# 1986 F-250 supercab diesel..how much is it worth?



## rferoni (Nov 7, 2002)

I'm going to look at a F250 supercab 6.9 diesel. Owner says it only has 52000 original miles with a new transmission. He's asking $7500. Blue book on this truck with all options in excellent condition is $4000. Any input?

Thanks, Ron

[email protected]


----------



## rferoni (Nov 7, 2002)

I was just thinking and had a couple questions.....


I've never owned a diesel before. Is the 6.9 a reliable engine? Also, what are things I should look for on a used diesel that may be different from looking at a gas engine??

Thanks all for any info.

Ron


----------



## CARDOCTOR (Nov 29, 2002)

i know they had some problems with the motor
plus since its not turbo its a sled



cardoctor

gone fishin(if it stops raining)


----------



## snow (Jan 5, 2001)

> _Originally posted by rferoni _
> *I'm going to look at a F250 supercab 6.9 diesel. Owner says it only has 52000 original miles with a new transmission. He's asking $7500. Blue book on this truck with all options in excellent condition is $4000. Any input?
> 
> Thanks, Ron
> ...


I paid $8500 for a 1995 F250 with a plow almost 2 yeard ago. He's asking to much for that truck. You'd be better off saving a little more money and buying a powerstroke.

Bryan


----------



## rferoni (Nov 7, 2002)

when did they start putting the powerstrokes in, and are they reliable??

Ron


----------



## snow (Jan 5, 2001)

I believe 1994 Ford introduced the powerstoke diesels. From 1988-1994 (i think) Ford has the 7.3IDI which had a turbo i believe. The powerstroke is a proven engine. My boss has a 1996 or so F350 utility truck with a powerstroke and 120k miles on it and it has plenty of power.

I also know a general contractor who has like 4 E350 vans and one has over 200k miles on it and he loves it.

To learn more about the ford diesels go to http://www.thedieselstop.com/

Hope this helps,

Bryan


----------



## Pelican (Nov 16, 2001)

Powerstrokes were introduced in late '95, it's a pretty reliable engine if maintained properly. There were turbo versions of the 7.3 in '94 and early '95, but the Powerstroke was a complete redesign.

One area people tend to ignore is the cooling system. It has to be monitored for silicates and treated when necessary to prevent cylinder damage. I'd ask for an oil plus coolant sample of any truck you're considering and have them tested at any heavy equipment or truck center.

1986 was the first year for the 6.9 diesel and it was fairly sluggish. There were also problems with the cooling systems due to owner neglect which usually meant a new engine. I think that's a bit much for that truck unless it's in perfect condition.

One thing to note: the trannies that came with the '95 to '97 Powerstrokes were weak and prone to failure. There are built up versions available, but keep this in mind when shopping.


----------



## wyldman (Jan 18, 2001)

Price is way too high.Other than that,they are excellent trucks,very simple and easy to work on.I had an 86,no problems whatsover.

The 6.9 L didn't have as many problem with cylinder wall erosion and cavitation,as it made less power and the cylinder walls were slightly thicker.You can also sleeve the affected cylinder to repair the condition at much less cost than a new motor.

They were pretty slow trucks,not a lot of power,but they got the job done.Injectors and pumps are available dirt cheap too.

You can check the oil,if it looks milky or has any sign of moisture in it,then walk away.Also pay close attention to the cab structure,and rear frame rails,as they were prone to rusting

If you can get it cheap,then take it.I'd pay no more than $2-3000.


----------



## SIPLOWGUY (Mar 21, 2002)

TOO HIGH! SHOP AROUND!


----------



## Brickman (Jun 17, 2002)

> _Originally posted by rferoni _
> *I was just thinking and had a couple questions.....
> 
> I've never owned a diesel before. Is the 6.9 a reliable engine? Also, what are things I should look for on a used diesel that may be different from looking at a gas engine??
> ...


In my opinion the 6.9L was a good engine. Like was mentioned they are a little dead. But with a turbo and turning the fuel up they can run with the best.

But the asking price is way too high in any case. A neighbor of mine bought a 96 F350 SRW with a flat bed for $2500. It ran like **** and only needed ONE injector. He drives it all the time now and it runs and pulls fine.


