Hi guys i use to have a 88 D 100 with a 3.9 manual 4 speed with O/D and i went in a ditch bc of ice and then a kid in a ford saw my truck and took it out of commission. I got a job right now and have to drive to it. It is different places maybe 100 plus miles a day or could be less. Have tried to find a car and that has not worked out. I found a 2 wheel drive slant 6 4 speed. How would this truck do driving that far and speeds of 65 to 70 on the interstate? thanks

 

If there was ever an engine series that Chrysler should never have dropped, it was the slants (aka "leaning towers of power").

The slant is a dependable, durable engine with surprising torque in the 225 cu./in. version.

Don't expect to out drag v-8's at stoplights but you'll pass gas stations they can't.

Keep the oil/filter changed, if it's a pre 1980 engine keep the valves adjusted, set the base timing at 12 BTDC and run 87 octane.

Btw, if it's the two barrel Super Six engine you have a collector vehicle.

Two four speeds were offered: the NP435 wide ratio (easily recognized by the long truck looking shift lever) and an 833 based overdrive 4 speed (3rd is 1:1 for around town under 40 mph).

Enjoy!!! I loved mine (80 D-150 with 225 -single bbl ,NP-435, 3.55 Sure-Grip axle)

Budd

 

A decently maintained Slant 6 would be very reliable and be very easy to work on. Along with the AMC 4.0 I6 it's my favorite to work on or rebuild. Would also be a great commuter truck as the Slant 6 always got really good fuel economy.

What killed the Slant 6 was the initial round of government emissions laws in the early 70s. To meet the first round, power numbers were already reduced from 145 HP / 215 TQ in 1971 all the way down to 95 HP / 170 TQ in 1975. Even though it got mild power increases through the '80s, by the mid 80s most 6 cylinder base offerings from rivals had at least 25% more power...

 

And what was truly crazy was that the bore on a /6 was well under the EPA's 4" maximum bore diameter for emissions control... but then the EPA still doesn't have a qualified automotive engineer on board, just touchy-feelies to this day.

My '80 D-150 with 225 had excellent torque / power after I tossed the tune specs for it out the window and tuned it to 1972 specs (IOW, 12 degree BTDC instead of 4 ATDC) and I could still run 85 octane.

And anyone that thinks they, the EPA, are responsible people needs to look at how they are passing the buck on the Animas River spill here in Colorado.

Budd

 

Even though I don't work in the field, my degree is in wildlife biology. You don't have to tell me how damn useless the EPA is...

 

Incredibly enough, there are some, Hammer, that believe the EPA is the greatest thing since sliced bread ... but many of them are weird in other ways also.

I worked for Arvin Ind. Inc. (Journeyman Millwright and forklift mechanic) when they first started making the catalytic converters and as I assisted with the installation of the presses to stamp out the stainless steel shells, I overheard engineers from the Big Three (and AMC) discussing how they weren't going to get hot enough around town to light off and it was all a waste of taxpayer money.

They also said that the good old PCV had knocked out 95% of the pollutants already which means that all the claims for emissions reductions since then are just nibbles when you look at the total reduction since 1960.

Budd