The Last Really Good Chrysler Product

Art wrote:
> Yeah like Bush solved any problems in the last 3.5 years. Give us all a
> break. The guy is one catastrophe after another.
>

Just wait. If Kerry gets elected and follows through on his promise to
raise taxes on business owners, just WATCH how fast the economy hits the
tanks. The miniscule reduction in the deficit (independent studies say
Kerry's plan will hit a 1.27 T, Bush's 1.33T- a vanishingly small
difference) will be nothing compared to the lost jobs and loss of
revenue stream flowing through the economy.

Daniel J. Stern wrote:


>> As I remember, the Nissan SD33 was sold by Chrysler as a "Chrysler
>>Nissan Diesel" (replete with a so-embossed chrome rocker box cover)
>>and it had a standard Mopar bolt pattern.
>
>
> Doubtful but possible. The factory installed a few of these turds into
> Dodge D100 pickups in '78-'79.

Every time the memory almost dies, someone has to go and resurrect that
clunker. Installing that engine (and I use the term loosely...) was one
of Chrysler's few all-out bloody screaming mistakes.

>
>
>>One of the old Valiants with the trunk lid reminiscent of a Westinghouse
>>45? washer would make a good host for one of these great engines
>
>
> Such a swap would be very much akin to entering a church, climbing atop
> the altar, dropping trou and taking a dump.

Accurate metaphor. Disturbing, and not easily purged from the mental
viewscreen, but accurate.

Daniel J. Stern wrote:


>> As I remember, the Nissan SD33 was sold by Chrysler as a "Chrysler
>>Nissan Diesel" (replete with a so-embossed chrome rocker box cover)
>>and it had a standard Mopar bolt pattern.
>
>
> Doubtful but possible. The factory installed a few of these turds into
> Dodge D100 pickups in '78-'79.

Every time the memory almost dies, someone has to go and resurrect that
clunker. Installing that engine (and I use the term loosely...) was one
of Chrysler's few all-out bloody screaming mistakes.

>
>
>>One of the old Valiants with the trunk lid reminiscent of a Westinghouse
>>45? washer would make a good host for one of these great engines
>
>
> Such a swap would be very much akin to entering a church, climbing atop
> the altar, dropping trou and taking a dump.

Accurate metaphor. Disturbing, and not easily purged from the mental
viewscreen, but accurate.

Daniel J. Stern wrote:

>
> According to the road test (and the abovementioned former owner), the
> trucks took about 35 minutes to go from 0 to 60, once you got them
> started, which took considerable patience. Exhaust smoke was heavy.
> Horsepower was something ridiculous for a D100 -- I'd have to re-read the
> road test, but it was something like 72BHP; totally inadequate.
>
>

The road test I recall referred to "spewing unburned liquid diesel out
the tailpipe for 5 minutes after a start on a cold morning," and that
was assuming you could persuade it to start at all.

Being able to say "well, at least it wasn't an Oldsmobile diesel" is
damning with faint praise.

Daniel J. Stern wrote:

>
> According to the road test (and the abovementioned former owner), the
> trucks took about 35 minutes to go from 0 to 60, once you got them
> started, which took considerable patience. Exhaust smoke was heavy.
> Horsepower was something ridiculous for a D100 -- I'd have to re-read the
> road test, but it was something like 72BHP; totally inadequate.
>
>

The road test I recall referred to "spewing unburned liquid diesel out
the tailpipe for 5 minutes after a start on a cold morning," and that
was assuming you could persuade it to start at all.

Being able to say "well, at least it wasn't an Oldsmobile diesel" is
damning with faint praise.

Ted Azito wrote:


> The turbo engines are a lot more suited to vehicle use than the
> naturally aspirated ones: they were idiots to use the NA version if
> that's what they did.

The contemporary Ford diesel was naturally aspirated, and was actually
quite successful throughout the 80s. Yes, it got 200% better when they
finally hung a turbo on it, spurred by Dodge releasing the Cummins turbo
diesel, but it was perfectly acceptable as it was. The Nissan diesel was
not acceptable under any definition.


> And in any event, the /6 in full size pickups
> was an obstruction to traffic too, especially the three on the tree
> ones.

Uh... no.

Ted Azito wrote:


> The turbo engines are a lot more suited to vehicle use than the
> naturally aspirated ones: they were idiots to use the NA version if
> that's what they did.

The contemporary Ford diesel was naturally aspirated, and was actually
quite successful throughout the 80s. Yes, it got 200% better when they
finally hung a turbo on it, spurred by Dodge releasing the Cummins turbo
diesel, but it was perfectly acceptable as it was. The Nissan diesel was
not acceptable under any definition.


> And in any event, the /6 in full size pickups
> was an obstruction to traffic too, especially the three on the tree
> ones.

Uh... no.

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Steve wrote:

>> According to the road test (and the abovementioned former owner), the
>> trucks took about 35 minutes to go from 0 to 60, once you got them
>> started, which took considerable patience. Exhaust smoke was heavy.
>> Horsepower was something ridiculous for a D100 -- I'd have to re-read
>> the road test, but it was something like 72BHP; totally inadequate.

> The road test I recall referred to "spewing unburned liquid diesel out the
> tailpipe for 5 minutes after a start on a cold morning,"

YES! I'd forgotten about that, but now you mention it, I remember laughing
out loud and shaking my head when I read that.

On Mon, 25 Oct 2004, Steve wrote:

>> According to the road test (and the abovementioned former owner), the
>> trucks took about 35 minutes to go from 0 to 60, once you got them
>> started, which took considerable patience. Exhaust smoke was heavy.
>> Horsepower was something ridiculous for a D100 -- I'd have to re-read
>> the road test, but it was something like 72BHP; totally inadequate.

> The road test I recall referred to "spewing unburned liquid diesel out the
> tailpipe for 5 minutes after a start on a cold morning,"

YES! I'd forgotten about that, but now you mention it, I remember laughing
out loud and shaking my head when I read that.

Blowing raw fuel out after cold start is the symptom for glow plugs
not working or not used on prechamber engines. No mystery why they
wouldn't start.

That said the NA 3.3 was too small for the fullsize truck-unless you
never need to go over 50 mph as was the case for some in-town
vocational trucks. Many medium duty straight trucks were sold with
four cylinder Cumminses and three or four cylinder Detroits which
wouldn't do 55 mph with a van body up through the late sixties or
early seventies. Many bread vans with gas engines wouldn't either. Had
they used the turbo engine performance would have bettered the /6
which admittedly isn't saying much...

Properly used these are remarkable powerplants, but they are 200
CID...not 400.