What's new
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.

The Great Smaug

Overview Gallery Discussion
I fear I'd find the same thing or worse,if I took the oil pan off my 6.2 in my pickup to put the good used oil pan on it..:(..that is one reason I've put off doing it so long and just keep puttying it up..

That sucks Campfire...too bad my '85 Suburban K10 with a 6.2 is so far from your place--it'd look good sitting in your yard rather than mine!..(might well be in the same shape as your engine though,for all I know--the 700R4 needs a rebuild or replacement too)..
 
diesel4me said:
I fear I'd find the same thing or worse,if I took the oil pan off my 6.2 in my pickup to put the good used oil pan on it..:(..that is one reason I've put off doing it so long and just keep puttying it up..

That sucks Campfire...too bad my '85 Suburban K10 with a 6.2 is so far from your place--it'd look good sitting in your yard rather than mine!..(might well be in the same shape as your engine though,for all I know--the 700R4 needs a rebuild or replacement too)..
Click to expand...

So...a rusty burb with a blown 700R4 and an unknown 6.2?

I already have enough of those. :doah:
 
Me too...:tongue1:....
It has a nice Diamond plow setup on it though...I installed it and used it once to ensure it worked OK--then it has sat since 2010..:(
 
Campy, it sure seems like the 6.2's are your Lucy to you being Charlie Brown. She keeps pulling that football out when you try to kick it. Dump Lucy.

If you want to stick with the diesel, go get a 6.5. I don't remember that the 6.5's had the block or crank issues the 6.2's did. The 96 burb looks sweet for the price, but if you want to stick with the square get a 6.5.

I'd say dump the oil burner all together, but your persistence to the 6.2's is commendable. Moving away from diesel would cost more in the change anyway.

Just note from a guy watching you get the football yanked out from under your foot.
 
If I ever own another diesel,it'd be a Cummins 4 or 6 BT or a Detroit 2 stroke (just for the sound!)...but I'll probably be going back to gasoline power in my next road driven vehicle..

I put over 200 miles on my truck in the past 2 weeks,mostly short trips of 10 to 25 miles each,and under 45 mph..filled it up yesterday,I had gone 127 miles since the last fill up--it took $25 and a bit over 9.5 gallons to go that far.
I do not consider that stellar fuel mileage really..I've had 454's do that well..and they dont need glow plugs,block heaters,2 batteries,don't eat starters--and you can actually hear the radio over the engine !..
 
Campy, do yourself a favor and put aside all your preconceived notions and misguided loyalty towards the 6.2 for just long enough to complete one single LS swap. It'll change your life...

Same fuel mileage
Better towing
Way more reliable
Lighter
Cheaper
Double the resale value (vs having a 6.2 diesel)

I admire your tenacity, but the numbers and logic do not support the 6.2 diesel anymore...and the case for the 6.2 gets worse and worse the more time goes by. Soon it'll make as much sense as trying to swap in a steam engine.

Oh yeah, NV3500 behind a 5.3 would be super fun!

Just my two cents after having gone down the same road for a while. I began my 6.2 journey when diesel was 30% cheaper than gasoline and ULSD were just crappy Scrabble letters. Back then the swap made sense and allowed me to be able to afford to drive my Jimmy daily without gong broke.
 
ZooMad75 said:
Campy, it sure seems like the 6.2's are your Lucy to you being Charlie Brown. She keeps pulling that football out when you try to kick it. Dump Lucy.

If you want to stick with the diesel, go get a 6.5. I don't remember that the 6.5's had the block or crank issues the 6.2's did. The 96 burb looks sweet for the price, but if you want to stick with the square get a 6.5.

I'd say dump the oil burner all together, but your persistence to the 6.2's is commendable. Moving away from diesel would cost more in the change anyway.

Just note from a guy watching you get the football yanked out from under your foot.
Click to expand...


Hahahaha. Yeah, it does feel like that some days. :rotfl:

Charlie-Brown1.jpg



charlie-brown-football.jpg
 
ZooMad75 said:
Campy, it sure seems like the 6.2's are your Lucy to you being Charlie Brown. She keeps pulling that football out when you try to kick it. Dump Lucy.

If you want to stick with the diesel, go get a 6.5. I don't remember that the 6.5's had the block or crank issues the 6.2's did. The 96 burb looks sweet for the price, but if you want to stick with the square get a 6.5.

I'd say dump the oil burner all together, but your persistence to the 6.2's is commendable. Moving away from diesel would cost more in the change anyway.

Just note from a guy watching you get the football yanked out from under your foot.
Click to expand...

