Dismiss Notice

Welcome To CK5!

Registering is free and easy! Hope to see you on the forums soon.

Score a FREE t-shirt and membership sticker when you sign up for a Premium Membership and choose the recurring plan.

Diesel Vs. Gas

Discussion in 'The Garage' started by TSGB, Aug 28, 2002.

  1. TSGB

    TSGB 1 ton status

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2002
    Posts:
    12,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Centralia, Washington
    Can someone(s) help me with the advantages and disadvantages of having a diesel engine in a late 80's K5? I haven't seen a comparison of this type anywhere I look! Any help will be appreciated!
     
  2. trailblazer87

    trailblazer87 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2002
    Posts:
    707
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Madera, CA
    Diesel motors are torque monsters, but attrociously expensive. Gas motors are much cheaper, but don't develop the torque. Down and dirty comparison.
    GM diesels weren't very good until the mid-90's, the early 80's sucked flat out, and don't even think of using the 350 diesel conversion, convert it back to a gas motor, can run extremely high compression in these things /forums/images/icons/cool.gif
     
  3. Can Can

    Can Can Pusher Man Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    15,552
    Likes Received:
    136
    Location:
    Cochrane, Alberta, Canada
    "Sucked flat out"???? /forums/images/icons/mad.gif

    My 83 6.2 has been WAY more reliable than my 305. If you mean that they are gutless, than I guess you're correct. But the reason I own a diesel is not for the performance, but for the dependability and the fuel mileage.

    Have you ever owned a 6.2? I highly doubt it........ /forums/images/icons/tongue.gif

    "Atrociously expensive"?

    WHat are you referring to? I get 25-30 MPG with my diesel, compared to 14-19 with my gasser. In my case, the diesel has paid for itself in the fuel savings alone. If you add in the lack of maintenance a vehicle without a secondary ignition needs, it looks to me like overall my 6.2 is cheaper to run than my 305.

    Get your facts together before you make dumb statements.
     
  4. four_by_ken

    four_by_ken 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2001
    Posts:
    3,806
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allenton, MI
    I have to agree... sucked flat out. But, this is in comparison to other diesels that could be bought at that time. The Powerstroke and the Cummins were true diesels, not the crap that that GM put in their trucks.

    You think the 6.2 and 6.5 are dependable... dream on. Look at how many have fuel pumps and even complete rebuilds needed just over 100k miles. Most Cummins dont need anything till 200k+ and that is just top end stuff.

    Ken H.
     
  5. azblazor

    azblazor 1/2 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2001
    Posts:
    1,953
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Arizona, Phoenix area
    If you want the opinion of people that actually own diesels, you need to go to the diesel forum and read some back posts. And go check out www.thedieselpage.com . My initial opinion was that GM diesels were bad. But after reading A LOT and doing some research - my opinion is a much better informed one - GM diesels are pretty good. I own one now and I'll own more in the future.
     
  6. BoyNamedSue

    BoyNamedSue Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2002
    Posts:
    6
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Tx
    Advantages:
    -Usually better fuel economy
    -Last longer
    -Usually a little more reliable
    -Can get wet (no spark to drown out) but you don't want to take it swimming unless you waterproof it
    -You get the advantages that putting FI on a gas motor would give you
    -They smell good /forums/images/icons/grin.gif

    Disadvantages:
    -Parts are more expensive
    -Oil changes are more expensive
    -Less power (not really a good motor if you do mud)
    -Vacuum lines going EVERYWHERE and they like to leak which can be a royal PIA
    -Very expensive to rebuild



    I don't think the Chevy diesels are good diesels (I don't know about these new ones yet). They took a gas engine and built it up so it could be a diesel. Hell, I just don't like V8 diesels period.
     
