There are a few,

1.  Timing is different Non-IC is 1.40, IC is 1.20
2.  IP's are different the Non-IC have large pump head, the pump is longer(physically) if im not mistaken.
3.  The injection lines are different.
4.  The injectors on the Non-IC are 9mm and the IC are 7mm
5.  How the accessory's mount are different form Non-IC to IC
6.  Turbos were different on the later IC trucks.
7.  Throttle cable and kickdown are attached different
8.  Different style vacuum pumps.

That's all I can remember off the top of my head.

Yes I would be more comfortable running 20%.  Don't know what the long term affects would be in the modern motor fuel systems.  Yep I run additives with all my motors now, new, and old.

Ok one of my local Pick_A_part's is closing its doors so it was half off day.  Out of all the years I have gone there I have NEVER seen a CTD truck in the yard with an engine until today it was an 89 D350 standard cab long wheel base.  I never really paid much attention to the "D" series
trucks but when I was looking over this very well used truck I saw something interesting the cross member had a bracket bolted just forward of the crossmember for the motor mount and the passenger side had something similar but it was riveted.  I always thought the Cummins bolted down on the crossmember.

  What was of some note was the frame between the control arm on the drivers side was cracked halfway thru and on the passenger side it was broken all the way thru.  The steering box area was fine I didn't see any cracks.

Ok let me type up some notes and I will get it posted.

I just took my colt apart to clean, and also thought about coating it. Stainless and reflection seem to go hand and hand which is not good for hunting (I carry that gun while hunting, not FOR hunting). Do you bead blast or sand it first...to make it "stick"? Is it basically a spray paint?

I always have bead blasted but some people have had good luck just doing a real good degrease, I think baking helps a lot also.

Ok Don per your request, some firearm stuff.  This is my first 1911 build, the frame was an 80% and the slide was from Brownells, the internal parts were from Sarco.  This is a series 70, not very challenging took about 45min to do the machining the most involved job was fitting the hammer and sear.  Function check good, now I just need to put some sights on it and put a few hundred rounds thru it.  after that I will take it back apart and do prep for coating.  Not sure what I will use for coating.

Ok not a lot to report on the side wrench side of the RC, its all back together and I have over 1000 miles on it since I have swapped the head.  I am still down on boost and I am not 100% sure it is because I backed off the timing or something else.  I need to do a pressure check on the intercooling plumbing and make sure I don’t have a problem there.   I am almost ready for new tires and I am pretty sure I am going with a 285/70/17 maybe a 295, most likely going to go with Goodyear MT/R.  Planning for an overland trip at the first of the year.

  I am also gathering up parts to rebuild the bottom end of the Cummins and the 47RH, I am thinking I will tear down the core over thanksgiving and get the block over to the machine shop to get checked out.

It was a great weekend for flying, this was one of the reasons I built the RC was to use it to get to some of the places we fly most are forest service roads and sometime they are not maintained but I’m glad I can throw six people in the RC with all of our equipment and go 99% of the places we need to get to!

 Pictures are coming.

 I was looking thru my notebook this past weekend and I realized I have had the RC mobile for almost three years now.  I have went thru every major system and rebuilt or improved/enhanced to make them more dependable and have learned a lot thru the process. 

  I have put over 45K miles over that time and looking forward to the next 400K!!! and the only real complaint I have is the fuel mileage is not what I thought it would be, I think a taller tire will help that and since I am almost due for new rubber we will find out if that helps. 

I'm looking forward to rebuilding the bottom end of Cummins and 47RH this winter.   

Everything is back together and the truck is running good I took it on a 200mi shake down run and all looks good so far.   The engine runs about 10degrees cooler but I think that was because I retarded the timing from where I had it, also because of the timing is retarded I am still down on boost under full throttle my EGT creeps up to 1300 so I might have to bump the timing back up. 

The only issue I had is the OD quit working so once I got home I checked the TPS, sensor in the head, and the sensor in the transmission line, as a general rule the problem was were you were working and sure enough the sensor in the head seems to of died.  Its not an issue since it’s a switch so I just jumpered the plug and all is well OD works good again.

I post some pictures in a few.

No the rods for some of the Cummins BT6 are made in Mexico, and the gears are mostly from Mexico.  The rumor is that after Richard Nixon lander in China the second plane that landed had the Cummins Executive team on board.  I have never see a China Cummins casting for the larger items, but I have seen parts from everywhere else.
 

Yes I asked a lot of questions about the China heads, I didn't hear anything bad about them.  That being said everyone I talked to said they were only running stock boost levels, and then the longevity issue comes into play  I don't want to have to do this every couple years.  Cummins dose have a Casting plant in China and they make heads for the engines made in China supposedly Cummins dose not bring those Castings to the US, the US gets the crappy castings from Brazil.  I hope mine holds up!!

Right before install, more to come all I have time for.

Yea its set up that way when you post, I always resize the pictures.  Also the site only allows you to post five pictures at a time.

Ok back to the head removal, this is a very straight forward job, you don't really need anything special at least tool wise.  First thing I disconnected the wiring going to the cylinder head.  After that I removed the turbo, then the injection lines, and then the injectors. 

