i havent found any measurements yet but would a cummins turbo diesel block fit ina tii?

 

Short answer? Of course, anything will fit with enough cutting and without regard to hood or crossmember clearance.

Serious answer? No. Way too long and tall. Look under the hood of a Dodge truck.

 

your problem might be depth. those engines have long strokes and deep oil pans. you might want to consider maybe a 4BT swap, thats just a cummins 4cylinder. i've seen people swap those in alot of things with compound turbos with about 500hp and 1100ft/lbs. or you could go the duramax route, lightest of all those diesels and people have swapt those before.

 

"your problem might be depth."

Your problem might be that this engine weighs almost as much as your car. Why go halfway? - drop in a Packard Merlin or Allison V-12 and get some real horsepower.

 

I swapped out a 6.5 turbo diesel out of my 1 ton Chevy and put in a Cummins 6 cylinder 5.9. The trucks weight increased by almost 1000 pounds, and no way it would have fit without a body lift AND a cowl hood. Forget about having a fan on the front of the motor. Cummins Rx7 will never happen.

 

Dude, the best thing you could hope for as far as diesel goes is maybe a 1.9 TDI from a jetta.

come to think of it, people look at my car with raised eyebrows from the weird noise my 13b makes..... could you imagine rolling up to someone with a diesel in an Rx7?!!?!

clakety clakety clakety clakety clakety clakety.....

I love it!

 

Fact is some of the new German diesels really don't sound like Diesels, and certainly don't perform like one either. My friend has a Mercedes 320 common rail turbo diesel, straight six, and I think runs about 20,000 plus psi fuel pressure. It weighs about 3900 pounds, rated at 200 hp, and if you got in and drove it, you would be impressed with the performance and NEVER suspect it was a Diesel. No smoke, no smell, very smooth, quiet and plenty of performance. That motor in our RX-7 would be awesome, but may be a bit heavy - I have no idea what the engine weighs, and in any case, it would be very expensive. The transmission alone is probably worth several times what a nice 1st gen could bring.

In the Mercedes, my friend is getting about 33-36 miles per galllon.

The more readily available Diesels are mostly from front wheel drive cars, so fitting to a suitable transmission could be a real project. However, I think the latest VW diesels are pretty quiet and smooth, and have as much or more power than the stock 12a, and probably twice the fuel mileage or better.

 

Nissan makes engine series known as RD its a deisel version of the Infamous RB inline 6 mototrs put that under your hood with a turbo and you would be movin.

 

cummins also makes a 3.3l that's about 100 lbs lighter than the 4BT. transmission and gearing would be the big issues on it. most diesels only go to about 2500-3000 rpm max... some even less, redline drops more as the engine gets larger.

you might look into VW diesel swaps too.... there's a 1.6l swap that's common on suzuki samurais.

but overall i'm fairly sure you're cutting new ground....

 

not gonna happen, i had a hard time trying to get a big block mopar in my fc, and that was WITHOUT the exhaust headers. i dont even think a cummins is doable without going tube chassis in the front, plus i dont think the trans would fit in the trans tunnel.

 

I think a 4d65 motor would fit the bill for this, I just can't find much about the bellhousing. I would assume that it is the standard Mitsu wideblock bolt pattern though.

 

The Merc-Benz inline-5 cylinders (yes five) from the 80s are practically indestrucable. I have a '80 300SD with 300k+ and runs, starts, and idles very well despite a poor maintance history. Also, for a turbo diesel, it has a considerably high redline - 4500rpm. It is pretty much mechanically ran (mechanical injection, lots of vaccum opperations) which could simplify swapping.

The down side would be the cast iron block and head. The things are made solid and heavy. I cant imagine the block being much longer than a 20B though. The stock transmissions are also tanks, but just 3 speeds and Im not sure how the gearing would match up with the RX's 4.1 . But on a plus side, In a 5000+lb car, these motors can pull around 30mpg with 30 year old technology.

 

the 5.9 cummins weighs 1100 lbs. add the i/c cooler in the mix and the whole package is about 5 feet long!

I'm looking into installing a VW turbo diesel into my vert. It will give 45 mpg all day long. Besides the obvious issues, depth, length, oil pan sump location my only concern is the weight.

does anyone know the complete weight of a 13b with all peripherals including the harness.


thanks

lewis

 

Hey Lewis, got your email, but I cannot send any info back. Please PM me a good email address or your phone number and I would be glad to talk to you about my Chevy Cummins.

 

my address is


lews9146@yahoo.com


lewis

 

Oh how I wish I still had that old International 9L diesel motor to shove in something! But being serious, if you want to go diesel (which is definitely a good route for making serious torque) your major performance limitation will be the transmission. As these are truck motors you will need a transmission that will link up and handle that much torque, and the only transmissions available for that kind of appkication will either be for very high-performance drag racers or trucks, and I don't think either set of gears will suit your interests.

