GMC 6.2 swap

[bapos]

being a GM guy my self and having far more experience with chevy motors the 6.2 would not be my first choice. Kind of a dog of a motor in my opinion but its just that my opinion others may differ. If I was going to go through all that trouble I would put in a duramax personally. One thing you have to know, and i got a first hand taste of this, is the cost of repair on a diesel is LOTS more than a gas motor.

I had head gaskets put on my 1 ton 4x4 dually about a year ago to the tune of 4300 dollars. Yes it was a gasket flaw from gm but they wont admit it and im well over 200k in it so it was all on me. I think its a great motor till you have to do something like that. I know the book hours call for I think 43 hrs to do the heads and for just 4 more hours i think you can replace the motor all together?

Yes it will probably cost lots more to put in than the 6.2 but if you going to keep it i think it would be more well spent. Not sure what your long term plans are but there is something to be said about gas motors... simple and available. I have a 366 in my ward gmc and i am casually looking for another 366 to go through and have it ready to install when the current one craps the bed?


Good luck with it.


Bapos

[chev49]

43 hrs isa bit much...should take half that... the 6.2 is ok, 6.5 is way more powerful, but eats more pass head gaskets cause turbo only on one side... i have 1 ton dualie 4wd with 6.5... also injector pumps usually only last 150k miles or so. today is starter change today so no work on bus..
you can easily put in the 454 if you want the gas hog...but thats another couple days of work as well...

[opus]

Boy, I think I'd keep the 6.2 for now. What you gain in power by replacing it you will likely lose in fuel economy. I sure understand how the 6.2 is gutless. They were a great motor for just making forward motion. If it didnt grenade in the first year or two, they generally were good. "Good" having a different meaning than the normal, everyday "good". LOL.

[opus]

Originally Posted by id stitch

After all money is a tremendous factor.

Since when did that start? ;)

[ol trunt]

I'd never go for another 6.2--unless it was gas! They are slow and gutless and in my opinion not even suitable for an anchor. On the other hand, the late model Duramax seems to be doing just fine. I have a friend who "chipped" one in a Chevy dually crew cab and swears he gets 25 mpg. I've ridden in the thing and it HAULS! Oh well, Ya pays Ya money an Ya takes Ya chances!

[ns9987]

Originally Posted by opus

Boy, I think I'd keep the 6.2 for now. What you gain in power by replacing it you will likely lose in fuel economy. I sure understand how the 6.2 is gutless. They were a great motor for just making forward motion. If it didnt grenade in the first year or two, they generally were good. "Good" having a different meaning than the normal, everyday "good". LOL.

HAHAHA!!! Well, put!! That part about "If it didn't grenade in the first year" made me fall out of my chair laughing!!!

[opus]

Ha...kinda like the 6.9 IH. If you got through 60k miles without head gaskets, the thing would last to infinity. It was gutless too, but who cares. I have seen 6.2's with tons of miles on them. How they got there beats me but they did. Who wants a Duramax, etc. Close to $50k and its nothing but wires and electronic components. Give me a mechanical engine any day....whatever it may be! I'm hungry..........

[ns9987]

Yep! My 6.9L's got 138,000 on her now lol and that thing will burn some oil. I have to put at least a quart or 2 of Rotella 15W-40 about every 2-3 times in I drive it. lol And, like I said it gets horrible fuel mileage, and is really gutless at times. I have a 5.38 ratio in mine but that's the limit for it. If anything, I wish it had a lower 5.57 minimally now, because I put larger 11R22.5 tires in it. It came specd with 9.00-20's. So, I love it, and have so much money in it, I'll never sell it, lol but yeah.

[opus]

Gee...find a 9.0 and stick in there. That way you can have the same power but with more cubic inches. ;) No, the 9.0 was a great engine.

[ns9987]

HAHAHA!!! Yeah, I have a Dump Truck that has a 9.0L/MT-643 in it. It's an 87' S-1700. I like the 9.0L alot better than my 6.9L But, I fear of over working, or running it to high for a long time and blowing the head gasket on it. I've got to get some different gears for it too. It has a 6.14 and it'll do about 45MPH @ 3000!!! It sucks ass... lol I would love to find a 5.38/5.57 for it. Also, the Allison MT-643 on it, has it's first gear valve body set super high!! It will not shift out of 1st unless you hit 3100RPM's, I was told the city I bought it from did that to make it a better snow plowning truck. So, it's really a bitch to drive. lol

[opus]

I drove school bus for years. We ran the dickens out of the 9.0L. We then got the 466 and it wasnt near as fun. Then we went to the 360 and I quit. LOL! I cant remember seeing a 9.0 with any engine issues, not even head gaskets.

[ns9987]

Wow!! lol Well, Back in 1985 here in NC the state bought it's first series of Diesel school buses, and they all were exclusively 1985 S-1800 60 passenger Thomas 9.0L's. Some of them had Air Brakes, some did not. And, since then they still have a good bit still running as Activity buses. Now here's the issue NC had with 9.0L's. Since state law mandates ALL school buses have a maximum road speed of 45MPH. (Which still holds true today. Activity buses can go 55MPH) They had the buses geared to where they would kindly max out at 45MPH. Which is around a 6.14 gear ratio with ALL Spoke Hub, 40 inch, 9.00-20 tires they had them specd with. Well, they ran ok for about 6 months, then they all suddenly started popping head gaskets one after the other. NC, was highly pissed with International and didn't buy anything from them for maybe 4-5 years after. So, with that in mind I kindly have that fear with mine as well. But, a school bus mechanic here told me, that if your 9.0L had more than 100,000 on it and never blew it, it probably wouldn't. But, like I said there is still alot of late 80's Activity buses with their 9.0L's still hanging on pretty good. But, when the blow they're sold off instantly. NC, also has a 20 year/200,000 mile limit on ALL school buses here too. In NC the state DPI (Dept. Of Public Instruction) governs the whole state, as far as buses go. Pretty much every School bus in NC is the same spec, and paint scheme.

