What Do You Guy's Think of GM 6.2 Diesels?

[ProMac1K]

What do ya'll think of the Detroit 6. 2 diesels that they have in the 80's Chevrolet's and GMC's? I know someone who has three of them for sale and I thought about getting one for a beater truck to drive between farms or over to milking chores, or even something for winter. Is it worth it? Are they pretty cool to run? He said that they cackle pretty good at high rpms out of a couple straight pipes, so that's kind of cool for a diesel. Do they have a lot of problems? There is one with the super-low granny gear 4 speed manual, one with the 4 speed OD manual, and one with the 700R-4 transmission. Just curious.



Thanks

 

[CRSmith]

Well, it just so happens that I've been looking as well. Here is a thread that I've started:



link







You also might look on gmc-diesel.com. That's the free equivalent to the diesel page.

 

[ProMac1K]

Thanks!



Yeah they're not too known for there power, or noise, or oil leaks. Actually, they probably are known for those because they are low on power, high on noise, and high on oil leaks due to the internal pressure. I'm just trying to make another person that wants one jealous, without making too big of an mistake on my part. I think he's asking $1500 each, which sounds like plenty to me.



Trever

 

[csevers]

I have an 82 1/2 2wd long box 6.2

The ONLY reason I bought it was the LOUD dual exhaust and the sweet music that it can make. Mine has 75k orignal miles it was not taken care of very well before I got it, In my opinion the 6. 2 sucks for everything but making noise,witch it does well. I like mine I drive it to work some times just for kicks, most of the time I use it for hauling wood or leaving at different place for a ride when barrowing equipment. They do have some power if you get rid of the EGR intake manifold and that also makes them much louder and better sounding. The 700r4 trans sucks in the early years I have been told they can be fixed up with all the updated parts to hold up better to some work.

When I first got mine it was a "summer" beater just because it started so hard now with new glow plugs and a home made switch circuit it starts pretty well for what it is. I would offer the guy $1100 don't over pay for it I am sure it will need some help.



Craig

 

[SmokinMax]

we've got one thats a work truck with a box on the back of it... its really not a bad truck we haul around about 5,000 lbs on it all the time so of coarse it never gets above 50-55 mph... ... it reallly doesnt have enough power to hurt itself... . weve had like 3 or 4 trannys put in it actualy by a gm shop so lucky for us it keeps going out whenthe warrenty on the rebuild is still good..... its got 310,000miles on it and counting(its on the road tooday) it does leak oil bad but the only real regular servicing it gets is n oil change every 4,000 miles... ... hope this info may help





kyle

 

[TBeckman]

I drove my buddy's 6. 2 3/4 ton 4x4 suburban around for a while last winter. W/o the block heater it was painful to start, if it did at all. Once you got it going and let it warm up it would go, about as well as you could expect 130hp and 280 ft*lbs(could be wrong about those numbers) pushing a 6k brick along. I do not like the gm 700r4, I ripped it out of my blazer, and if I ever to back to the drak side and it has one, I'll rip it out of there too. The transmission wasn't designed to be behind a diesel, yet gm put it there. Hence why the military versions come with the th400. I had the painful experience of towing a 7k trailer with it. Couldn't hold any speed on hills, this actually holds true for trailer or no trailer. I was on 84 in NY, there were times when I was going 25. Still got 18 mgp w/o overdrive though, have to respect that.

Since then my buddy has put the banks kit on it, what a difference that made. I think that transmission is living on borrowed time now though. Personally I would go for one with a manual, leave those autos out of the equation.

 

[HoleshotHolset]

Dad had one in his old '82 K10 Chevy - it lasted over 140k miles with nothing more than oil changes, one water pump, and an injection pump rebuild.



I remember Dad telling me that he told the shop to 'turn it up a little'. They didn't want to do it... . but they turned their heads the other way and did it. Thus begun my love of diesels.



That engine must have eaten at least a dozen glow plugs... . a glow plug controller, and an alternator bracket or two. It gelled up a few times as well. At least I learned a lot about diesels!



We took out the tired, but good running 6. 2L in favor of a worked over 454. That engine was good for beating ricers and Mustangs with the plow on the front and weight in the bed. Man, did it love to eat, though.....



We also had a 6. 5L in a '96 Tahoe - that only ate one injection pump and a water pump..... nothing else. Oh yeah - we replaced the oil cooler lines... . but that was it.



