• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2.3L (N/A & Turbo) Tech

Diesel Mustang?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 87LX2.3
  • Start date Start date May 27, 2009
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

Mustang5L5

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell
Mod Dude
Feb 18, 2001
43,217
17,899
224
Massachusetts
Nov 8, 2021
#21
  • Nov 8, 2021
  • #21
Pretty
Hoytster said:
Look up "Cumstang"
Click to expand...
That's pretty badass.


The other Cummins Mustang was a notch. Looks like there are definitely a few
 

Hoytster

I don't dare do that to my Knob
20+ Year Stangneter
Dec 30, 2002
1,069
700
164
Cornwall, PA
Nov 8, 2021
#22
  • Nov 8, 2021
  • #22
Mustang5L5 said:
Pretty

That's pretty badass.


The other Cummins Mustang was a notch. Looks like there are definitely a few
Click to expand...

Def. a couple of them around now. The other one I've been watching lately is the S550 one by Westen Champlin. I think that "Cumstang" was one of the first.
 

603mustangs

Advanced Member
Sep 19, 2016
249
140
73
New Hampshire
Nov 8, 2021
#23
  • Nov 8, 2021
  • #23
BruceinFL said:
Hello everyone.
Has anyone ever tried putting either a 6.9L or 7.3L diesel in a Mustang?
I think that would be cool! You would still be getting reasonable fuel economy(at least with the 7.3), and fairly good horsepower (again with the 7.3). I saw a post on here about a 6.8 V10, so I thought how 'bout a diesel?
Click to expand...
View: https://youtu.be/XsXkRn5rNWYWestin
Champlin YouTube channel. He put a Cummins in a 2017
 
J

junkyardwarrior

Well-Known Member
Jan 10, 2011
400
113
63
Nov 15, 2021
#24
  • Nov 15, 2021
  • #24
for the life of me I cannot undertsand why any sane person would go through the painstaking effort of installing a big heavy slow lumbering smoky clattery DIESEL into a Mustang, of any vintage.

Cummins? LOL. Yeah u can make a ton of power, but you're also going to be adding about 500 lbs over the nose of the car. A 302 dressed is what 465 lbs? A 6BT and ISB both, is going to be close to triple that weight...somewhere around 1100 lbs (just for the engine), plus 30 lbs of oil (15 quarts total), plus what? 7 gallons of coolant?

Then no matter what engine you choose, you're disadvantaged by the weight, and now consider that diesels are meant to run about 3500 max rpm in "most" cases, so you end up with a bunch of torque from 1200-3000 rpm, and then it completely peters out. Plus, most of the popular diesels are physically huge, they really don't fit well in a Mustang engine bay without surgery. A 6.9/7.3 Ford MIGHT fit, I haven't tried and I have a car to play with and a few 6.9's as well. The turbocharged 7.3 certainly won't fit under the hood, it's way too tall, and seriously doubt that the pan would fit the crossmember. So yes they'll make 1000 lb-ft of torque. So what? Still slow, in comparison to the same amount of money you'd pour into a 5.0, the 5.0 will walk all over it in almost every aspect. MPG included!

The only reason I can think of that I'd ever try it...is to be "different" and if different in this case was a good thing, it would have been done many times over and probably lost it's popularity by now. They weren't popular to begin with, and they aren't now. For good reason!

Now maybe for saving a lot of fuel, maybe if you can find a diesel Ranger 4 cylinder (2.3L I believe it was) and swap that in, might see 40-45 mpg, but it'll be a sub 100hp slug that vibrates horribly. I had a diesel ranger for a little while and it did get good mpg, but it wouldn't even pull my flat bottom boat up any kind of hill, and at idle, anything in the mirrors disappears as a blur from engine vibration.

I wish I had a Detroit 53 series that I could try to play with, freebies, but I don't and I'm not about to go buy one to try either. Like a 4V53T (which is rare). Funny thing about those old Detroits. If they didn't leak, they didn't have any oil left in them. They were heavy, they were kinda slow, but they sounded super cool. Youtube them. Any of the Detroit 53, 71, 92 series, I'm partial to the 4 cylinder versions and the I6 and V6 models. The V8's sounded nice too but I just prefer the smaller ones. I once bought a 1979 MCI 9 bus on a whim, knew nothign about it figured it would be worth what I paid in parts. Drove it home, all 40 foot of it. Parked it and opened up the engine compartment to find a 6V92TA. Good engine, had lots of power down low and sounded really good with a straight exhaust. I gave $800 for it, put it back on the market after I got home and before the engine had enough time to cool off, I had offers of up around 10 grand. It was gone that day. Apparently people like to convert the MCI's into campers, and some of them are super nice based on the small amount of research I did.
 
Reactions: General karthief

KRUISR

10 Year Member
Apr 16, 2015
1,804
903
143
Nov 18, 2021
#25
  • Nov 18, 2021
  • #25
If you are going to do diesel, you have got to do the stacks ...

