I've been making biodiesel (for my off road garden tractor of course) for a little over 3 yrs now. I'd been buying professionally made stuff for about 4 years before that. It was biodiesel that actually got me into diesel's and why we bought our 2001 VW TDI 7+ years ago.

I did the swap more for a hobby/challenge/environmental/education/personal development type of thing. Wasn't really looking at it from a financial investment point of view. I could've bought a lot of $4/gal fuel for what I've put into this hobby.

 

I'm very familiar with that graph (I'm a VW TDI nut as well) and looked a long time to try to find something like that for the B3.3T (I wish all engines had this type of graph because it is sooo revealing). I've only found 3 data points for the B3.3T: 1400, 1600, 2600 rpm and these are at max load. Of these the 1400 rpm point is the lowest BSFC (it's shown on the flickr photo site) so I agree with your suggestion of keeping rpm's down. I think at one point in this thread I'd mentioned I thought my fuel mileage was better in 4th gear at ~2000 rpm's for my back and forth to work commute. After going back and analyzing my fuel log I think it was more of an issue of favorable weather conditions during the tests than it was of the actual improved thermal effficiency of the engine.

For the last year I've been keeping the rpm's in the 1400-1600 rpm band as much as possible and I'm extremely pleased with the fuel economy. I'm still waiting to see what B3.3Sonoma's mpg's are like since he's advanced his pump's timing a little more than I have. If he's got good results I may have to bump mine a little more as well.

I'm pretty happy with the gearing I've got right now. On a more aerodynamic vehicle I could see going to a lower gear ratio, but this would really cause problems with the jeep when trying to do 70+ mph on the freeway into a stiff headwind. The amount of power required to overcome this situation is astonishing. Right now I can keep it in overdrive while doing 70 into a 30+ mph headwind up slight hills in the winter, but it's taking all the engine has to give in these situations. If I calculate the hp requirements for a stock jeep just for the aerodynamics (rho ~1.24, 70 mph + 30mph headwind = 100mph) I need ~ 120hp. That's not counting drivetrain loss/rolling resistance! Right now the engine can give me this at ~2000 rpm which is where I'm at in overdirve. If my gear ratio was lower I'd have to be doing more shifting on the interstate and that would irritate me

 

Soooo....has anyone seen something like that for a 6BT? You all have me a little bit intrigued in what that looks like for my truck.

 

Not as good as the TDI graph, but I recall seeing BSFC data for the 305/555 engine when it first came out and remember being astonished at how efficient it was. My memory is a bit fuzzy on this but I recall it having a lower BSFC at it's optimum point than the VW TDI but I can't find the info now.

 

http://www.chaunceycreekboats.com/pd....9%20380hp.pdf

This isn't what I remember seeing but shows some data for different versions of the QSB5.9 for marine applications (I don't know if this is a good comparison to our truck engines or not). Data for 2000-3000 rpm's are shown. Interestingly the best BSFC occurs between 2400-2600 rpm's for most of these variants. The 305hp version has a min of .343 lb/hp-hr at 2400 rpm and the 330hp has a min of .340 lb/hp-hr 2600 rpm.

 

Do you ever run B100 in the jeep? I am trying to get an idea of what % home made diesel(wvo/meth) can run in the 3.3 without detrimental effects. Completely new to the this. I love diesel motors, but I have to make it work $$ wise at some point, otherwise the wife will nix the idea from the beginning.
In an XJ, I am assuming the fuel mileage would be similar to your set-up. Maybe better, but for cost analysis standpoint, I am figuring 28-30. Right now I get 16-20 in jeep. the percentage of non- pump diesel used makes a huge difference when calculating the yrs to pay for the diesel motor. Just trying to demonstrate my need for some numbers of similar vehicles.

As far as i know, there aren't any biodiesel stores around here, so I'm looking at mixing homebrew with pump diesel. Hence my questions about what percentage you mix the bio with petro. Thanks for your time. Hope I wasn't too confusing.

 

TDI,

I've been searching for the B3.3 BSFC map as well, apparently Cummins keeps pretty tight tabs on them. It's frustrating because you would think they'd want to show off how efficient their engines are. I've been wanting to put a diesel in my S10 for a year and a half now, about a year ago I saw the QSB3.3 in Diesel Progress and was really impressed by it's BSFC, a google search led me to your Jeep thread. According to my data an S10 is about 35% more aerodynamic than a wrangler. So if a jeep can do 30 mpg an S10 should have no problem with 40mpg which is my goal.

Sonoma's posts have confirmed what I estimated with my measurements, alot of modification is needed to shoehorn a 3.3 into a 2wd S10. I'm trying to find a 4x4 with a blown engine. I plan to remove the front axle and replace it with a custom crossmember and leave the transmission in it's stock location. I might have to remove the SAE bellhousing and create a custom adapter to keep the package short enough.

 

Looking back at my mileage log shows I'm typically in the 70-90% biodiesel concentrations during the summers (Just to make sure we're talking about the same thing . . . biodiesel is a chemically different molecule than what you get from mixing wvo with methanol -- it's methyl esters where you chemically remove the glycerin molecule from the three fatty acid chains and attach the methanol molecule to the heads of those fatty acid chains and discard the glycerin). I've reported oil analysis and shown pictures of the orginal injectors that experienced this type of concentration of biodiesel. You can interpret the data as you see fit.

