82 6.2L any good?

[corelokt]

Were the early, 1982, 6.2l's an alright engine? Did they have known issues?

 

[ODdave]

corse thread ingectors, IIRC they had a few issues. If its dirt cheap and runs it would be worth it though

 

[Speedwoble]

Were the early, 1982, 6.2l's an alright engine? Did they have known issues?

Had one in an 82 K5 Blazer with 220000 miles. My experience was good.

 

[TyJustice]

Had one in an 82 K5 Blazer with 220000 miles. My experience was good.

Thats impressive, You buy it new?

 

[Tanner]

Depends.... on maintenance, usage, was it driven hard & beat like a plow mule, etc...

 

[dependable]

Some of them did not live too long. I have one that is still fine (82 c-20) If it is not J code, will have lower performance, but maybe a little better mileage. 82s used an different injector (coarse thread). If you can hear it run & sounds good, ok. I would do a compression check on any used engine I was going to bother installing. Lesson I learned anyway.

 

[corelokt]

It's complete.w/ everything bolted on. I want to put the heads on my block. Keep the rest for parts.

 

[jeeplvr247]

It still has the cast crank instead of forged so, just like all cucv engines, it is not fond of revs.

 

[Tanner]

All 6.X motors have cast Nodular iron cranks, until the more recent upgraded 6.5's came out with beefed-up forged cranks in the Optimizer 6500 / P400 engines -

'Tanner'

 

[DriverSideImpact1008]

I heard they had a few little issues typical of a first year product, including different injectors.
Is the 82 a C-code (emissions engine)? That would be a difference between the 82 and the J-code engine from a CUCV. C-code has less torque and HP. The heads are slightly different but interchangeable. I'm not sure if there are other differences like better oiling or cooling...maybe someone else knows that.

Have any idea how many miles are on it? Can you hear it run?

If it's cheap and you just want it for the heads and spares, go for it. I would probably work over the heads...port and polish, & valve job.

 

[Darwin T]

harmonic balance. i don't know if that 6.2 model has the same issue, but, if it does and the harmonic balance is bad it can break the crank shaft. the rubber dries out over time and it does not balance.

 

[skinnedknuckles]

In my opinion NO! Back in the mid 80's when I was a mechanic at a GM dealership I replaced WAY too many 6.2 and 5.7 diesel engines under warranty. None of the flat rate wage guys wanted to touch them but because I was hourly they were my job. It was good training for me on diesels though . And no, you will never see one at my place unless its in my scrap trailer ready to be hauled in. Just my own opinion from my own experience from dealing with the repair of them. Others may like them however.
Paul in Janesville, Wis

 

[jaymcb]

good gawd, a 5.7 diesel! <involuntary shudder> I had one in an olds cutlass...it was gawdawful.

an 82 is a long time ago....my 2c.

 

[DriverSideImpact1008]

The problem with the 5.7 diesel and 6.2 diesel, is that people didn't know how to drive them, or how to maintain them. They'd rev them up like a 350 gasser and use them like engines that they aren't, and not perform proper maintenance on them.
Granted the 5.7's weren't the greatest engines in the first place, but I've heard of them lasting a long time just with proper maintenance and good driving.

 

[Tanner]

People old enough to recall the early GM diesel attempts also confuse the 4.3 V6 & 5.7 V8 diesels - which were converted gas engines - with the 6.2/6.5 diesels, which were designed by Detroit Diesel as being a low-cost, light-duty diesel engine, designed for fuel economy & light-duty towing/hauling.

These engines are good for what they were designed to do, but require regular maintenance & upkeep & can give a long service life.

But they will NEVER be a Cummins or Caterpillar diesel in strength or quality - so there's no use in comparing them to anything else.

'Tanner'