CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

6.2 NA Detroit in my 72

I dont recall saying the 6.2's were "junk",I did say they were only slightly better than the POS 5.7 Olds based diesels because of their high rate of failure from crankshafts breaking or the webs in the block cracking..they weren't GM's best diesel,but not the worst by any means either...Some people still feel GM has yet to make a "good" diesel engine,they had to go with Isuzu to make the Duramax,and even those have their problems,at least the early ones did..and I hear they suck to work on..


I know not every one fails at low mileage,but many did,owner neglect and abuse may be a factor,maybe not...I suppose if they were THAT prone to failure,the military wouldn't have wanted them,when soldiers lives depended on their trucks,and knew they would be abused badly..--or maybe GM was just the lowest bidder--I dont know..:dunno:

I do think the 7.3 IHC and the Cummins are much better engines than the 6.2,there is no comparison...but for what they are and were intended for,they do OK I guess...

I dont "hate" my diesels,if I did,I would not have bought another truck with one ...I really regret selling the VW Jetta diesel I had,it was a stupid move..

However,as far as the 6.2's go,I'm not thrilled about the fact you must replace glow plugs in them sooner than I'd like when you use the trucks for short trips,at 100 bucks a set,or they can be a pain to get started in extreme cold like we've had this winter,and in a full sized truck,and I dont see the "savings" from getting only maybe 5-7 mpg more than a gas V8 gets,especially since diesel fuel went up to 4.25 a gallon,and gas is still 3.45 a gallon...

Having 140 HP,slower acceleration and hill climbing ability and a noisy engine makes my truck less pleasurable to drive ,it feels like your driving a big rig and makes a short trip feel longer to me somehow,than a similar gas powered truck would..but in it's own way,it is kind of neat too,but the novelty can wear thin in a hurry when you need to go somewhere an hour or more away..but diesels do seem to like being driven longer distances and hold up longer,rather than short trips or stop and go city driving--like any other engine,MPG will suffer when you are going short distances and starting cold too....so for me,thats probably why I'm a bit less enthusiastic about having one now..

I will say this,my 6.2 powered plow truck by far,is the best I've had as far as pushing snow easily,with no wheelspin--I dont know if the weight is a factor,or the low rpm torque,or the lack of HP!..all I know is its like a bulldozer compared to the three other similar trucks I plowed with that had 350's or 400SB and a 454...and it does consume less fuel than the gas V8's did when plowing too...

So far I've gone thru 3 sets of AC G60's and they rust away to nothing long before they wont "glow" any more,the wire terminals rot right off them,and they whittle away like a rusted brake bleeder screw,and the original 9G's often wont come out of the heads...while a set of spark plugs for a gas V8 costs maybe 15 bucks,and can be left in for years...and the gas engine will start a lot easier in winter without needing a block heater plugged in ..

Things like the injector lines can rust or break and are hard to find and expensive too,and you'd need to remove them if a glow plug breaks,or the valve covers needed gaskets...so when those kind of things fail,it can eat up any savings you got from using less fuel..

I'd rather put a water pump or valve cover gaskets on an old small or big block gas V8 any day,or a timing chain,than a 6.2 also--though I have yet to have to do any of those repairs on my diesels,it certainly doesn't look as simple or as quick to do on the 6.2..maybe I'm just intimidated because I haven't ever pulled an injector pump off before,or the front cover..but I'd be leery of attempting it myself..

In short,I'm saying the 6.2 diesels are OK,but for someone like me who only putts around town and doesn't go far often,the diesels aren't for everyone..

I'm not bashing them,I'm just pointing out some of the pro's and cons of owning one..I really cant diss mine,I have not had to do much of anything to it other than glow plugs,oil changes,and for that I'm gratefull...had I used it every day as a commuter rather than a "yard truck" most of the time,I might be more unhappy with it though..:dunno:
 
I wasn't there when the 6.2 was newer and more common, but all I've heard is they're a simple, reliable, engine that makes acceptable power for what it is.

I'd love to find a stockish half ton with one to DD.
 
I know you cant believe everything you read online,but Wikepedia and a few other sources say a 6.2 , IS a Detroit Diesel engine..(one they "built",but GM cheapened up from its original specs,according to one site)...other sources say its only because GM owned Detroit Diesel at one time,that the 6.2 is considered a "Detroit"...all I know is they are marginally better than the Olds 350 diesels they replaced...not looking to argue about its origin,just posting what I've read about the 6.2..
All that is wrong. The 6.2 was a totally new engine design in '82 built by Detroit Allison ,so not a cheapened anything and technically not a Detroit. Detroit and GM were one in the same,always were. In fact,they were called GMC Diesels at first. Detroit began use when demand for them by other brand trucks began. You could have a Detroit powered Ford. Saying a 6.2/6.5 is marginally better than the 5.7 is a hoot! Makes you wonder how GM ran that engine in so many vehicles from '82-'00. The contract with our military ran to '07. My '92 has a 6.5TD with 300,300 miles on it and my '85 Jimmy has a 6.2 with less than 1/2 that but is an original motor that is 29 years old and runs like a top. In my '92 I got 200k out of the original glow plugs,injectors,and injector pump. I ordered the truck and since the day it arrived it has worked hard loaded with tools and materials to pay my bills...22 years now. It is always heavy and has plenty of power no matter what the load. Just today I hauled a cord of locust firewood (heavy dense wood) home and it pulled every hill the same as without the trailer. My 135hp Jimmy doesn't hold up traffic. You hit the peddle from standing and it jumps forward and moves right along. It doesn't hold up traffic,it has all the power (torque) anyone needs. Hills don't dog it and it can run along effortlessly at 75 mph all day long. I get 22 mpg with 35s and haul the trailer with it,too. Does just great.I'm sitting here wondering what more someone could want from a truck (ok,need). I have an S&S powered Harley and '67 SWB GMC (built 327/M22/posi) for when I want a hot rod
They are a far better engine than the 5.7 was. I have run these engines since the mid-80s in five rigs. I remember when they were coming out with them and I read up on them and who made them. Learned a whole lot more after owning them. I have never had an injector line,glow plug or wire rot away. But,I don't plow snow,either. What doesn't rot on a plow truck in the N/E? Salt rots all makes. It's not particular. Not looking to argue,just set the facts straight. For what they are intended for they do what all diesels were intended to do before they became the new muscle car...economy,longevity,and torque.
 
Last edited:
Back on Topic...

I know this post went off topic (surprise, surprise), but what's news with the OP and the pair of trucks? Any further plans? Any questions that need answering? :popcorn:

Nice to see this made it into the garage. :)
 
Well this can be deleted. I sold the Silverado with the 6.2 in it, the 72 K5 is undergoing a heart transplant from an 86 K5. Now the 305 is gone and has been replaced with a 300 hp 4 bolt 350 and I didn't know that til I ran the numbers :woot:
 
that's too bad...

fwiw my 6.2 has 285k on the clock, I drive it daily.
 

Latest Posts

Top Bottom