If you can get a 6. 2L/6. 5L cheap enough - you can play with 'em and tinker a bit... . but they're only really good at turning diesel fuel into noise. We had VERY good luck with them... . but we maintain everything very well.



Some people love 'em - some people love to hate 'em.



Matt

 

[Camara]

My youngest son has a 6. 2 in a 82 Blazer. He got it cheap so if he bangs up the truck or blows the motor it's OK. His doesn't make too much noise but it sure lays down the soot and blow a cloud of smoke. Right now the exhaust system has rotted off so he is going to take it to a custom shop and put duals on it with flowmaster mufflers. His is turned way up. The original owner did the same thing - they closed their eyes and turned her up tight. I was told by him it dyno'd at 300hp (flywheel) but I'm not sure I believe it, although it will smoke the tires off the wheels. The trans was also rebuilt so it has about 10,000 miles since. Totally the blazer has 138,000 on it. Still gets 20mpg. But it's a typical chevy very rusty. Had to do the floors, doors, inner fenders and all the brake lines. Oh well - he's happy with it. He says his next truck will be Cummins powered so I haven't lost him yet!

 

[WDaniels]

The 6. 2 is a waste of good cast iron, and the 6. 5 isn't far behind.

Sorry, but you asked for opinions. Had one in the family for 9 years and was the worst vehicle I have ever had the misfortune to drive.

WD

 

[ProMac1K]

Thanks for the replys.



Sounds like these engines are almost a joke, must knock pretty bad. One person described it as a diesel truck up front and a gas behind the exhaust. At least they're not as bad as a 5. 7 diesel. I believe the pump on these are a Roosa Master DB2. If so, there's got to be only one fuel adjustment, being the leaf spring screw on the rotor which controls plunger stroke.



Still waiting for the guy to let me come over and look at them. Apparently he has to get them ready or something. Talked about having me bring a couple batteries with. I don't know what to think. It's either get a DTT for my 97 or get one of those, or get one of those now and get a DTT later when my transmission goes. I'll let you know how they look if this ever pulls through.



What do you guy's think of the 6. 9 Fords? Any advantage over the 6. 2's? I hear they are harder to find or they're worth more.



Thanks,

Trever

 

[Camara]

I had a 1983 F250 4x4 with a 6. 9 and a 4 speed trans. I used it for work and play. My dad had rubbish trucks in the city of Boston and I was constantly chasing them for flat tires. At the time we still had bias ply tube type tires. Anyway I put 198,000 city miles on that truck and aside from brakes and tires I put 1 injector pump and a set of u-joints in it. I traded it in 89 for another F250 4x4 with a 7. 3 and an auto. I got 99,698 miles out of the 89. in that time I had 2 engines, 4 transmissions and 3 complete front ends. I finally gave up on that truck and bought a 95 CTD. I wish I had my 95 back.

 

[Dieselnutz]

If they are cheap go for it. I would stay away from the auto's. The granny 4 speed will make up for the lack of power. (140hp&270torque) Mine has a 400 turbo. It is ex-military and has 4. 56 gears. With 33 inch tires 55mph is wide open but it still has good power due to the gearing. They do get 20 plus mpg. You did not mention if they are 4wd, 1/2, 3/4, or 1 ton. The 1/2 tons have like 3. 08 gears so the power is low.

 

[ProMac1K]

Hi,



I think they are all K20's and all have 4wd.



I've heard about those miltiary trucks. Forgot the intials or the name of them. They are pretty cool. There are a couple kids in my tech college that know a lot about them because they are in the guards or something like that. They said that they do go pretty slow.



So what do you think I should stay under for price if I do buy them? Really, they aren't necessary for me to have. Just something to play around with.



Thanks,

Trever

 

[Dieselnutz]

He is asking $1500. If the granny 4 speed one is not ate up with rust $1200 to $1300 would not be bad. Dont let the motor scare you. Lots parts through military surplus. Do a search on CUCV that is the what the military calls them. A lot of people pull the 6. 2 because it has the same bolt patern as a 350 or 454. I have seen local complete running motors for $100 and a guy on pirate4x4.com giving away 2 for parts. Plus if you have a good running gear you can always put a gas motor in it. I like mine but I would love to put a new 8. 1 chevy in it some day.

