Hans,
With all due respect, my Northern Indiana friend, by the questions you are asking, I think you have not dug into the DOW Forum search feature enough.
Wayne, (and Marcus N. too!) have been finding nice Dakotas, and others much closer than the Pacific Northwest, and posting them on “Deals on Wheels 2” thread. Tennessee, Atlanta area, Alabama, etc. much more “rent an auto hauler and go get it” friendly. All of our Northern Midwest trucks have rust belt disease, road salt induced body cancer. Remember though, the engines, driveline can be good. To find a low rust truck without lots of leg work is getting difficult, I agree. Mine is kinda rusty. I always thought my truck would become an “Assembly Jig”, and proof of concept vehicle. If I can be successful with that, I will spend more on a second truck, using the same gasifier, or a copy thereof.
1992-1996 Square Dakota V8, 5.2Liter. It ticks all the boxes, and a known quantity, which will get you more help when troubleshooting.
If you transform a V6 truck into a V8 truck, you need a lot more stuff than just the engine. Better to take two damaged V8 trucks, same model, year, engine, etc. and make one good one if you go that route. (Ask Jakob North!)
If you go with another path, I must advise you to get a “before 1997” -ish vehicle. Its the ECM computer that won’t let you woodgas a newer vehicle (In general) some have invested tons of time and money, ultimately giving up and hopelessly leaving the “Hobby”. 
Is there any logistical reason to not use, say a 3.6 engine? I have access to a few 3.6 Dodge Dakotas and have not had a lot of trouble getting a hold of more if I needed
Thomas,
Same advice to you, my friend. Find out why it won’t work. Reasearch, Research, Research! = Time well spent. 
Remember, the truck is important, so is the gasifier build. The cost of the truck, that is just throwing money at a problem to try and solve it. THEN the difficult work must begin! If you get a really nice truck, you may not want to cut into it, and start necessary modifications.
ThomasF. that 3.6L Dodge engine is a late model variable valve controlled overhead cam V-6.
Good luck chuck. For at least 10 different reasons other have nose bent into. $$,$$$ lost!!
Seriously. The early Dakota’s were evolved selected by W.K. for multiple reasons. Search magnifying glass research this out as MikeR. said.
WayneK is a self-professed Ford man. His first two? were Ford full sized pickup trucks.
IF. IF Ford had ever made a factory V-8 small block small Ranger pickup truck I’ll bet he’s still be a Ford driving wood gasser.
Others have small car and small pickup truck done overhead valve inline four cylinder engines. The earlier, easier, simpler ones.
Sean French did a later model Ranger/Mazda DOHC Ford with his gasifier system. Got expensive. He went back to GM small blocks applications for many reasons. Info on the DOW here.
Matt Ryder did do a few Lego-engine GM “LS” V-8’s. Then he has now also gone back to GM small blocks too. For reasons. Search out these fellows previous topics comments for thier reasons.
Regards
Steve Unruh
This is from the premium side, (Chris Saenz copy paste), will answer a couple questions. No secrets told, just practical advice.
From Chris S.:
"From time to time we get asked if the V6 Dakota is a good candidate for a Keith gasifier. The 3.9L engine is a bit smaller than the 5.2L V8, but they are fairly common and some folks would like to use them. As far as we know the engine should run, like any spark ignition engine would.
BUT.
One of the advantages of the Dodge Dakota is the “magic” that happens when you rotate the distributor. It’s a noticeable boost in power and acceleration. This is commonly referred to as timing advance. Emerging data shows that timing is NOT what’s changing when you turn the distributor. Regardless… The magic of the V8 computer from this generation has yet to be quantified or reproduced.
In Wayne’s experiments on a V6 Dakota, he wasn’t able to get it to run properly (on gasoline) when rotating the distributor as he normally does on the V8 Dakotas. This is a warning flag. Whether this rules out ALL V6 motors or just V6 Dakotas, we aren’t sure yet. Wayne had a V6 Dakota years back with an all mechanical distributor and it could be advanced just fine, although it has less effect than the V8 Dakotas have. The V6 may run OK on stock timing, but performance will be lacking.
Just be aware when shopping around, computer based woodgas timing advance is new/uncharted territory, and being actively researched. We encourage folks to stick with the proven Dodge V8s until we know more about what’s happening."