 

still working on the vw diesel into my vert. looks like I'll be going with the 97-99 1.9 turbo diesel due to less electrical issues.

will keep updated

lewis

 

published engine weights from 279 page book "RX-7, the New Mazda RX-7 and Mazda Rotary Engine Sports Cars" By Jack Yamaguchi 1985


1965 production Cosmo L10A (alum. sidehousings)--- 225 lbs (pg 261)

1968 production Cosmo 10A (alum. sidehousings)--- 224 lbs (pg 262)

1968 production R100 10A (cast iron side housings)--- 268 lbs (pg 262)

1971 production JDM RX-3 10A--- 282 lbs (pg 264)

1967 production R130 13A--- 301 lbs (pg 264)

1977 production USA 12A --- 321 lbs (pg 244)

1977 12A sports kit (over the counter P-Port)--- 242 lbs (pg 244)

1977 12A MFR (factory P-port)--- 224 lbs (pg 244)

1977 production 13B--- 330 lbs (pg 244)

1977 13B MFR (factory p-port)--- 233 lbs (pg 244)

1978 production RX-7 12A--- 348 lbs (pg 267)

1983 production RX7 12AT (turbo)--- 356 lbs (pg 270)

1986 production RX-7 13B DEI--- 337 lbs (pg 47)

1987 production RX-7 13BT--- 377 lbs (pg 52)


1993 production 13BREW---450 lbs*

2004 production 13B MSRP---332 lbs*

*from Sport Compact Car citing Mazda in 2002.

The above weights include all available engine mounted accessories and fluids.

 

thank you for the info. got my bare chassis back.1st up will be the rolling cradle to sit the car on.

Found some interseting info while researching this swap.

Does anyone know if a Mitsubishi tranny will bolt up to the back of the rotary? I got info people were swapping rotarys into some mitsus but cant find info on it. If that is the case then the adapter plate will be much easier

thanks

lewis

 

I bought my 1.9 VW td today. I hope to start fabbing the mounts in a week or 2. will update the thread with pics as I progress


lewis

 

Your putting a 1.9 TDI into an Rx7?

This is going to be slower than any stock Rx7, and will not drive like a sports car.

I love diesel engine, don't get me wrong, I also don't give a **** what you do to your car, but this is going to have some major issues.

It will be slow as hell, get great fuel economy, but be slower than this same engine would be in a jetta (jetta is a lighter car) and get much worste fuel economy (then a jetta) and be extremely top speed limited by the rx7's 3.9-4.1 rear end.

You would be better off with a 3L om 603 from a merc they are also built better than the VW diesels, and can be had for 1500 or so, and can make much more power and torque with similar fuel economy.

Even better would be the 32 valve CDI out of the later 90's E300 merc, the CDI can be removed and re fitted with a standard diesel pump from the 603.

 

I dont care. The Vw diesel is one of the most robust and dependable diesels money can buy. Mercedes has too much wiring to mess with plus there is the clearance issues. The VW wil fit right in and should give me 40+ mpg I dont care if it's slow. As for being slower than the jetta, you are wrong. jetta is heavier and has a bigger frontal area. simply put less wind resistance for the convertible. And since I drive at 60-70 on the interstate and at speed limit when in town I should get 40+ mpg. In case yoiu dint know. the 2nd gens were no speed demons. My 5.9 cummins powered truck that weighs over 7500 lbs will smoke my convertible. in mileage and 0-60. The best the rotary coukld ever hope for mileage wise is 25-28 pmg. And that is after a costly after market ecu.

In a nut shell, better motor better mileage happier owner

cheers

 

Good luck...

But one thing, as far as the merc engines:

Only the newer CDI engines after 95 would have more wiring thanks to OBD2

there are almost no computer controls, and very little wiring on the older engines.

I have a car with one.

 

Ok.I didnt plan to come across so angry but I've heard just about every nay sayer's comments on swapping a LS1 motor and a 20b and this and that. I simply want better economy and dont care if it is a little slower. After talking with members of tdiclub.com they say I can get 140-150hp with the 1.9td. Mind you, I wont be getting 40mpg with that kind of power but I would like to think that it would still be better than the 13b

thanks again

lewis

 

One more thing. To keep from reinventing the wheel, and making costly mistakes I chose use off the shelf parts to make the swap as easy as possible. I decided on the VW after hearing of Acme adapters. the make an adapter to mate the VW to a Toyota 22r tranny. That tranny is about as good as they come and should be able to handle the torque of the VW. Plus they are everywhere.

lewis