Seriously, though, none of my 6.2 engines have had real issues before now. Contrast that with all three trucks needing transmissions, axles, and body work, and it's hard for me to get mad at the oil burner part of the equation. I've replaced starters, lift pumps, glow plugs, and a couple of alternators. Pretty standard stuff, and the overall simplicity and reliability is what I like about these obsolete engines.

The 6.5 engines before '97 are identical to 6.2s as far as crankshafts & journals go. And their great improvement in '97 was decreasing the bolt size so there was more meat around the crack-prone holes. Hardly a robust improvement.

For my uses I would not have a problem running this engine in the K10. The crack is probably stable and the outer main bolts are not nearly as critical as the inner ones. I'm not even sure why a 130HP engine warranted 4-bolt mains in the first place. :dunno:

But for this truck I want to play around with turbines. And turbines + cracks are not a great idea. So that's why I'm taking a break to look over the market for replacement blocks. A new long-block is not in the cards, but your average $300 CL engine is likely to be in the same boat. :dunno:

A 6.5 running 18:1 CR will handle more boost, so that's a plus. Even if it does eat a little more fuel.
 
The 6.2 has one good feature--it'll probably be one of very few engines that will run after an EMP strike,and on practically anything flammable,like cooking oil or used motor oil...for a prepper who wants to survive WW3,one might be just the ticket..

Another good thing about the 6.2 is diesels are still exempt from emission tests here,at least old ones like mine anyway..
One less hassle at inspection time..

But Rene is right,its about as modern as a steam engine compared to todays powerplants..

If my square bodies were in better shape rust wise I'd be tempted to get one of the craigslist 5.3 LS engines I see listed for $350-$500 and attempt a swap,but considering all the things you'd need, like motor mount brackets and all the computer wiring,which I'd consider a nightmare,--I do not think it is something I would want to attempt now..maybe when I was 10-20 years younger,and didn't get a killer backache after spending only 5 minutes bending over under the hood..

I'd be better off buying an old truck someone already did a swap on,or just get a truck that came with an LS factory..it wont be likely I'll be able to afford either of those options though..
 
tRustyK5 said:
Campy, do yourself a favor and put aside all your preconceived notions and misguided loyalty towards the 6.2 for just long enough to complete one single LS swap. It'll change your life...

Same fuel mileage
Better towing
Way more reliable
Lighter
Cheaper
Double the resale value (vs having a 6.2 diesel)

I admire your tenacity, but the numbers and logic do not support the 6.2 diesel anymore...and the case for the 6.2 gets worse and worse the more time goes by. Soon it'll make as much sense as trying to swap in a steam engine.

Oh yeah, NV3500 behind a 5.3 would be super fun!

Just my two cents after having gone down the same road for a while. I began my 6.2 journey when diesel was 30% cheaper than gasoline and ULSD were just crappy Scrabble letters. Back then the swap made sense and allowed me to be able to afford to drive my Jimmy daily without gong broke.
Click to expand...


Rene, my goal here has always been to have fun building things, I've never planned on putting 200,000 miles on any of these rigs. The numbers never made sense, that's kinda what has made it fun as a hobby. I like quirky things. Everyone and his mom has an LS or a small block. Seriously, you can buy bolt-in LS kits for all kinds of things. Swapping in a steam engine would have an interesting steam-punk feel to it. :crazy:

I did decide, though, that I'm not willing to rebuild any of these engines. When a rebuild kit is $850, a long block is $2900, and the end product is an obsolete piece of junk, it's just not fun anymore. And when it stops being fun, I stop being a diesel fan.

The yard back home will let me pull any engine in the yard plus any accessories/wiring/whatever for $300. Or they'll pull it for $400. That includes the 5.3s they often have in stock as well as any 6.0s that accidentally wind up there. A 140,000 mile junkyard 5.3 will probably have more life left in it than my 125,000 mile 6.2, and I won't need to go back through all the leaky seals & injectors & glow plugs & all the other nickles and dimes. Regardless of how much work I dump into an oil burner, it will never stop being a product of the Regan administration (alright, it's really the Carter administration, policy-wise). I don't care much about the lack of ponies, but I am fed up with the endless leaks. Oil, ATF, differential fluid, power steering, etc. At least a modern power plant would eliminate the really annoying leaks.
 
Get a Duramax. :grin: Seriously, first generation 'maxes are not all that much in serviceable form, and if one has a bad cp3 they're nearly nothing (if the motor is out of the truck the pump isn't terribly hard to replace.) Older ones are emissions exempt. And the Duramax was originally designed to fit in the gmt400 truck line, but was delayed so the gmt800's could come to market, so if it'll fit in a 90's truck it'll fit in yours.
 