[March 2013.] Found with the “search” magnifying glass graphic, under “V6 Dakota”
From Mike R:
Now we know… Many engines are a non-starter, no-go. look for approved donor vehicles. 
Must read this, from the Driveonwood Library section.
hmmm. looks like this is going to be a lot of R&D. which is fine. thats why i got into engineering. learning new stuff is exiting. even if there is a failure, you learned how NOT to do something lol
Wayne figures pound and a half for the small block Dakota and two pounds for the V-10. Look at the work he does with that half pound. I may have a small brain but that is a no-brainer.
Hey ThomasF., you seem like a youngerish guy.
Up for a challenge.
Twofold to use the post 2000’s vehicles.
Figure out how to never, ever under any set of circumstances; Never, Ever send tar passed with the made gas into the engine.
All late model engines to get the certified emissions down, and the customer loving power up; have valves if stuck down open WILL be crashed by the upcoming piston crown.
And these four and five valve late modern engines have very, very skinny valve stems.
They bend easy just cylinder head off servicing with ham-handed handling.
Engine running clashed usually break off a valve head. And it rattling around for even a few hundred rpm with score damage the cylinder walls too. Not just bent valves . . . a trashed engine.
Second challenge with be learning to spoof the particular years, and chassis, OBDII system to not just shut you down ran long enough in what it is preprogrammed in as weird, abby-normal.
Focus on chassis/engines/systems that have a lot of off-road racing support. Use their overlay and replacement systems.
And since you are tearing off those DO-NOT-REMOVE tags, from evolved systems that are designed to record and report tampering, non-factory certified compliances . . . do not tell, broadcast, blab-blab, what you are doing across the Net.
All places North America you broke Federal anti-tampering Law.
Broke many anti-tampering States laws too.
Chronic, blatant, tell-all tamperers, get set examples of.
Fines. Big, big fines.
Read the recent news about the diesel systems “cheaters”. Tracked back and busted by the Feddiys to use as examples.
S.U.
incidentally, the filtration of the gasses for wood gas is one of my biggest priorities. i have some “theory designs” that i plan on making for filtration methods and redundancies. might not work. might be overkill. wont know till i get testing started. im not super interested in post 2000 vehicles if im being honest specifically because they have too many boards, chips and electronics that can potentially shut the car down. i can certainly look into it, but id really rather start with a vehicle that i know will work in the beginning.
i know a few fellas in the county that i think are familiar with OBDII spoofing. there is a fairy large off road following in the area. im not personally familiar withh it, but i may be able to pick their brains.
Filtering is fine, yes.
I’ve used extensive, expensive stationary systems with four levels of progressive filters.
They catch soots, and ash fine.
Tars will pass through. They are in a vapor gaseous state when warm.
Ideally you burn up tars as fuels inside a warmed up, stabilized gasifier.
Some lab researchers have net energy input gas stream refrigerated and taken them out with enhanced condensate. Then a disposal problem. Requiring a whole separate downstream system added for that.
Operating procedures is how you prevent tars to the engine. Never rush when not fully warmed up. Flare off all until you are up to stable temperatures.
Always keep the system loaded up operating hot enough. Took me 20 minutes today stop and go, crawling along to get though a road construction zone. If I’d been woodgasing good time to just switch to gasoline. Then past have to use reheat up and stabilize the gasifier.
Char beds can and do get burnt out stretching to the next easy pull over re-fuel stop. THEN refueled you Will make tars until you burn in a new char bed.
Any wood fed system can fuel fall down bridge - You Will then make tars.
None of these and many more can be solved by filtering.
Not to steal this topic starters thunder but we all have learned the real set-back to wider use of wood gas-for shaft power is the near constant Operator involettns needed.
Why many here now have switch to pre-made charcoal gasification.
Whole generations been spoiled now by made easy refined, spec grades liquid fuels. Us Boomers aged too.
Coming onto 15 years now seeing new agers thing this can be solved by digital electronifing.
Nope. not unless you grind up powder the wood stocks inputs. Compress and uniforrmize them to be very, very consistent always the same. Like the spec grade liquid fuel were made to be.
Too many pre-steps to that approach.
Too complex. Many, many single post failures then made possible.
Too far from useable DIY systems.
S.U.
