6.9 diesel in tractors?

had a friend tell me he saw 2 International tractors with 6.9 diesels. The engines looked to be the same engines they put in ford pickups. could this be true and what model of tractors?

If you are refering to the V8,you have that backwards, the engine in earlier Ford trucks looks just like the ones used in IH tractors. The early powersmokes were a modified IH diesel.

mm: The 6.9 is or was an IH engine. I don't think it was ever used as a factory installation on any farm tractor. The 6.9 had much the same outside physical appearence as the larger 550 cu in and the 800 cu in. Then one has the 7.3, got to be close to same cu in as the 550. Those engines were all cast along same exterior design lines.

The 800 cu in was used in the 300 hp articulated 4568 and 500 was used in the 1468. As I recall it wasn't rated any higher than the 1466 with inline 436, 6 cylinder. I wouldn't look very hard for one, V8 diesels, any brand have never been a roaring success, especially in tractors. They don't have as much torque as inline 6s.

I saw this myself in 1976, went to a demonstration, and one of the tractors I drove was a 1468. I came home thinking my one year old 1066, was quite a decent tractor.

We pulled a racecar trailer one season with one of the 6.9 diesel Fords ('83 maybe?) and it was a real gutless wonder. Nothing like the later 7.3 Powerstrokes.

(quoted from post at 05:53:09 02/20/09) We pulled a racecar trailer one season with one of the 6.9 diesel Fords ('83 maybe?) and it was a real gutless wonder. Nothing like the later 7.3 Powerstrokes.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree. I had a couple of 6.9's and they did not have the "umph" they needed to really get you going with a load. However, they did not have turbochargers either.
I read on some diesel truck forum a few months back where guys are rebuilding 6.9's and adding plenty of boost with aftermarket turbo kits - claiming both great power as well as best ever diesel pick-up mileage.

Yea, it was cheaper for me to just buy a Duramax! I did learn most of the "Upgrades" to the Powerstroke, were what Navistar was doing out of the box. Ford really messed up the 7.3, but it ws still reliable.

6.9 was a diesel built from an exisiting gas-engine platform by International Harvester. Later 7.3 was the same engine with a slightly bigger bore until mid-1994. Powerstroke 7.3 that came out late 1994 was an enhanced and modifed version of the original IDI 7.3. Many companies built diesels from exisiting gas engines. GM, Isuzu, Hercules, Continental, and many more. Most were fine, but the early GM Oldsmobile 350s not so good.

I've seen several IH tractors with 6.9s - all home built. No pictures. Here are a few of a GM 6.2 in a Massey Ferguson. 6.2 came out about the same time as the 6.9, but was a weaker engine with a lighter block, timing chain, and a cast-iron crankshaft.
The IH 6.9 had a heavy block, forged-steel crank and gear-drive cam.

As to stories about turbo 6.9s being great on fuel? You "can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear" and the 6.9 was just an indirect injected diesel using the Ricardo Comet system, just like the GM 6.2s and 6.5s. Ford DID put a turbo on the 7.3s which are basically the same engine. No, not great on fuel. I'm still driving my 85 F250 with a 6.9 as well as my 1994 turbo 7.3. Ford used the ATS turbo system.

<a href="http://s104.photobucket.com/albums/m162/jdemaris/?action=view&current=62_mftractor1.jpg" target="_blank"> </a>

<a href="http://s104.photobucket.com/albums/m162/jdemaris/?action=view&current=kolkman02.jpg" target="_blank"></a>

No V8 non-turbo diesel has as much torque as an in-line six? What six are you talking about?

Ford 300 inline six - 115 net horsepower at 3000 RPM and 223 net pound feet of torque at 1600 RPM.

Ford-IH 6.9 V8 diesel - 185 horse @ 3300 RPM, 315 net pound feet of torque @ 1400 RPM

Ford-IH 7.3 diesel V8 185 HP @ 3000 RPM, 360 net pound feet of torque @ 1400 RPM

Ford-IH 7.3 Turbo diesel V8 IDI 190 HP @ 3000 RPM, 395 net pound feet of Torque @ 1400 RPM

Ford-IH 7.3 diesel V8 Turbo DI Powestroke - 235 HP @ 2700 RPM and 500 net pound feet of torque @ 1600 RPM.

<a href="http://s104.photobucket.com/albums/m162/jdemaris/?action=view&current=1985FordF25069b-1.jpg" target="_blank"></a>

JDemaris: I think it's quite clear which inline 6 I was talking about. The day I tried the 1468, with 550 diesel, the only comparison I had was my 1066 at home with DT414. That V8 was about equal to my 1066, until it started to loose RPM. When that happened the V8 lost it, big time.

Drove a Massey 1155 quite a bit one summer with a Perkins V-8... it ran pretty good. Just the rest of the tractor was junk.

No, I didn't know, and I think I made that point clear. I often find people comparing 6.9s to Ford straight 300 sixes, and GM 6.2s to GM sraight 292 sixes. Torque is determined, for the most part, by length of stroke in relation to the bore. Does't matter if it's straight six or a V-eight.
Many, but not all V-8s are designed with space-saving in mind, and for that same reason many have shorter strokes than some non-vee engines. Again, not all. There is no set rule. Compare engine to engine, gas, diesel, straight 6, 8, V-8 etc. They will all have comparable torque if they have near equal cubic inches and compariable stroke to bore ratio.

It's obvious you've never ran big tractors or semi trucks. Anyone who has will tell you that an 855 Cummins will both outlug and outlast a 903. Check the torque specs on those.

I've done both and was driving big rigs in 1970.
Was also a diesel tech. If my history is "obvious" to you with such little information, you must be a pretty lousy researcher.

Your comments about the 855s and 903s are pretty-much meaningless unless you specify which engine models.

But since you seem to favor the 855 engine, you are supporting everything I said, not contradicting it. Did you note where I mentioned stroke versus bore being the main factor with torque?

Note that the 855 is a long-stroke engine with 5 1/2" bore and 6" stroke, and the 903 a short-stroke engine with 5 1/2" bore and only 4 3/4" stroke. That goes along perfectly with what I already stated. So, thanks for supporting my statements, although it seems you either did not read them, or don't understand them.

By the way, one of the best marine Cummins turbo 903s puts out 1200 lbs. of torque at 2200 RPM. Some turbo 855s puts only make 800 lbs.

Thanks for the information, Hugh.
mike

Keep living in your dream world of figures, 6cylinders of equal torque values will always outlug your V8.