6.2 diesels opinions

I've got my eye on a 91 Suburban 4x4 with a 6.2 Diesel in it. Anything wrong with these engines. Ive not heard much about these engines. I heard the
block head bolt holes crack, but Ive heard others say they are good engines. Any chronic known problems, or is this vehicle just a fluke that should be in the junkyard.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

The GM light-truck 6.2L and 6.5L diesel engines were optional in the 1982-2000 C/K series pickup trucks, and in the Suburban, Chevy Tahoe & Blazer, GMC Yukon & Jimmy, vans, and motor homes (RV) - in both turbo diesel (TD) and naturally aspirated (NA) versions. In addition, low cost and ready availability have made these engines extremely popular the world over for diesel conversion projects; powering Land Rovers, Land Cruisers, and a host of other foreign and domestic production vehicles.
Designed as a diesel engine from the ground up by the Detroit Diesel Division of General Motors, the original 6.2L diesel engine was introduced in the 1982 model year GMC and Chevy C/K pickup truck and full-size SUV lines. Taking this engine design to the next level in the 1992 model year, the new 6.5L diesel engine was an advancement in technology, and was designed for the application of a turbocharger. The 6.2L saw its final year of production in 1993. While the 6.5 was replaced by the Duramax 6600 beginning in the 2001 model year Chevy and GMC vehicle production, the 6.5L diesel engine continues to be manufactured and sold by AM General for the civilian H1 Hummer & military HMMWV.
The only major problem I've heard of is the placement of the injector pump controller down in the block valley which tends to overheat the controller. After market suppliers have come up with several solutions to this problem buy installing larger heatsinks and/or moving the controller itself to a different location. Hope this helps.
Regards,
JR
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
The 6.2 is a useless dog. The early 6.5 was a dog, but they managed to get some life out of it after they worked the kinks out. Not bad units for chugging along (think farm equipment) if that is all you need.
They couldn't touch the Ford, or Cummins, though.
Don't get anything that does not have a turbo if you plan on having any performance.
The Duramax is a great unit if you have the bones.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Is it a useless dog as in run away from it?? Or is it a useless dog that runs forever???
I want it to be able to sit a long time or go on a 400 mile trip without breaking down. Will this thing have a 70 mph cruise or is it getting pushed hard at that speed. Like my Dads Van??
Here's the vehicle in question. http://cleveland.craigslist.org/ctd/1318964766.html I already own a bottom rusty 81 with a Chevy 350 and 200,000 miles thats probably unsafe. But it gets me everywhere. Im in a severe salted road area. Pretty isnt it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It should run for a long time. (see below for more)

That unit without a turbo might have a problem with 70, at least going up slight grades.
Here's the skinny on diesels. They really love to be feed air. Any diesel that does not have a turbo will be very underpowered. They will have plenty of low end torque, but they really won't have any get up and go, or keep you there, power. The second you hit a grade your speed will drop off quickly and it won't matter how hard you push on the accelerator. That particular engine was bad enough with a turbo, I could not imagine how gutless it would be without one.
Anyway, take it for a spin. Let that experience tell you if the performance is up to par. As for durability...I'd say that it has another 100,000 on it. It is used so who knows? Just change the oil religiously in them. Diesels create a bit more sulfur in the oil than gas engines (even with low sulfur fuel), and that makes for nasties in the crankcase.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I want it to be able to sit a long time or go on a 400 mile trip without breaking down.

Got it.

I can .I had a 82 VW van with a 52 hp diesel in it. 0-50 in about 18 seconds I recollect. It was dangerous slow and had two gas pedal positions off and full down. But would spool up to about 5500 RPM.

This would be a nice upgrade from mine . Its real rusty but reliable. I guess im going tohave to go out there again for another looksee.
Thanks
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Looks like a well cared for unit for the price. Look for rust under the carpeting just in front of the barn doors. The interior looks like aftermarket but a nice job done. I have a spare tire bracket and cover from a full size '87 Blazer that you can have for the shipping. Regards, JR
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Is that truck on craigslist really a 91??? I had a 76 Blazer with that dashboard. Surely they didn't still use that dash in 91 !!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

'91 was the last year of the old body for Suburban and full size Blazer; they used the old '73 body and dash until the '92 model year.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Wow, that must be a record. Those years were some of the best designs IMHO.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yes the dash was made of real steel with a nice padded vinal cover.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I have been driving 6.2's for over 20 years and love them-- 2 pickups, a Suburban and a van. The one problem I have had with all of them was breaking starter bolts. Make sure it has the little bracket on the rear of the starter. I've been driving a gas 92 GMC with a v6 for a couple of years, but recently got a nice little 86 shortbed C10 with a 6.2, and as soon as I fix a couple of minor things --not engine related-- am going to start driving it. I'm seriously thinking about replacing the bolts every oil change as a preventative measure. Larry BTW, the 6.2's have about the same performance as the old stock 350's in the early 70's after they lowered the compression and stuck EGR on them, and before fuel injection. But they will easily get 20mpg where the old gassers would be hard pressed to get 10. I got 27 out of my 83 GMC 1/2 ton once-- on the highway at about steady 60 and the a/c off.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Just read your post today, guess what! The module that controls the injector pump died. Short story, Chevy dealer replaced motor two years ago. Left wiring harness loose that goes across the back of the motor. It rubbed against the block, and shorted out several circuits. One was the PCM, and the other the fuel module. just my luck.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
I got one of those. It's okay, I just wish it had a turbo charger.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.