A strong cold front is rolling in tonight. We're supposed to get down to 15*F, so I'll have some time to think about future directions while I'm shivering inside away from the cold. :wink1: :haha:

At this point I see at least 3 options:

1- Run it as-is, with no turbine, until it blows the bottom out (if it ever does). I don't like this idea because it doesn't increase the fun level, it just maintains the drudgery.

2- Find a 6.5 block and install my square-body turbine kit. This would be great if I had a donor lying around.

3- Grab a newer engine and get out of the dark ages. I wanted to do this later in life after I finished playing with turbines, but it gets more enticing the more I think about it.
 
tRustyK5 said:
Campy, do yourself a favor and put aside all your preconceived notions and misguided loyalty towards the 6.2 for just long enough to complete one single LS swap. It'll change your life...

Same fuel mileage
Better towing
Way more reliable
Lighter
Cheaper
Double the resale value (vs having a 6.2 diesel)

I admire your tenacity, but the numbers and logic do not support the 6.2 diesel anymore...and the case for the 6.2 gets worse and worse the more time goes by. Soon it'll make as much sense as trying to swap in a steam engine.

Oh yeah, NV3500 behind a 5.3 would be super fun!

Just my two cents after having gone down the same road for a while. I began my 6.2 journey when diesel was 30% cheaper than gasoline and ULSD were just crappy Scrabble letters. Back then the swap made sense and allowed me to be able to afford to drive my Jimmy daily without gong broke.
Click to expand...

And yes, a 5.3/NV3500 does sound like fun. :burnout: :burnout:
 
noJeepshere said:
Get a Duramax. :grin: Seriously, first generation 'maxes are not all that much in serviceable form, and if one has a bad cp3 they're nearly nothing (if the motor is of the truck the pump isn't terribly hard to replace. Older ones are emissions exempt. And the Duramax was originally designed to fit in the gmt400 truck line, but was delayed so the gmt800's could come to market, so if it'll fit in a 90's truck it'll fit in yours.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is something that @78K30 and I talked about a few months ago. If I understand correctly, his local yard will sell an LB7 pull out (with accessories) for $3000. Still more than I wanna dump into a hobby, but I imagine it would be easily recouped at sale time. If I found one cheaply I wouldn't hesitate to do the conversion. Having read through several of Russell's threads, he makes it sound downright easy. :haha:

Definitely a better option than dumping $2900 into a 6.5 long block. Hands-down.

James, what is their asking price this week? :thinking:
 
diesel4me said:
The 6.2 has one good feature--it'll probably be one of very few engines that will run after an EMP strike,and on practically anything flammable,like cooking oil or used motor oil...for a prepper who wants to survive WW3,one might be just the ticket..
Click to expand...

I do not think that a person of sound mind plans to drive a street vehicle through most apocalypse scenarios. If there is no power grid there is no gasoline. If there is no gasoline, the roads all look like this:

hurricane-interestate.jpg


And not even the best 6.2 can drive through that.
 
I just searched the local classifieds and found an engine/trans/tcase combo with computers for $1600, and a complete donor truck (rolled, intact drive train) for $11.
 
noJeepshere said:
I just searched the local classifieds and found an engine/trans/tcase combo with computers for $1600, and a complete donor truck (rolled, intact drive train) for $11.
Click to expand...

$11...as in $1100 for the whole truck?


The closest I can find on CL is $2500 for a bare engine, on the other side of the state.
 
The Duramax is a much better engine--very powerful,good durability,decent fuel mileage----but have their share of downsides too...
I hear from dealer techs that hate working on them,the glow plugs still break off in the heads,the valve cover gaskets with the wiring for the injectors made into them was not their best idea ,and the early ones had injector problems--swapping new ones in only takes a whole day,vs 20 minutes on a 6.2 (if the rusty injector lines do not twist off!)..

Maybe Campfire can find one of those elusive "brand new in the crate cosmoline coated" 6.2's the military has stashed away and ends up in some government auction...for $400..

It would be interesting to see just how long a 6.2 with a cracked main bearing web would live..it might go forever,or come apart tomorrow..that would certainly be sphincter puckering drive time though...maybe the crank would fail first ?...

I would tend to lean towards buying a newer truck with the desired engine in it already from the factory ,rather than try swapping later ones in old trucks...here in the northeast anyways..maybe out west where some rust free square bodies still exist it would be worth it..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom