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.

new to chevys: ? on the 6.2l diesel

Discussion in 'The Garage' started by terky, Aug 23, 2004.

  1. terky

    terky Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2004
    Posts:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Arlington, WA
    Hey guys i need some help real quick.

    I have the chance to buy a 1983 K5 with a 6.2 diesel in it. The motor doesnt run now bit i figured i could buy another one for around 2k. I just need to know if it would be worth it to stay with diesel or put a 350 in there? I would like to stick with diesel if i could.

    My friend told me the 6.2 is horribly underpowered and i dont want to waste 2 grand and then not be able to go muddin.

    All help is appreciated, thanks alot
     
  2. 82K5_6.5L

    82K5_6.5L 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2002
    Posts:
    439
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Tucson, Az
    [ QUOTE ]
    Hey guys i need some help real quick.

    I have the chance to buy a 1983 K5 with a 6.2 diesel in it. The motor doesnt run now bit i figured i could buy another one for around 2k. I just need to know if it would be worth it to stay with diesel or put a 350 in there? I would like to stick with diesel if i could.

    My friend told me the 6.2 is horribly underpowered and i dont want to waste 2 grand and then not be able to go muddin.

    All help is appreciated, thanks alot

    [/ QUOTE ]

    well if ur all about muddin' then i wouldnt recommend the 6.2.. go with a gasser, but for the rocks n other stuff it will do great. never stalls, amazing mileage and they last forever if u keep em maintained..
    in my opinion, i love my 6.5 and i do some minor muddin and it does fine. but i live in tucson, so not much mud here. mostly rocks, cactus, and sand.
    its up to you though.. good luck /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif
     
  3. alec78

    alec78 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2002
    Posts:
    358
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Washington
    Ditto with 82K5_6.5L!!!

    Granted I don't do mudding, I would never trade my 6.2 for anything. Torque that is just under a big block (till you go turbo), horse power like a small block (see turbo comment), and milage of a car (I average about 25mpg)!!!

    Another thing to consider with the millage is the cost per gallon of fuel (gas vs. diesel). My wife perfers to go in the truck than her car cause it costs less!!!! /forums/images/graemlins/eek.gif

    If you do get stick with the 6.2, you'll find a wealth of info in the Diesel Forum (paid member only) /forums/images/graemlins/whistling.gif. I've heard that The Diesel Page is also a good source, but I can't vouch for it, never joined.

    As for me, I'm never buying another gasser again!!! /forums/images/graemlins/peace.gif

    Good Luck!!! /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif
     
  4. 82K5_6.5L

    82K5_6.5L 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2002
    Posts:
    439
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Tucson, Az
    alec78, i love the torque my 6.5 puts out, but i was just sayin if he is strictly all mud, it might not be the best.
    i'm with u on the whole gas vs. diesel. my old mans got an 81 k20 with the 350 and it sucks gas like there is no tomorrow.. i get prolly twice the mileage he gets. right now being under-geared i get about 14-16 mpg.. not to bad
    but like u said, not getting another gasser, i'm with u there /forums/images/graemlins/peace.gif
     
  5. smprider112

    smprider112 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    May 1, 2004
    Posts:
    624
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Beaverton,Oregon
    ya I've got the 6.2 in my k5 too, and love it...it doesnt have the killer torque a powerstroke or cummins has...but the way I look at it its like a 350 that runs on diesel fuel and gets almost twice the mpg's powers about comprable...more torque tho, and they crawl very well!! hard to stall is a huge plus!! dunno if I'd spend 2grand to get another motor tho /forums/images/graemlins/thinking.gif i'd look into getting it rebuilt, see how much that costs at least! /forums/images/graemlins/thumb.gif
     