  7. BlackDog714

    BlackDog714 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2002
    Posts:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Indiana
    OK, first of all, the 6.2 and 6.5 Diesels in GM trucks are NOT gas conversions. They were built for GM by Detroit Diesel. The injection system is made by Stantadyne and was designed after the Cat 3208 injection system. The 6.2/6.5 can produce over 350hp easily and reliably, and get 20 mpg in my 1 ton truck. /forums/images/icons/grin.gif Oh yeah if you want to talk about who is a gas conversion, you might want to start looking at the Powerstroke 7.3, as it is a gas conversion from the International 345 engine!
     
  8. laketex

    laketex 3/4 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    6,220
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    North Texas
    Diesel for the tow rig, gas for the towee. Works out well for me!
     
  9. Can Can

    Can Can Pusher Man Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    15,552
    Likes Received:
    136
    Location:
    Cochrane, Alberta, Canada
    </font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
    You think the 6.2 and 6.5 are dependable... dream on

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I guess I've been dreaming for the last 6 years then. Put your big mouth where your money is and let's compare repair receipts between whatever you drive and my 83 6.2.

    Secondly, comparing my 83 6.2 to a Cummins is like comparing my carburated 305 to my buddy's injected Vortec. Apples and oranges, my friend...

    Thirdly, what is the base price of a 6.2 compared to a PS or a Cummins? I HOPE that a motor that costs $8000 out of the box will be better overall than a $3500 6.2. C'mon, be realistic. /forums/images/icons/tongue.gif
     
  10. four_by_ken

    four_by_ken 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2001
    Posts:
    3,806
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allenton, MI
    Ok, you are one of the lucky ones that have not had problems.

    Look on average over the past 10 years at a Cummins vs a GM diesel. No question as to what one makes more power, every year, period. This point cannot be disputed. And this is not even considering how much easier and cheaper it is to hop up a Cummins. And how much more you gain with each thing done.

    Again on average, the Cummins last twice as long as the GM diesel. This widely known. This is why sales of the GM diesel were so bad compared to the Powerstroke and Cummins.

    I dont even see how people can argue this. Its not even an issue. The GM diesel has been chasing the Cummins from the introcution by dodge into the light duty trucks.

    Lets see a GM diesel get 1100ft-lbs.

    Now if only it was in another truck besides the Ram.

    Ken H.
     
  11. BlackDog714

    BlackDog714 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2002
    Posts:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Indiana
    There is NO reason for a light duty truck to have 1100 ft/lbs. It is nothing but bragging rights and is totally unusable. My 6.2 is 350 hp and 675 ft/lbs and I can tow or haul anything that you could hook up behind my truck. I get 20 mpg (when I stay off of the go pedal) with a T400 and 4.10's and 35's. I can smoke (tires and exhaust) most cars off of the line and I have the drive line and frame to handle what the engine can dish out. Before I had my 6.2 rebuilt, it had 260k on it and would have stil been running, accept I blew and oil line on the freeway. The Cummins is a great engine, but its noisy and VERY heavy! It was not designed for the light truck market, but Dodge needed a "name" so that people would start buying their trucks again. Oh, and your reliability tack rally doesn't hold true for the Powerstroke, as they ahve been service nightmares for many owners.
     
  12. laketex

    laketex 3/4 ton status

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    6,220
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    North Texas
    Sounds like you've tried to get some of those bragging rights too. Lots of power from a 6.2, what the hell did you do to the thing? I could chip mine, do bigger injectors, 4" exhaust, bigger air cleaner, and get nearly 800 lbs/ft. And probably still not have what you have in yours...damn. For it being heavy, who cares? Being noisy? I like it! But 675 outta a 6.2, what's the details dude?
     
  13. BlackDog714

    BlackDog714 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2002
    Posts:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Indiana
    Big turbo, intercooler, 18 to 1 pistons, bumped up injection pump, high volume electric lift pump, high flow injectors, K&amp;N air filter and a 4 in exhaust from the turbo back to the 3 baffle Flowmaster dual outlet muffler. All of the items are marine units and the engine was built by a local marine genius. Its a good thing that the only thing they do here in WA for emissions is an opacity test /forums/images/icons/grin.gif
     
  14. DieselDan

    DieselDan 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2001
    Posts:
    1,056
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Vermont
    You want to compare apples to apples, throw the Duramax in to the fray /forums/images/icons/smile.gif The 6.2 is a good motor, it was never designed to be a heavy hauler. The Powersmokes and Cumm-ons are HEAVY truck motors. Yes the injection pumps do wear out, (it's a distributor type with only one plunger) but costs a less than a third the price of a rebuilt cummins pump.