----------



## Funkster (Jul 10, 2003)

Hay there everyone!! I'm a newbie. Just to clear up a couple of things, the 6.9 diesel was released in 1983. It was around 150hp. About the same as a 351, but it had over 325lbs of torque! At the time, it wasn't designed to be a racer like the new diesels, but to do one thing. And that was PULL. I have a couple of friends that have 6.9's and to be honest, they're still running strong. They do pretty decent on mileage and are pretty reliable. Plus they have a mechanical pump which makes it nice to turn the torque up alil without having to buy a chip . 

In late 1987 ford released a new diesel. The 7.3IDI. It was a non turbo charged engine rated at about 175hp with about 385lbs of torque if I recall. This was a nice step in the right direction. About this time aftermarket turbos were really starting to be played with on these trucks. And like it's predecessor, it too had a mechanical pump that could easily be "turned" up.

In '93, Ford started putting some ATS turbos on and it soon became an option. by midway through the year, you could get either a naturally aspirated ,OR turbo charged engine. Then in '94 Ford released the engine that would soon revolutionize the diesel pickup industry as we know it. The direct injection POWERSTROKE. Only being offered with the 5sp, (the 7.3IDI was still offered only with the auto), it was soon known that that was the diesel to buy. With quicker throttle response and "more power" at 190hp. 

Then in '95, Ford cut the 7.3IDI and the new Powerstroke was the only option. Released with electronice pumps and ECU's it was the dawning of the chip erra. In '96 they were increased to 205hp. And then in '97 they were 215hp. Alot of people say that the '95 and '96 were the years to buy due to fewer problems. For some reason in '97 when Ford was working with some new programs to reduce emissions, alot of them were known for being "dogs" 

I know this is lengthy, but I thought that this might help. Thanks !!

-Funkster-


----------



## wyldman (Jan 18, 2001)

Welcome to Plowsite :waving:

The 6.9's were a good dependable engine.I had one,and I couldn't kill it.



> Then in '94 Ford released the engine that would soon revolutionize the diesel pickup industry as we know it.It was soon known that that was the diesel to buy.


I didn't know that Ford offered a Cummins Turbo Diesel in 94 ??


----------



## Nozzleman (Feb 6, 2003)

> _Originally posted by wyldman _
> *Welcome to Plowsite :waving:
> 
> I didn't know that Ford offered a Cummins Turbo Diesel in 94 ??   *


Wyldman, Just let them Ford boys think they have the best engine. This way we save the Cummins for the real men.


----------



## Brickman (Jun 17, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Nozzleman _
> *Wyldman, Just let them Ford boys think they have the best engine. This way we save the Cummins for the real men.  *


Ignorance is bliss man. There are plenty of Didges that ran against the "daddy truck" and lost, I only laughed as I left them crying in my huge cloud of black smoke. Lotsa crapamaxes too.

 :waving: :salute:


----------



## wyldman (Jan 18, 2001)

Oh no,now what have I started 

There are a few Ford's making big HP numbers,as well as the Dodge's

Now where's that connecting rod pic,that will keep the Ford guys quiet for a while......


----------



## wyldman (Jan 18, 2001)

Found another good pic,it's a Dmax connecting rod and piston


----------



## Brickman (Jun 17, 2002)

Its not the engine I have the problem with. Its the truck, who would want a Dodge just because of the engine???????????


----------



## wyldman (Jan 18, 2001)

You could put a Cummins Turbo diesel in a golf cart,I'd still drive it.

The Dodge's aren't a bad truck at all.Based on what we see in the shop,they seem to hold up better than most.Fords tend to break down more than most.To be fair though,there are a lot more Fords out there,so I guess that would be part of the reason we see so many more of them.

My ultimate truck would be a Cummins transplanted into an older 73-87 Chevy crew cab dually 4X4.


----------



## Brickman (Jun 17, 2002)

> _Originally posted by wyldman _
> *You could put a Cummins Turbo diesel in a golf cart,I'd still drive it.
> 
> The Dodge's aren't a bad truck at all.Based on what we see in the shop,they seem to hold up better than most.Fords tend to break down more than most.To be fair though,there are a lot more Fords out there,so I guess that would be part of the reason we see so many more of them.
> ...


Only several million of the current body style fords on the road.

As to ultimate trucks give me a mechanical Cummins (reliability, I am still scared of all the electronics) in a current style of F SuperDuty. That would be a bad azz truck hands down.


----------



## Funkster (Jul 10, 2003)

Just alil FYI. Ford sells more diesels than Chevy and Dodge combined. I read that in a mag awhile back. Not meaning anything harsh by it. 

-Funkster-


----------