Ok if you are not doing some baseline measurements you can leave the injectors in place but I want to do a quick compression test so I removed the injectors, also Cummins dose not recommend a compression test the prefer method for them is to use the breather with orfice method. 

So I got decent numbers right around 400psi in every cylinder again this was just an FYI for me.

So up next is to remove the cooling lines, intake hose, valve covers, rocker pedestals, and pushrods.  You should always mark from where each tappet the push rod goes back to.  After you have that all out of the way you can remove the cylinder head bolts, completely remove the bolts so they don't get in the way.

Then you are ready to lift the head off the block.

I have some cleaning to do but the block deck looks real good and the cylinder bores look good also.   

Ok a little update, I pulled the pushrods out of the core engine just to show how bad they bend.

Yes, Cummins, headbolts, head gasket and remanufactured complete head.  Yes I will post pictures of the job in my build thread.  The reason I am running the Cummins head bolts is the last set lasted 25years and never gave any problems, also I am only running 28psi of boost and my motor will stay basically stock So I really don't need studs or super bolts!  Looks forward to getting it apart and see how everything looks.

Quote from: wilsonphil on September 28, 2015, 10:48:11 PM

I an currently running a 1/2 line from the sump to the mechanical pump, I am running Hungry Diesel modified piston pump and I have a low pressure light from a Gen2 setup and I had a gauge on it when I first installed just to see what I had it was around if I remember correctly.  The only reason I did that was if I ever wanted to run a turned up Ppump motor I already had everything in place.  But I am running a VE setup right now.

1.  P/N 4988747 pump "unmodified"
2.  P/N 3914753 Fuel Tube  from pump to fitler housing
3.  P/N 3914284  Spacer
4.  P/N 3963983  sealing washer
5.  P/N ???????  mounting gaskets 2ea cant find the bag!!

BTW everything was made in China from Cummins.

So according to Norm, I need to swap out the pump spring...should be easy if I can find the spring

Now about the spacer...Use it or lose it on a P-Pump motor?

I am pretty sure you can just get the standard Gen 2 piston pump, the reason I got the one from Hungry Diesel was the VE pump I'm running cant take the stock pressure of the Gen 2 lift pumps, the guy at Hungry Diesel changes the spring out on a new pump so that the pump only produces 10-12psi.  I believe you still need to run the spacer and just the standard pump from Cummins, I'm sure Norm can correct me if my assumption is not correct.

Two things can cause this, one most people have heard of is the KDP.  The other is the bolts that hold the timing case to the block are just as a concern, they should be removed cleaned and the hole they go into with parts cleaner and then reinstalled with locktight and torqued.  This should prevent them of ever coming out, but the only way you can get to all one the case bolts is with the cam removed 

Dug into the core engine a little yesterday, I just wanted to make sure it was just the cam.  internally it looks like it was maintained no sludge and water jackets look the cleanest I have seen in a longtime.  A couple pictures of the cam.

The head gasket looks to be getting worse, I noticed today my boost is down, I was keeping it under 20lbs but I pulled a long grade today and I could only get 24lbs and EGT started to climb so I am assuming its leaking under full load.  Looks like I will be doing this job sooner rather than later.

some more

So from the looks thing this is pricing in my neck of the woods,

1.   China casting complete head  $550.  I have not found any bad experiences with anyone using these heads but most of those people are running stock boost.
2.   Machine shop basic Valve Job Mag, pressure check, deck . no new parts, 600-850 depending on the shop
3.   Machine shop 100% reman $1250 new valves, guides, springs, etc,etc
4.   Cummins reman exchange $1235 +$65 core(I would keep my old head for that price ) this is supposedly all new parts.

Most likely I will just go the Cummins route but I am waiting to hear back from one more machine shop up in Farm/Oil country

For right now I will keep an eye on the leak and see if it gets any worse. 

I would prefer to just find a complete engine and go thru it and stick that in but find a decent engine that is not totally destroyed at a REASONABLE price is difficult in my neck of the woods. 

I have always planned on upgrading to the 47rh so finding a 94-95 truck or running gear out of those years and go thru everything would  be the best path.
 
I would just pull my current running gear but I use this truck every weekend and really don't want it down for however long it takes me to get all the work done, that and it runs so good with good oil pressure.

 If I pull the head I will have it gone thru or just replace it with a overhauled unit, it looks like Cummins has sent the casting jobs overseas so I am pretty sure anything they offer is from China, India, Brazil.  Ebay(china) route looks like anywhere from 550 to 1200 for a complete head, I will call Cummins in the morning and see what they want for exchange.

   

Looks like the head gasket has started to leak, just coolant.  Just a little back ground I really don't know how many miles are on the engine, when I pulled it from the doner truck I torqued the head bolts, the previous owner had dumped a bunch of stop leak in the engine but I assumed it was because he was to lazy to replace the water pump but maybe we had head gasket problems I don't remember seeing any evidence of water leaking around the head when I pulled the engine otherwise I would of pulled the head and replaced the head gasket.