  6. diesel4me

    diesel4me 1 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2003
    Posts:
    17,583
    Likes Received:
    945
    Location:
    Massachussetts
    I love the 6.2 in my 82 K20--at least until something goes wrong,like needing a water pump(I hear they arent much fun to change)or if the injector pump and lines or oil cooler lines finally rust through.I'm going to check out another diesel truck my friend saw next to the crusher at a local scrapyard saturday,maybe I can score some cheap spare parts!.I really like the fuel mileage and the tourque,I dont think its doggy at all,but since I drove a six cylinder and a 307 in my other vehicles,I guess anything feels more peppy than they do!.I often find myself exceeding the speed limit with no problem,and it plows better than my other K20 with a 400 small block.
    The yards around here usually get about 600 for a good running 6.2,but if you can get the truck before they do you can do much better--I missed one deal for 300 bucks for a whole truck with plow,running and not that rusty,needed only easy fixes like glow plugs and new belts and hoses,seat cover,etc.It would probably be wise to avoid a truck with the 700R4 tranny,or at least plan on having to rebuild the tranny--the overdrives are great for fuel mileage,but dont seem to live long in a 4x4 unless rebuilt and modified--so far the trucks I've seen all had TH400 tranny's and 208 tranfer cases,ecxept 1 suburban that had the 700R4 and a 241 transfer case.I wouldnt be afraid of the diesel--if you end up hating it a gas motor will bolt right in without too much hassle,but I bet once you own one it will grow on you,and you wont mind a little more noise and the diesel smell after you see how far a full tank will take you,and diesel is cheaper per gallon than gas--and if the arabs shut off the oil taps you can run it on fryolator oil,soybean oil,and many other alternative fuels. /forums/images/graemlins/peace.gif
     
  7. Blue85

    Blue85 Troll Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2000
    Posts:
    9,090
    Likes Received:
    489
    Location:
    Grand Rapids area
    Yes the diesel torque is good, but not like a big block (unless you add a turbo). The power is less than almost any gas 350. They are only about 130hp in stock form (compared to 160 for the 305 ). The torque in 83-84 was listed at about 240 ft-lbs, which is only 5 more than the 305. The reason to run a 6.2 is fuel economy.

    You can get a Goodwrench 350 for $1300 and get 260hp and 350ft-lbs of torque. Jeg's link (I think you still need intake manifold/carb/distributor, which normally would come off your existing gasser)
     
  8. joez

    joez 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Posts:
    2,512
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New Lenox, Illinois
    Fuel economy is not the only reason, they are all fuel injected, so you can run at any angle. They would run upside down if they could hold oil pressure. You can lug them much more than you can a gasser, because unlike the 305, the torque is down low. Ill take a diesel over a gasser anyday, in a truck at least.
     
  9. joez

    joez 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Posts:
    2,512
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    New Lenox, Illinois
    Terky, read my response on yotatech.
     
  10. tRustyK5

    tRustyK5 Big meanie Staff Member Super Moderator GMOTM Winner Author

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2000
    Posts:
    36,184
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Location:
    E-town baby!
    [ QUOTE ]
    Yes the diesel torque is good, but not like a big block (unless you add a turbo). The power is less than almost any gas 350. They are only about 130hp in stock form (compared to 160 for the 305 ). The torque in 83-84 was listed at about 240 ft-lbs, which is only 5 more than the 305. The reason to run a 6.2 is fuel economy.

    You can get a Goodwrench 350 for $1300 and get 260hp and 350ft-lbs of torque. Jeg's link (I think you still need intake manifold/carb/distributor, which normally would come off your existing gasser)

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Got a dyno sheet for a 6.2. All Rear wheel numbers...

    The first pull's are as the truck was purchased, and successive pulls are as it's tuned and repaired before the Banks turbo was installed.

    Tuned, with a 'J' code intake and good exhaust (Stinger exhaust) it put down 134 hp and 359 lb/ft or torque at the rear wheels.

    [​IMG]

    That is easily small block hp and big block torque before it's turbo'd. My 6.2 easily pulls as hard as my old 355, and my old 355 never had to get 40's rolling.

    Rated power versus reality on a dyno are two entirely different things.

    Rene
     
  11. tRustyK5

    tRustyK5 Big meanie Staff Member Super Moderator GMOTM Winner Author

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2000
    Posts:
    36,184
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Location:
    E-town baby!
    As for mud, unless you're competing the 6.2 should do just fine. It will happily spin 3600-3800 rpm all day long which should be decent enough rpm's. It also will not over-rev like a gasser will (unless it has a rev limiter). The 6.2 is governed...

