020 just to see if there were any differences in sizing. I went with the .020 over isb ring set due to the second ring being a cast moly faced ring, and not the stronger ductile iron chrome faced second ring like the QSB rings beacause the QSB second ring probably never seat. As far as the top ring and oil control rings were identical in every set.
 
I do want to thank everyone involved in this time consuming build, especially my close friend Jim Bush, Glenn @ Engineered Diesel and Lavon @ firepunk for the helpful advise and answering of any of the many questions I had.
 
Cflanery88 said:
I didn't have any issues. theoretically thinking about it it doesn't make sense to shove a wider ring into a smaller hole due to the ring no longer being a perfect circle. But honestly the ring tension seemed to be about the same I just had a lot more ring filing to get the .020 rings in the hole lol. The Std ring gap measured .018 top ring and .045 second ring at .0045 PTW std bore, once I sent the block back to the machine shop to get my .0075 PTW top ring gap was over .025 and the second I think came in right around .054 end gap. I ordered a set of every ring pack available offered by Mahle which was the isb rings in std and .020 and the qsb rings in std and .020 just to see if there were any differences in sizing. I went with the .020 over isb ring set due to the second ring being a cast moly faced ring, and not the stronger ductile iron chrome faced second ring like the QSB rings beacause the QSB second ring probably never seat. As far as the top ring and oil control rings were identical in every set.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure the ring will still be a perfect circle, it just has more pressure.
 
zstroken said:
I am pretty sure the ring will still be a perfect circle, it just has more pressure.
Click to expand...
We had a thread about this a while back. I disagree, but have no evidence to support my claim, or the tooling to find out.


Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk
 
I remember that thread, I figured I'd chime in and ask. I actually asked my instructor about this today. He's been building circle track engines for 12 years. His recommendation was to take the wider end gap, especially for high boost applications.
Personally, I think the oversize piston will cause it to be negligibly out of round, but the increase in ring tension would cause more friction and wear the walls faster. So the little it may be out of round, will have more pressure.

Cflanery should use an ta reader all around the cylinder walls when he does a freshen up!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top