 The question is should I,

1.  Pull the head and just replace the head gasket.
2.  Pull the head get it redone, hope the block deck is OK and leave every else alone.
3.  Pull the Engine and just rebuild the whole engine?

Option 2 and 3 I will most likely find an head or engine and rebuild it as I have time, for now I will keep and eye on it and make sure it dose not get any worse.  The engine is healthy good oil pressure, no oil on the water, runs cool and no real blow by.   

http://truckyeah.jalopnik.com/swapping-a-cummins-diesel-into-an-old-dodge-truck-how-1728593136


I thought you guys might enjoy this, you would think with as much information that is out there they would of done a little more research.

Its very interesting if you ever study Gene Stoner’s original design in the 1950s.  Actually all firearms development is very good research and in some cases really amazing.
It’s been said by a few people that were involved in the development  of the original AR15 that everything worked really well until they changed the powder, which threw the system out of balance. Instead of changing it by going back to the right powder that it was designed for, they started changing the system, and it’s been bouncing around ever since, fixing the symptoms.  At the same time why do we have a design that is stuck with only ONE type of powder and that is that sensitive to that change so I will argue the orginal design should of taken that possibility in to account before it was deployed.

  The idea of putting a piston system on the AR15 throws its own problems into the mess.  The piston-driven AR type rifle has created its own set of issues that are going to show up in the field in the future.

This all being said there are problems with the M4, the gas impingement system is just so much more efficient. That being said, if you don’t have a set of good gas rings on the gun, if you have a carrier key that’s worn out or if you have a gas tube that’s worn out, there’s going to be problems IE you have not maintained the weapon.  I find it interesting that we have rifles out there in the military system that, some of them have 10,000, 20,000+++++++ rounds through them, and we’re comparing them with rifle systems that are brand new. Everybody likes a new broom because it always sweeps clean, and everybody wants something new.

 These changes need a track record, you have to be able to track the changes you make and subject your setup to a known working model, these systems need to fire as many rounds before we can compare. An example of what I think that we are doing wrong in our small arms for the US military, it’s that we figuratively woke up one Monday morning, and said the M60(we can discuss this later) was a bad weapon.  When and where did we fall out of love for the M60? It was after it got worn out and after the parts were worn out, and then we went out to low-bid, small business set asides as vendors that built parts for the M60, crap parts flooded the system some of these parts that may or may not have worked or there was a huge compatibly issue with the original parts and pieces. (rant!!!!) (I blame the original manufactures for this in some aspects and the greedy board members or just plain poor management.) What we did was adopt a gun that was two years older, six pounds heavier, and much longer, and that had some other issues of its own. We adopted that gun “because it was more reliable.” If you would let me add 25% of the weight and 25% of the cost, and all the other things to any weapon system we have, sure, we could build a better weapon. When we started realizing that the M60 wasn’t going to last forever, we should’ve started a program to design a new belt-fed .308 machine gun.
 
 Ok a little rant from me about the screwed up gun laws we have, contrary to the liberal even Military belief all small arms that the military has ever used has come from the civilian side of the free market not the other way around.  The pure stupidity of 1968 and 1986 gun control acts will haunt the firearms community forever.  The only real plus if you want to call it that is the 68 GCA let you build your own firearm and its written in there so unless they want to restart negotiations we should be safe there for awhile. 

Ok back to history, when Gene Stoner and among others started working on the 7.62mm belt fed issue in 1989, the very first thing that was tried was to import a PKM. ATF said the law would not allow Gene Stoner to import a PKM - that’s just crazy total BS. It was because it was a Russian design, and it was forbidden to import Russian small arms into this country. I mean, here’s the father of our main rifle caliber weapon, and he wants to work on a new belt fed, and he can’t have access to similar designs because of politics. We just decided not to even bother going down that road, it’s just not worth it. Our country should have started designing a new replacement for the M-60 when we saw that the parts were going to be worn out, and the parts weren’t going to be compatible. I’m hearing similar things right now that soldiers are saying about the M249, that they’re unhappy with its reliability, they’re unhappy with the parts, and maybe we’re going to wake up one Tuesday morning, and say, “Let’s throw the M249 away.” Instead of letting it get to that point, let’s see if we can fix the problems and track the changes so we always put dependable systems in the field.

 The first thing to do is see if that weapon system can be improved, and if we have reached the lifecycle of those guns and they’re worn out, then let’s throw ‘em away and buy new ones. But how could a gun that we have had for 20 years, how can we wake up one Tuesday morning and that gun not be any good? What happened to it? If we have an issue, let’s start developing, let’s start thinking about a new level of M249, let’s start now, and let’s improve it. But there is not anyone that has written and told FN that they have a problem. As far as the Army’s concerned, there’s not a problem.

  I lot of this comes for the military itself, this came out of WW2 with the M3 grease gun and other designs and we are stuck with it in some ways. I will add this I don't really see the point in having a barrel shorter the 14" on the AR/M4 platform, unless you are a building a PDW and use it on a PSD I don't see the use of it being practical, but that is IMO!