[opus]

Lets see, this was about 1988-1994 for me. Those things would run the hills of upstate NY farm country screaming! Most of them topped out at 65. We had tacographs that we had to bend the needles on to keep out of the bosses office. ;) I was opposed to being the slowest one on the road, just for safety reasons.

[ns9987]

Haha!! Yeah, Tachographs, I've heard of those, but I've never seen one on real life. lol

[Jarlaxle]

Originally Posted by opus

Ha...kinda like the 6.9 IH. If you got through 60k miles without head gaskets, the thing would last to infinity. It was gutless too, but who cares. I have seen 6.2's with tons of miles on them. How they got there beats me but they did. Who wants a Duramax, etc. Close to $50k and its nothing but wires and electronic components. Give me a mechanical engine any day....whatever it may be! I'm hungry..........

My wife works for a towing company, still running a 1986 F-350 hoist truck (bought new, her boss still has the cancelled check, dated December of 1985), 6.9/4-speed, 4.11 gears, and 996,000 miles on it. Amazingly, it has over 650,000 miles on the injector pump! (Original went a bit more than 300K, the NAPA rebuild is still going!) At 1,000,000 miles, it will spend a year displayed in the showroom of the dealer where he bought it. It will then get a full restoration...and go back into service.

They also have a 1979 International S1700 tow truck...with over 1,000,000 miles since the engine was in-framed. Yep, it's a DT466...still running an unopened bottom end with over 1.8 million miles.

[bansil]

Originally Posted by Jarlaxle

My wife works for a towing company, still running a 1986 F-350 hoist truck (bought new, her boss still has the cancelled check, dated December of 1985), 6.9/4-speed, 4.11 gears, and 996,000 miles on it. Amazingly, it has over 650,000 miles on the injector pump! (Original went a bit more than 300K, the NAPA rebuild is still going!) At 1,000,000 miles, it will spend a year displayed in the showroom of the dealer where he bought it. It will then get a full restoration...and go back into service.

They also have a 1979 International S1700 tow truck...with over 1,000,000 miles since the engine was in-framed. Yep, it's a DT466...still running an unopened bottom end with over 1.8 million miles.

wow impressive

[caseythenose]

Originally Posted by chev49

43 hrs isa bit much...should take half that... the 6.2 is ok, 6.5 is way more powerful, but eats more pass head gaskets cause turbo only on one side... i have 1 ton dualie 4wd with 6.5... also injector pumps usually only last 150k miles or so. today is starter change today so no work on bus..
you can easily put in the 454 if you want the gas hog...but thats another couple days of work as well...

"turbo only on one side"

Could you explain this statement please? I am unsure what you mean.

[Will]

I didn't read everything everyone else said, but I expect a lot of negativity, so I won't.

I have a 1988 Chevy crewcab diesel. It has a 6.2 with a Banks turbocharger on it and a Gear Vendors splitter/overdrive. I have towed with this truck for 10 years and my trailer, a 3-axle gooseneck, weighs 6,000# empty. I have a track loader and a hoe, and years ago, I was going to several events a year with a Bronco. I've seen a lot of miles, but most of my towing is local now. I also have a 2000 Ford Powerstroke and the Banks 6.2 is stronger than the stock Powerstroke.

A stock naturally aspirated 6.2 isn't very strong. Neither is a stock natural 6.5. They aren't enough different to notice the difference. A 6.9 or 7.3 in a Ford is a little stronger, but without a turbo, those are horrible too. The turbo is the magic with a diesel. Don't install a diesel without a turbo. 6.2 through IDI 7.3 are the same with a turbo. They all have the same injection pump and are all limited to 250hp with the screw removed.

A 6.2 with a turbo is better than a 454. It won't reach the horsepower numbers of the 454, but you never drive in the rpm range that the 454 makes those numbers with a diesel. You don't need a tach with a diesel, just an EGT gauge. When the EGT gets high, downshift. That's all you need to know.

A 6.2 is cheap--if you claim to be part of Al Queda, the Navy will drop 6.5s on your house. Just a tip. They bolt to anything a 4.3-7.4 gasser will bolt to and there are a lot of parts out there for cheap.

[caseythenose]

Originally Posted by Will

I didn't read everything everyone else said, but I expect a lot of negativity, so I won't.

There was a bit...but for the most part, people confuse the 6.2 with the 5.7 Olds motor in the cars. They think it is a bored out version of one of those.
(It has nothing to do with the 5.7 as we know)

I am glad I can buy a 6.2 running good for 500 bucks.

Grab a full sized GM car, stuff the 6.2 in it with not too awful many mods...and you have a 28 MPG (in front of a 700R4 with highway gears) and it will yank the full framed car up any hill in overdrive all day long WITHOUT a turbo on it.

It is one of the best ways to drive heavy iron and not make opec richer.

Veggie oil power even. Those mechanical pumps are not that picky.

Are they a 6B cummins or a DT? no. They don't cost it either.

[caseythenose]

Oh...BTW the turbo only works on half the engine?? Huh????