Ok heres my 2 cents. I went with a 93 dakota with 318 for several reasons. #1 most important. I’ve never done a gasifier before and Wayne( plus most everyone else) highly recommends it. #2 if you do what they are doing they have already probably had and have proven remedies for what ever problems you will encounter. #3 get a proven real world system. Work on learning other 75 %. Then start changing things. Its hard to reinvent the wheel. The things on my truck that i did different from what everybody else is doing(throttle bodies instead of Wayne’s dampers, the timing advance and idle control) all bit me at argos. So now instead of driving on wood and making more wood chunks I’m having to fix my bright ideas. I had others but thur reading and research on this forum i figured out why my ideas wouldn’t work. I’m not saying dont try something new i just think it would be better to have a proven setup as a base. Sorry for long winded reply.
I am not against Dakotas and I agree that it is the ideal woodgas donor. I hope to have one of my own before too long. However, the second generation Dakota ended in 2004 and I firmly believe we need to identify a younger, cheaper alternative. That’s going to involve reprogramming the OBD2 system., but if we figure that out, it’s possible both performance and efficiency could be improved.
Until then, I’m wondering about using all those Grand Cherokees. For a vehicle which was more expensive when new, they are far more available (and thus, cheaper) than the Dakota. Could a gasifyer be built in a trailer? Obviously, we’d need some kind of flexible coupling to deliver the gas, but I’m not thinking of anything else that would need to change.
Possible advantages:
- It uses the Magnum 5.2 that we’re already familiar with.
- All of the cargo capacity remains available.
- Seating for five.
- Less modifications to the vehicle.
- It could dropped of next to a generator (or other stationary engine) or one gasifyer could rotate between two or more vehicles.
Also, imagine you have a quick trip and a cold burn chamber. Or, you know you’ll be traveling where wood resupply is not available, or over mountains where WG struggles, it would be easy to leave the trailer behind and gain a bit of efficiency by not using gasoline to transport the weight of the unused gasifyer.
A big disadvantage is that you couldn’t read gauges mounted directly to the unit while driving,
A Grand Cherokee with trailer would be heavier than a Dakota, but not by that much:
Ram 1500 (Regular Cab Long Bed) – 5.2 6400.02 lbs.
94-96 Dakota – 5.2 4043.28 lbs.
Jeep Grand Cherokee (ZJ) – 5.2 3950.68 lbs.
Lastly, I wonder about the advantage of perceived safety. I shared photos from Argos with a coworker and he was convinced it could explode. I tried to explain the gas in inert until it is mixed with O2 and that happens on the other side of the firewall. And, yes it demonstrates a total lack of understanding that he is more afraid of WG than gasoline, but I wonder if placing everything in a trailer if would seem safer (and drive adoption) than having it immediately behind the back window.
Thoughts?
There’s a few trailer builds here on the forum, but then you run into the issue of using a trailer: maneuvering.
You have to account for parking, reversing, etc when you have a trailer. Also a lot of states in the USA require a second title tag and registration so that adds to the expense.
It definitely hinders the people that want to everyday drive on wood. I know I couldn’t park at work with a trailer in tow.
I’ve played around with the idea of a rear mounted luggage rack gasifier but you have to do a lot of weight watching when you have a mass behind the rear axle even moreso with a unibody like the later model Jeep Cherokees. Charcoal would be easiest for that but then you’re making charcoal all the time and don’t have the ability to scrounge in an emergency(burn bans), and for smaller engines one could take notes from Joni and his ultralight raw wood gasifier which he has drawings up here on the forum for free.
Most OBD2 engines will run on woodgas without cheating the computer. I’ve had my 2011 Sierra and it’s 4.3 run on charcoal gas twice now as a test bed and driven them on the road. All I did was tap the fuse block and set up a switch in series with the fuel pump, and made a new intake snorkel to not alter the original for changing back. I kept all the emissions stuff in place. Gary Gilmore ran his relatively new Ford Ranger on charcoal gas as well with a similar fuel shutoff using the airbag inertia switch as a fuel pump kill switch.
I think the main issue with OBD2 is finding a dependable engine design itself. Interference engines are simply a no-go not worth the risk as others have stated. Overhead Valve push rod engines are the safest bet. Some Overhead Cam engines are non interference. I personally think Mopar FoMoCo and GM are still the easiest pickings for woodgas vehicles. Apparently Cadillac Northstar engines take woodgas like a champ. I’d like to see what a Ford 3 valve in a Mustang would do.