 
Reactions: 603mustangs and General karthief
W

WindsorPenchant

Active Member
Dec 28, 2020
88
34
28
Ingurland
Nov 19, 2021
#26
  • Nov 19, 2021
  • #26
I've seen it written a few times that the BMW M21 is meant to be a dead easy swap into a Fox..

It's just a shame it's almost entirely anaemic and there doesn't seem to be any floating around any-who!

Which Ford Motor Company Car Had a BMW Engine?

The car world can bring together some strange bedfellows—like FoMoCo and the Ultimate Driving Machine folks.
www.thedrive.com
 

Mustang5L5

That is…until I whipped out my Bissell
Mod Dude
Feb 18, 2001
43,217
17,899
224
Massachusetts
Nov 19, 2021
#27
  • Nov 19, 2021
  • #27
I remember coming across one of those in a junkyard ~20 years ago. I was looking for typical 5.0 HO parts and spied a Mark7 and took a look and was shocked at what was under the hood. Prior to that I had never heard of the diesel mark
 

Piranahbite

Active Member
Jan 21, 2022
338
93
38
American canyon
May 29, 2022
#28
  • May 29, 2022
  • #28
after looking around the web i saw a ranger with a 2.3 turbo diesel... how hard would that be to swap into an existing 2.3 foxbody? just for chits n giggles?
 

General karthief

wonder how much it would cost to ship you a pair
5 Year Member
Aug 25, 2016
27,871
10,542
203
polk county florida
May 29, 2022
#29
  • May 29, 2022
  • #29
If you're talking mid 80s 2.3 turbo diesel it only made 86 hp in it's last year,
 

manicmechanic007

5 Year Member
Sep 26, 2017
2,528
712
143
Roy, Utah
May 30, 2022
#30
  • May 30, 2022
  • #30
'84 Stinkin Lincoln Continental MK VII LSC had a BMW turblo diesel plant that was a dream?
2.4l six that made 115 hp and 155 torque
Very few made most still around
 

KRUISR

10 Year Member
Apr 16, 2015
1,804
903
143
May 30, 2022
#31
  • May 30, 2022
  • #31
Piranahbite said:
after looking around the web i saw a ranger with a 2.3 turbo diesel... how hard would that be to swap into an existing 2.3 foxbody? just for chits n giggles?
Click to expand...
But why? Fuel economy for the Ranger was almost the same as a 88 2.3 5 spd.

 

manicmechanic007

5 Year Member
Sep 26, 2017
2,528
712
143
Roy, Utah
May 30, 2022
#32
  • May 30, 2022
  • #32
Torque?
Longevity?
No tune ups
That is the diesel reasoning
 

Bullitt347

I have been doing it wrong this whole time
15 Year Member
Mar 23, 2007
3,951
2,906
194
Middle of Maine
May 30, 2022
#33
  • May 30, 2022
  • #33
Don't forget over $6 per gallon!!!
 

65ShelbyClone

Founding Member
Sep 9, 2000
4,675
38
119
Antelope Valley, SoCal
May 30, 2022
#34
  • May 30, 2022
  • #34
That's what regular gas costs here. Diesel is about 10% more.

A Mustang is more aero and the diesel would likely get better economy in one than the Ranger. 9.8L/100km is about 23.5mpg. However, the diesel would have to deliver at least 26mpg (+10%) for it to just break even on fuel cost and a lot more than that for it to have a chance of paying for itself.
 

KRUISR

10 Year Member
Apr 16, 2015
1,804
903
143
May 30, 2022
#35
  • May 30, 2022
  • #35
manicmechanic007 said:
Torque?
Longevity?
No tune ups
That is the diesel reasoning
Click to expand...
Not that diesel
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Cam for 1989 2.3 4 plug
  • Jaycee1964
  • Dec 12, 2025
  • 2.3L (N/A & Turbo) Tech
Replies
3
Views
201
2.3L (N/A & Turbo) Tech Dec 14, 2025
AeroCoupe
S
1965 Mustang with 80s 5.0 engine in it Power Steering hose or connection ID?
  • spearce
  • May 19, 2026
  • Classic Mustang Specific Tech
Replies
2
Views
75
Classic Mustang Specific Tech Jun 8, 2026
AeroCoupe
P
market for 2.3L? i wanna sell
  • Patk
  • Dec 6, 2025
  • 2.3L (N/A & Turbo) Tech
Replies
5
Views
238
2.3L (N/A & Turbo) Tech Dec 7, 2025
rednotch
Yanmar Diesel Engine Question
  • Noobz347
  • Sep 1, 2024
  • Other Auto Tech
Replies
9
Views
502
Other Auto Tech Sep 7, 2024
Noobz347
9
1994 Mustang GT 5.0 L Convertible
  • 94ns95
  • Jun 17, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
10
Views
147
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 19, 2026
94ns95
9
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2.3L (N/A & Turbo) Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?