    The Defense Department has THOUSANDS of 6.2s (and 6.5s) in service since 1984. I can assure you if they had a "dependabilty problem" it would be a serious readiness issue (we record down-time in hours!) /forums/images/icons/smirk.gif

    Every time I hear someone call the 6.2 a converted gasser I my hands begin to shake /forums/images/icons/mad.gif
     
  15. BlackDog714

    BlackDog714 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2002
    Posts:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Indiana
    Yeah, my favorite comment is that the 6.2 suck, but the 6.5 is much better... Ummm they are the same motor, with interchangable parts. Yeah I think that the ARMED FORCES might notice a problem with reliability with all of the 6.2/6.5's in every HUMMV they own!
     
  16. carolina custom

    carolina custom 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    Posts:
    161
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Mt. Pleasant SC
    The 6.2 with the mechanical DB2 pump is dependable. I would avoid the 94 and newer 6.5 with electronic DS4. Both can be modified to make more power, but I would not do it again. I have almost 8k in mine /forums/images/icons/tongue.gif

    Marc
     
  17. carolina custom

    carolina custom 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    Posts:
    161
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Mt. Pleasant SC
    Do you have any pics of the intercooler and install. Details?

    Marc
     
  18. Can Can

    Can Can Pusher Man Staff Member Super Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2000
    Posts:
    15,552
    Likes Received:
    136
    Location:
    Cochrane, Alberta, Canada
    Well if I'm lucky, then I guess my buddy with a 6.2 that has over 340K(he's replaced the pump and injectors ONCE) must be blessed by Jesus Christ himself!!!!

    Initially you were saying that 6.2s were unrealiable. Now you're playing the "more power" game. I don't own a 6.2 because it's powerful, I own it because it gives me outstanding fuel mileage and is virtually trouble-free to run because I maintain it well. I'm the first to admit that a Cummins or PS is a more powerful motor, but like I said above(or maybe you didn't bother reading my entire post), for double the money it had BETTER have more output. And, if the Cummins is such a great powerplant, why the hell would you have to "hop it up"?????

    </font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
    Again on average, the Cummins last twice as long as the GM diesel. This widely known.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Show me proof that the average Cummins has twice the lifespan of a 6.2. I'm almost positive that you won't be able to show me stats to support your argument. Once again, put up or shut up.
     
  19. BlackDog714

    BlackDog714 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2002
    Posts:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Indiana
    No digital camera, sorry. If you go over to The Diesel Page there is a similar set up, but mine is in front of the radiator.
     
  20. four_by_ken

    four_by_ken 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2001
    Posts:
    3,806
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Allenton, MI
    I love getting people all riled up. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

    True you dont need all that power, my point was just how much easier and cheaper it is to do to a Cummins than a GM.

    I should not have brought the Powerstroke into it... because I dont know much about them at all. so, I will so no more about it.

    Now, you say your 6.2 produces those numbers, so I have to believe you, but I sure would like to see a dyno test of it. How much do you have into that motor to produce that kind of power out of it? Very nice.

    And yes, the Cummins was not produced to be put into a light duty truck... thats why I like them. They were designed for a medium duty+ truck and to last forever. For the most part more than what anyone ever needs. I hate ever haveing to say... "Too bad I didnt have more..."

    I am going to be increasing my daily mileage a lot soon. And a diesel is in the future. I would really like to find out more about yours. Since I cant talk myself into a Dodge, even with the Cummins.

    Ken H.

    (I like to argue)
     

Share This Page