Selecting a vehicle to woodgas is a very multi-faceted set of desisions.
Sure. Will the engine be big enough power downrated on woodgas to be safe and useable in your need-to-drive areas?
Following up on your discovery about Grand Cherokees V-8’s now cheap . . .
I’ve worked side by side on Grand Cherokee’s and Dakota pickup trucks. Why not get a no longer runnable Dakota V-6 and just swap in the Cherokee (Dodge) V-8 engine system, eh?
Same with the 2nd generation Ford Ranger pickups. Why not swap in the V-8 1st Gen Explorer/Mountainere engine system, eh.
Lots of fiddly bitty challenges to overcome as Marcus Norman found, and documented just trying to swap OBD1 and OBDII Dodge full sized V-10 systems.
Before leaping what are your actually annual, local drive on the roads requirements??
Annual, visual required safety inspections??
Annual, Bi-Annual emissions compliance inspections?? That check engine light MUST be off. The computer cannot have any stored trouble codes. 30+ years we had a mix of underhood equipments inspections, and measured tailpipe gasses out.
Will your Insurance company kick about a morphedite mixed vehicle you will create?? They do not like to pay out for problems you’ve created.
From what I’ve regionally experienced; and read from, others most places have too-old-to-have to comply exemptions.
Here one state it is over 25 years old.
The other state it is over 30 years old.
Some places it is a fixed (now very old) calendar date.
O.K. that works here as we’re not yet a kill vehicles with road salts areas.
But we are a required proof of insurance to get annual road licenses. I’ve been insurance inspected now too many damn times for my claimed but real low milage driving on the pickup truck.
So it is much more than a straightforward mechanical problem. Or even a problem with converting to discover that the factory computer control system kicks your butt about your changes. It will not give you the needed timing advances. WesK. and his 4.9L Dodge SOHC V-8.
My admiration is much for the Swedes, and Slovenian fellows; others; having to build to remove to pass their mandatory inspections.
You new guys will not know about Mike LaRosa. Amazing guy. He wood gassed anything and everything he could get cheap and free. No seeker of purr-fect in him. The duct-tape, aluminum tape and steel wire-it-togather man. That said; he was the very first guy in the US to woodgas his fuel injected four’s and V-6 GMs.
He lived I believe in a non-inspection area. Insurnaces? Donna’. Just do not ask. He lived Rural.
Rural, far-rural, far-farming-rural you can do things never possible to those who are Suburbans and Urbans living.
Ha! Skip right over vehicle agonizing. Go Rural first. Then go-local, blend-in. That gives you the most vehicles possibilities in the US and Canada.
Steve Unruh
We went over a lot of this engine stuff. That was fun.
Not trying to side track this thread but as far as engine characteristics go there are at least three threads devoted to it. I am amazed that the guys in Europe can get their vehicles to pass inspections. I had enough trouble getting the regular junk I drive through when we had inspections. Seems like a lot of guys are wanting to make wood gas vehicle changes invisible. I’m in the Mike LaRossa club. Been a few decent rat rods shown here as well. I like the plug and play idea also. Build it on a platform and slide it in place when you want to and disconnect if you have to get past the vehicle gestapo. I don’t know what inspections in the States are anymore. Been 25 years since I lived in an area they did them. As Steve says. Go Rural. Small towns and counties don’t have the money to dick you around like the urbans do.
Yeah. One of the rat-rod woodgas builders: John Stout. He did two at least. Lives far-out Dakota’s? or Minnesota? Iowa?
Then another fellow once-was here on the DOW. Built up a very capable woodgassed GM full-sized 454 towing pickup truck. Realized his publicized pictures and location were Net finable known exposures then. Moved from his Suburb. Pulled down all of his DOW posts. Later sold his truck, with its built in place Gasifier system to Chris Seanz, who by then had moved, Rural too.
Wife and I did 28 years ago move from an old very comfortable place down in the dense south county to up here in north county onto her folks old dairy farm. Into one of the three zip-codes areas Not back then required to have vehicles emissions inspected ever other year. Made life easier for drive-them-until-the-wheels-fall-off, vehicle scoff-law me.
And She was able to leave her creeping, stalker, drunkard Ex behind. Before we met and married he’d vehicle camp out on her street Lurking with the cops only able to get him to move along every 24 hours. “Public street”.