 

[illflem]

I work for the state of Montana, we have seven research stations scattered around the state. The mechanic at one station has a connection for free to us early '90s 6. 2 Blazers, ex-National Guard. Many of the other stations have taken some and have had nothing but trouble. I passed up the deal even though it was free.



Here's recent free to us item I'd like to pick up, problem is I don't have a use for it

http://www.nfc.usda.gov/propexcs/fsg28.htm

 

[Jeff H]

A 6. 2 is worth as much as a boat anchor. Yer better off converting it to a gas job.

If yer gonna get an old truck with a diesel. Get Ford with a International Harvester 6. 9 or 7. 3 non turbo. I know guys who put a lot of miles on them.

 

[ProMac1K]

Jeff,



Yeah i've heard good things from the 6. 9 and 7. 3 IDI engines. I've heard those 6. 9's have a distinctive exhaust sound to them. What years did they make those 6. 9's? I assume the 7. 3's took over the 6. 9's, or did they still make 6. 9's when they made the 7. 3's? Never thought i'd be asking this much about a Ford. :laf



illflem,



I heard those two people from school talking about getting some from auctions, but you have to buy a bulk amount. They said that there was one guy buying the bulk amount, so they could buy them individually from him for a pretty reasonable price. In other words it is a private deal. I guess they are in pretty good condition and they don't get many miles or a lot of use from them.



Dieselnutz,



That's the name I was thinking of. If i'm thinking right the blazers were called something different than CUCV. The lifted CUCV's look nice in their colors.



Trever

 

[1sand0s]

Most guys who run a Cummins get spoiled. I think it needs to be put into perspective a little bit here.



The Cummins is a "GREAT" motor.

The VW TDI is a "Good" motor.

The GM 5. 7 for 1977 was a "BOAT ANCHOR" motor.

The long VW they put into the Volvo rear drives... BOAT ANCHOR.



The 6. 2 is just an "AVERAGE" motor.



Not bad, not great. The failures, minus the fly by wire pump nightmares, were not out of the realm of the early 6. 9/7. 3's.





The 6. 2 in my Grumman albiet a gutless wonder, ran great for 145,000 and continues to run for the new owner today.



Give me the choice between the 6. 2 and a gasser to drive to California... and I'll take the 6. 2, thanks.



I dont think that saying things like "boat anchor" are fair when talking about the 6. 2. If you left them alone and used them for light work, they outlived the truck in most cases.

 

[AWM]

I've had three of them, only mistake (IMHO) was GM putting it in 3/4 & 1 tons, just doesn't have the power, last work rig was a '82suburban 6. 2 went 287K, after over three thousand in transmission repairs (700R) I put it out to pasture. Bob

 

[britannic]

I have an M1028 CUCV K30 and all of the negative comments about the 6. 2L above were true when I first got it, then I discovered www.theDieselPage.com and Banks.



After many upgrades and some R&D I conducted with Gale Banks Engineering, I ended up with an engine that my friends describe as a very strong 454. The recipe calls for a Banks 6. 9/7. 3 MHI TE06H turbo boosting to 20psi, intercooler, DB2-4911 calibrated inj. pump (overfueled to 76mm3/stroke) and 6. 5LTD injectors. Timing was retarded to 2. 6* BTDC @ 1300rpm.



An important note: a real CUCV block has a high nickel content, which will prevent fatigue cracks in the mains.



You can buy 300-400HP 6. 5LTD truck engines from Peninsular and others and boy do they like to rev (detroit diesel v8 influenced design), mine was governed to 4100rpm and it would hold that for hours on long freeway runs.



I get 17-22mpg with a seriously upgraded 700R4 with the current configuration.



However, my lust for high torque has created a need for a more bulletproof platform, so I'm going to convert to a 6BT with NV4500 and NP205.



The stock M1028 is a K30 on steroids, GVW is 9400lbs, Dana 60 full float with limited slip up front, TH400, NP208, HD drive shaft, 14 bolt full float detroit locker in the back, 30% stronger frame, 24v starting system, 12v electrics everywhere else, helicopter starter takeoff for firing up hueys in the field, twin 100A 12v isolated ground alternators (relayed in series to charge the 24v battery setup - the 12v is produced tapping one battery and the 12v glow plugs draw upto 15v from a resistor fed by both batteries in series).