Gas to diesel

TotalyHucked said:

You joke, but I wanna do that one day. It makes no sense, will make no power, get terrible fuel mileage lol...but they sound so good

Click to expand...

I think the two stroke Detroits are as cool as can be.

When you consider a 4-53 is only 212 cubic inches, that’s pretty darn impressive they made the numbers they did, being put in trucks with a gvwr of 30k, or combined to 60k lbs.

Brochure cuts below are from 1980, the 2 stroke Detroit platform was already 40 years old, but wasn’t far behind the new 8.2 fuel pinchers. Despite being less than half the displacement.

Oh wow! I've never actually looked up power numbers, just knew you basically have to hold them at redline to make power

Seems like a lot of great information so far.

Cummins R2.8 crate engine. That's what I want. I love the dmax in my Canyon.

SquareRoot said:

Cummins R2.8 crate engine. That's what I want. I love the dmax in my Canyon.

Click to expand...

We have a guy in my neighborhood with one of those. It's tuned and straight piped, sounds awesome and gets phenomenal mileage

It was a machinist at a military installation, Yakima Training center in Selah. I fell in love with those 6-V-53s that they put in a lot of those rigs not only did they sound bad to the bone. They really hauled butt too, cause they were both turboed and supercharged. I hated the 6.2 in the C20, but now that I am understanding it, I love it. It is not powerful, but now that mine is running I use it all the time, and I did haul a load up a steep hill the other day 8000 lbs, and just kept my foot in it, and she did great. Only thing that hurt my feelers working there is all the machine guns and etc. I had to cut up, they watch em' close, so I couldn't sneak one home.

6V63 in squarebody:

Craig Nedrow said:

It was a machinist at a military installation, Yakima Training center in Selah. I fell in love with those 6-4-53s that they put in a lot of those rigs not only did they sound bad to the bone. They really hauled butt too, cause they were both turboed and supercharged. I hated the 6.2 in the C20, but now that I am understanding it, I love it. It is not powerful, but now that mine is running I use it all the time, and I did haul a load up a steep hill the other day 8000 lbs, and just kept my foot in it, and she did great. Only thing that hurt my feelers working there is all the machine guns and etc. I had to cut up, they watch em' close, so I couldn't sneak one home.

Click to expand...

And the 6.2 got smokin mpgs while pulling that 8000lbs.

Ricko1966 said:

And the 6.2 got smokin mpgs while pulling that 8000lbs.

Click to expand...

^This. While I can’t imagine a world where I’d want one, the mpgs are what got me thinkin about diesels.
Growing up in the era of 6-9mpg being “normal”, seeing the 6.2 knock down 20mpg in a full size truck was intriguing. I was just more interested in getting speeding tickets and loud exhaust than a 6.2 could provide.
Never had an early 12V and was and still am convinced that the Ford 6.9 might be the biggest piece of chit turd motor ever after the GM 350 diesel, but back in the mid 90s picked up a 6.5 turbo K20 as a fixer flipper. PMD was out and the rest of the truck was in perfect shape but the bed looked like it got beat regularly with a sack full of hammers. Threw a PMD, quart of bondo and a quart of blue paint at it and wife drove the piss out of it for a couple months.
Never kept it long enough to test the longevity of the engine but was blown away at 19mpg loaded or empty and enough power to climb a pass at 7-8kft at terminal velocity.

My 84 K10 has 33s and 3.42 gears, and a very early Banks set up on the 6.2. (I tried to buy this truck new in Nov 1983, not knowing a buddy had ordered it, and the dealership was waiting on the turbo stuff from Banks)
I regularly get 24-25 mpg with no overdrive. Going to swap the 4 speed out for a 4L80 soon.

With 9 pounds of boost, you would be surprised at how well it runs. Family has had several 5.7/6.2 diesels, a few 6.9s, a buddy had one of the 7.3 idi turbos (before the swap to Powerstroke) and my brother, father and I have had 5.9s in every varient.

They all have their place, but going back to the 6.2 turbo for may daily

vr1967 said:

My 84 K10 has 33s and 3.42 gears, and a very early Banks set up on the 6.2. (I tried to buy this truck new in Nov 1983, not knowing a buddy had ordered it, and the dealership was waiting on the turbo stuff from Banks)
I regularly get 24-25 mpg with no overdrive. Going to swap the 4 speed out for a 4L80 soon.

Click to expand...

You'll want to do the math on RPMs with overdrive before you do that swap. I think you'll find it'll make the engine turn too slow, and actually hurt your MPG, or at best, not help it.

backwoodsman said:

You'll want to do the math on RPMs with overdrive before you do that swap. I think you'll find it'll make the engine turn too slow, and actually hurt your MPG, or at best, not help it.

Click to expand...

Truck was run about 10 years with a 700r4 with roughly the same mileage, only going back to the 4 speed when the 700r4 went out (the 700 was used when it was installed)

On a NA 6.2, I would worry, but with the Banks, the engines seem to do a lot better