Up here . . . he never followed. He knew I’d bury his body far out disappeared, into the National Forest with help from the Father-in-law.
Well now too many people have moved up out here too. Always with the percentage insisting on regulations, regulators to force those who want to live free and independent “comply” to their standards. Join, they say, the 21st Century.
So we move now father out and up along the mountain river valleys to even crappier soils and weather.
I can accommodate, and deal with that.
People and their Insistence’s; I-DO, so you must DO-Too . . . I no longer can.
True out Rural mostly you are left alone so long as you do not yourself intrude and irritate your want-to-be-left alone neighbors.
The freedom to vehicle do as you may comes at the price of long commutes back down into the Shitty areas. Good.
Don’t need their fiber. Get along on satellite. I am seeing more and more rectangular StarLink dishes now.
And we can make our own damn pizza’s at home. Just the way we want.
Live and die in place in as much peace as you will find in this world.
Not just an American spouting. Fellows here in at least 5 Euro countries and on five continents making the same go Rural choices too. Then they can too woodgas in peace. Got trees - got power.
Find where the cell phone service is poor, and crappy. Has many drop-outs. The GPS signals are weak and hard to get accurate fixes with. The Sheeple Insistant’s hate these areas. It scares them. They move back to the services, diaper security areas.
Places with weekly drive-by shootings; nightly burglaries, like now were the wife and I originally moved away from.
Here just last week outside working on her car I was much annoys by a buzzing, stationary drone, lurking overhead. Hopped into the old Hyundai to find the fingers on its controller and say, desist asshole, or suffer.
Nope. Nope. Too many fellows with badges and guns at a mobile base station. “Doing a multi-agency fugitive training exrecise.” “Are you bother by this Sir?” Yes. “O.K.” “We will stop if you tell us who you are, and exactly where you live.” I did. And so they did. Move the drone to pestering others.
I expect the hairy eyeballs to be watching me now for a time now. So all of my vehicle will stay normal and compliant as long as we still live here. My energy DYIing contained onto my own property.
I’ll say again and again. Invest into yourselves to actaully learning the late model vehicle systems. You want to Hack them and bend them to your own purposes . . . you must understand them. Period.
That’s me. Steve Unruh the owner of a 2017 GMC 3500 6.0L V-8 that I can bend to my own purposes. I ain’t afraid.
Only two moduals on that beast versus the wife’s 2014 Edge with 17 modules. One a factory GPS module. Another a bidirectional squawking digital radio.
Choice. That is freedom.
Guy i work with loves his dakota pickups. Has 4 or 5 of them now. (3 drivable and 2 parts trucks)
He is always looking for the next one as well.
He looked at a 91 with the 318 in it last week. He said it was ruff but might be salvageable, or maybe just as a parts truck. Anyway they got to talking about me and the gasifier. Long story short he said he would give me the truck. It ran back in 2017 when he parked it do to buying a new truck. Ill pick it up friday morning before work.
Any thoughts on the 91 318? Thats pre-magnum right? So what 170ish hp vs 230ish?
thats a big hit in the hp department.
Hello Chris .
I drove a 91 a couple years .
They have throttle body injection and the throttle plates are smaller than the port injection models. There are electric wires in the throttle and can’t be burned out to clean . However you can take the throttle body off and clean.
I don’t know anything about timing advance because I had this truck before I learned how to advance like the 92 models up.
ChrisW.
That’d be a Throttle Body fuel Injected engine.
V engines have two simple low pressure alternating pulsing fuel releasing injectors in that throttle body. Powered by exposed wires as Wayne said. Simple. Uses a simple low pressure electric fuel pump.
My favorite of all gasoline fuel delivery systems.
Nope, will not make the power or lowest emmisions of the later much more complicated individual to each cylinder FI systems.
But TBI’s will gasoline wash the intake ports Clean!!
Here is a composite video @MikeR made of Mike LaRosa GM 4.3V-6 throttle body woodgassed pickup truck. Listen well to MikeL’s explanation of what he’s learned woodgasing this type of system. (Ignore, overlook his politics) The man did know his woodgas operations shit. He was no afraid of applied electrical power as a HAM radio operator. He taught much to many of us. And as you will hear, willing to learn from others too:
Never judge a book by its cover art. Only it’s info relayed. It’s messaging.
A good heart, is a good heart. MikeL had one. He cared deeply.
Regards
Steve Unruh