    We also have a diesel forum here with plenty of knowledgable people. It's also a good place for more info and answers.

    Rene
     
  12. diesel4me

    diesel4me 1 ton status Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2003
    Posts:
    17,583
    Likes Received:
    945
    Location:
    Massachussetts
    Update on the truck at the boneyard--I checked it out yesterday--an 82 K10,6.2 diesel,complete,unmolested looking engine,SM465 4 speed,either a 208 or 241 transfer case(sitting on the ground with no rims,coulndt read the tag)--they dont know if it runs,looks like it would,has 80 something thousand miles showing,radiator and all underhood components appear useable shape.When I asked about it at the parts counter,the guy said,oh--there isnt much left of that truck!--when I told him it had the whole drivetrain in it,he said"you want it?? 500 bucks for everything!".I'm wishing this had appeared before I bought the 305 for my C10--also this truck has a nice frame and beefy springs,but they trashed the body with the loader(not that rusted either!)---and its about 75 feet from the crusher! /forums/images/graemlins/angryfire.gif. /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gifYou have to make quick decisions at the junkyards around here--I bet this will be gone by weeks end,unless someone like me puts a deposit on it.It must be nice to buy trucks like this for 60 bucks a ton,and get 500 just for the drivetrain /forums/images/graemlins/thinking.gif.Anyone else think this is a good deal??(condition of motor and tranny/transfer unknown). /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif /forums/images/graemlins/dunno.gif
     
  13. Blue85

    Blue85 Troll Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2000
    Posts:
    9,090
    Likes Received:
    489
    Location:
    Grand Rapids area
    [ QUOTE ]

    Rated power versus reality on a dyno are two entirely different things.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    I agree with that and I can confirm that the low end grunt from a 6.2 really feels good (and seems to pull almost anything). The same "ratings vs. reality" statement can also be made for some of the gas engines. The SB 400 was really only 175hp?.

    The relevant numbers you posted are 94hp/272lb-ft at the rear wheels. That does confirm good torque, but not big block torque without modification. Of course when you talk about modifications, you also have to consider equivalent modifications to the SB and BB gassers.


    As another aside, isn't the 6.2 actually a big block? I know it is not a SB.
     
  14. terky

    terky Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2004
    Posts:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Arlington, WA
    Ok thanks alot, you guys have given me alot of help and i am hopefully going to get the truck today. You guys are really helpfull providing real information instead of just an opinion.

    Thanks again.
     
  15. tRustyK5

    tRustyK5 Big meanie Staff Member Super Moderator GMOTM Winner Author

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2000
    Posts:
    36,184
    Likes Received:
    1,392
    Location:
    E-town baby!
    The relevant numbers are the numbers attained after it was repaired and tuned but before it was turbo'd.

    An out of tune and neglected 400 is gonna put down some weak numbers too...

    134 and 359 is tuned and all the parts working correctly, in stock trim with good exhaust. Using the same parameters a 400 might have more horsepower, but definitely less torque.

    As for being a big block...it just isn't. It is it's own animal, neither a big or small block. /forums/images/graemlins/peace.gif

    rene
     
  16. afroman006

    afroman006 1/2 ton status

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2002
    Posts:
    2,876
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    College Station & Kingsville, Texas
    Yah the 6.2L is kind of a "medium block" physically it is about right between a big and small block and 6.2L works out to 379 C.I.
     
  17. Blue85

    Blue85 Troll Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2000
    Posts:
    9,090
    Likes Received:
    489
    Location:
    Grand Rapids area
    [ QUOTE ]
    Yah the 6.2L is kind of a "medium block" physically it is about right between a big and small block and 6.2L works out to 379 C.I.

    [/ QUOTE ]

    Of course. I was thinking that it was a Chevy engine. I must have forgotten that it is a Detroit Diesel. /forums/images/graemlins/dunno.gif
     

Share This Page