I would encourage you to look at this as a hobby. There's a lot of things that could go wrong and I would hate for you to get into bad graces with your wife or the government regarding this experiment. If you can't afford to pursue this as a hobby you should probably not be pursuing it. Just my opinion. . .

 

Well guys I took the plunge also. Picked up my 3.3 this week, adapters from Phoenix Castings came in this week. I may have some Ideas as to why there is a difference in the way your two engines are running at idle. If your engine came with the deep SAE 4 flywheel housing the flywheel is larger 55 lbs. If your engine has the shallow SAE 4 (aluminum) housing the flywheel weight is 39 lbs. I am thinking that the less rotating mass the rougher your idle will be. Which makes since, I am not going to break out the Physics book, a large rotating mass takes more energy to get moving and to slow down (during idle it would be the compression and combustion strokes).Which means that the smaller flywheel should be the roughest at idle and should accelerate a little faster. 3.3 Sonoma, in your case instead of getting the lightest flywheel available maybe you should go a little heavier.

I am gong to try to shoot in-between you two. I am using all Chrysler and right now I am going to use a V6 flywheel.

 

Macet,

How much did you give for the 3.3 and adapters? Also, is this still the rotary pump 3.3 or the common rail version...

With what Marco has been doing with his Smarty for the 5.9 common rails, I would love to get a 3.3 QSB (I think that is the common rail version) and have Marco come up with tunes for it using a Smarty (wishful thinking I know).

 

SHAZAM!

I wasn't aware of the difference in the flywheels between the short and long housing. Good info. Your theory seems plausible to me.

Please keep us informed on your progress.

 

I paid 4500 plus tax for the engine. The dealer knocked a little off because I am an employee. Sales have been getting 5200 for these engines. The adapters SAE 4 to Chrysler cost me 410.00 and I had to get am adapter ring 215.00. There are three different flywheel/ fly housing you can get on these engines. You need a deep SAE 4 but the combination gives you a total weight of 114.6lbs. I have the shallow SAE 4 because the combo only weighs 51.7lbs, but if you go this route you will have to buy a spacer to achieve the correct flywheel to housing face distance of 2.12. I bought a 1.25 adapter ring and it will have to have to be machined to 1.13.

I have a question for everyone

What can I use for an outlet tube? I have pulled parts that will fit but the cheapest I can find is 50.00. Will an exhaust repair shop be able to flare pipe to fit it. OD 3.10 ID 2.83 with a flare angle of 20. What I have been pulling run on a 6Bs

My reasoning for not going with the QSB is that I was told that Komatsu has control of the software. It’s not the same as the dodge/Cummins software. So it would be difficult to play with. (don’t quote me) I like the idea of being able to run that little engine through almost anything and as long as I keep water out of the fuel, air to the unit and 12v to the pump she will run.

 

this is the best thread I've ever read! my hats off to you all.

i have been wanting to convert my CJ 7 to diesel for a long time. my problem has been transmission selection. currently the jeep has an automatic (727??? or 904???). I've done a little research and have concluded that the cost of modifying the auto to work with the diesel will be more than acquiring a manual tranny. i would have to install a lower stall torque converter and a different valve body to make it usable at lower rpm's. now that i have said that, ill ask a question anyway: phoenix offers an adapter for the 727, what else would i need? flex plate?

question 2: since I'm probably going to a manual, which tranny would offer the easiest hook up? I'm trying to avoid an expensive bell housing from advanced adapters. i found that cummins offers a factory bell housing to go from a 4bt 3.9 to a warner T-19 transmission. i found that in a 4bt parts book. i cant find a parts book for the 3.3 to see if one is offered. im worried about the clutch itself. if i go with the T-19, will i have to find a special clutch that fits the tranny input shaft and the cummins flywheel? or will i have to come up with a special flywheel? or will it just slap together like PB and jelly?

i have emailed phoenix and advanced adapters with my questions but they have not answered me.

at this time I'm leaning towards the 3.9 because they are easy to find used, where as i haven't run across a used 3.3 yet. and cummins offers a bell housing made for the application. (i would really like to use a Deere engine, but i cant find any info at all)

i guess I'm asking "what transmission would you choose if you knew you had to buy one?"

thanks
richard

 

Thanks.

If you want to minimize risk then there seems to be two different approaches that have been pulled off so far with this engine: AX-15 and NV3500. I'm sure other approaches could be made to work but someone more knowledgeable than I would have to help you in this area.

Good luck with your project.

 

This may help: I am using the PC SAE 4 to Chrysler adapter. From there I have the bell housing, flywheel, pressure plate off a 94 Dodge Dakota, with a 3.9 v6. Dodge started using the AX 15 in 92 not sure when the cut off is. Jeeps 4.2-4.0 88 to 95 also sport the AX 15 different internals/ talishaft but the casing is the same. If you buy a Jeep AX 15 get a 94 up they have external slave cylinders like the Dakota. They run different throw cylinders but still you are keeping everything similar. Laying everything out it looks good so far.

Concerning finding info on the 3.3 it is hard for me and I work for Cummins. It’s a fairly new engine and is built overseas. When making the decision 4B or 3.3 keep weight and size in mind (3.9 745-782 lbs. H37.7 L30.6 W24.6) (3.3 567 lbs H 31.7 L27.7 W22.8)

Call Phoenix ask for Bill (engineering) or Jim (sales) they will be more than happy to help.