[mikeinri]

@Jere39 Until you mentioned the fox, I'd assumed those footprints were from Scout walking the trail with you.

In a VERY contorted coincidence of life, I was watching your video with the truck radio on the background (sitting here staying warm while my son is sledding). And I heard this playing...

Can't make that up!!!

Mike

 

[g huns]

View attachment 2492148
My 1986 Chevy 5/4 ton stock military pickup.

View attachment 2492149

Those things are awesome. 6.2 engine aside, that's as good a drivetrain ever put in a truck. I have dreamed of getting one of those and putting an old 12 valve Cummins in it.

 

[TnTkr]

View attachment 2492148
My 1986 Chevy 5/4 ton stock military pickup.

View attachment 2492149

That's something I like!

 

[TnTkr]

Those things are awesome. 6.2 engine aside, that's as good a drivetrain ever put in a truck. I have dreamed of getting one of those and putting an old 12 valve Cummins in it.

Here I have heard about broken diesel injection pumps, but are there some other problems with 6.2 diesels too?

 

[g huns]

Here I have heard about broken diesel injection pumps, but are there some other problems with 6.2 diesels too?

Harmonic balancers can explode and break the crank. Main bearing journals can crack.

It's not a bad engine. It's simple. If the block is warm enough and you have enough battery to spin the starter, it will run.

The biggest problem is that they are giant turds, 130 hp and 240 lb-ft torque. About what a modern 2.0L VW diesel makes in a Jetta. A Banks turbo kit helps, but only so much.

 

[Tractor-Holic]

I own two 6.2 powered trucks,an '82 K2500 GMC and an '85 K-10 Suburban..

I cannot complain much about either one,both have been thru the mill before I got them and are still running..
But if I had a choice I'd rather have a 454 or at least a V8 gas engine instead..or even a straight six,which is about equal in HP and torque as a 6.2 and makes the most torque below 2000 rpm like the diesel..

The 6.2's were noted for weak cranks (they blamed the harmonic balancer ,but I have one for parts that had a new balancer and snapped the crank anyways--they put a cast crank in them,a big mistake,it should have been forged )...these engines are noted for starting hard in the cold,you need all 8 glow plugs working,two good high amp batteries,and be prepared to replace the glow plugs every few years ($90) and most likely a starter or two ($150+)...
I've seen more than one in junkyards that had the starter rip off the block ,and not all were missing the "front brace" to the starter either...

They are not that great on fuel in my experience either,my pickup never gets over 16 mpg,but its a 3 ton beast for a 140 HP engine to lug around...remember diesel fuel costs a good 50 cents per gallon more,and not every station sells it too,so you "save" nothing by owning a diesel..especially if (more like when) you end up having injector pump woes..

Some parts are getting very expensive for 6.2's now,getting rarer every year,and many parts are "one off" that only fits that engine or certain years,--example,the cast aluminum "crossover housing" the thermostat goes in,if your snaps the mounting bolt ears off like 90% do when you go to replace the thermostat--you'll be lucky to find an NOS or good used one online for under $100..I was lucky I had 2 good exhaust manifolds on that blown up 6.2,if I had to buy them it would have been $400..
Mine rotted right thru...

I'd just assume put that $100 or $400 towards a good running gas V8 to swap in its place..and have a truck I don't have to "plug in" and pray will start the next morning at zero degrees..and actually be able to pass someone on the interstate uphill..

 

[TnTkr]

I see, cranckshaft and starter problems. Are the 6.5 diesels any better then?

 

[706owner]

I see, cranckshaft and starter problems. Are the 6.5 diesels any better then?

From what I understand the 6.5 is a 6.2 with bigger heads.
In Dessert Storm I was told the Humvees with the 6.2’s held up better than the 6.5 version.

 

[dave_r]

I know this forum Diesel Place had some fairly knowledgeable people w.r.t. the 6.2 and 6.5 diesel engines...

 

[TnTkr]

I have no deeper personal experience of either one, but company I work on installed both 6.2 and 6.5 engines to a rubber-tracked articulated all terrain vehicle in 90's. Some vehicles were even equipped with 6.5 turbo, which gave nice boost to performance. I know some crankshafts were damaged due to too much power outtake from the front end of the engine, but otherwise they have a good reputation.

 

[mikeinri]

What's happening in that pic?

Mike

 

[TnTkr]

That vehicle was in Antarctica at Finnish scientific research station and in the picture they are pumping meltwater from glacier pocket for the station personnel.

Some of the vehicles were purchased for research and expeditions, fire and rescue, electric power line maintenance, but it was primarily designed for and mostly used by the Finnish Defence Forces.

 

[APinNY]

Nice shot of the mortar fire. I did that in another life.

 

[TnTkr]

Mortar muzzle velocity is relatively low, so you can get nice shots of the grenade escaping from the barrel.

 

[Tractor-Holic]

I see, cranckshaft and starter problems. Are the 6.5 diesels any better then?

The 6.5 diesel is basically a bored out 6.2...and the thinner the cylinder wall to water jacket area gets,the weaker the block is...
Far as I know they stayed with the cast crankshafts and the 6.5 began coming equipped with a turbo in the mid 1990's and they had issues with the PMD that controls the now "computerized" injector pump (vs the all mechanical one used on 6.2's).
The 6.5's had thinner piston tops so its easier to melt one vs a 6.2 if the fuel was "turned up" too much...also later 6.5's were casted with oil cooling jets in the block that take away meat too..

The turbo'd 6.5 had enough power to harm itself easier than a natarlly aspirated 6.2,so that may explain why the 6.2 is supposedly "more durable"...these engines are still around and my thoughts is because they will bolt up to basically any GM vehicle's transmission is one reason they still seem to have a following...personally I think GM should have put 6.2's in some of their RWD cars back in the 80's where they would deliver better fuel mileage and acceptable power levels ,vs using them in trucks that weigh 3+ tons ...GM never advertised these engines as being "heavy duty" really,the emphasis was on better mpg ..

 

[TnTkr]

In Finland 6.2 was sold in Olds Cutlass and Delta 88 in 80's, and after 5.7 it was a huge improvment in reliability.

 

[mikeinri]

@TnTkr I need one of those crawlers with a plow for my yard!

Mike

 

[TnTkr]

@TnTkr I need one of those crawlers with a plow for my yard!

Mike

They can be found in Finnish army surplus auctions. Welcome to buy!

 

[706owner]

My fire wood supply for next year and my 3/4 ton M101A2 trailer that I use for hauling my wood.