- Thread starter
- #41
There is acually already a water port drilled in the heads all you have to do is ream it and press in a valve guide .All machine shops are aware of or should be able to get the up date for this procedure.
6.2 chev in 40
- Thread starter dargreg
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
dargreg
Just been thinking back through this thread and don't remember seeing a battery. Did you put it behind the seat? Do you think there is enough room under the hood or is it too tight?
Don
Just been thinking back through this thread and don't remember seeing a battery. Did you put it behind the seat? Do you think there is enough room under the hood or is it too tight?
Don
- Thread starter
- #43
I had to put mine behind the seat however in the past couple of days I see its posible to put the mounts out of a 42 with a 3b. The diesel battery tray mounts a little more forward and is taller.The 6.2 alt may require a shorter belt to clear the mount. Will be doing the mod shortly,It would definatly be easier doing this when I was doing the build.
dargreg
Bringing this thread back up. Any updates? How's it going? Curious how the fuel mileage (long term average) is going now that you've changed to 3:73's. I'm still dreaming about putting the 6.2 into my 40. I had to re-license the 83 PU to use for my DD (sure do enjoy the 6.2). My 97 Astro is setting and waiting for almost $800 in repairs that I don't have the money for. To make things worse, my wifes 98 Astro died a few days ago while she was on her way home from work. Had it towed to the mechanic, still haven't heard from him what the problem is except that it is electrical. No choice but to put it on plastic, IH8PLASTIC!
Don
Bringing this thread back up. Any updates? How's it going? Curious how the fuel mileage (long term average) is going now that you've changed to 3:73's. I'm still dreaming about putting the 6.2 into my 40. I had to re-license the 83 PU to use for my DD (sure do enjoy the 6.2). My 97 Astro is setting and waiting for almost $800 in repairs that I don't have the money for. To make things worse, my wifes 98 Astro died a few days ago while she was on her way home from work. Had it towed to the mechanic, still haven't heard from him what the problem is except that it is electrical. No choice but to put it on plastic, IH8PLASTIC!
Don
- Thread starter
- #45
Sorry Ive been away for a while and the web site has been down when im at home .The milage has stayed the same it seems just not takeing so long getting to where I want to go.I have 2200 miles on the rig ,the only thing Ive had to do was retighten the AA adapter.Still getting lots of weird looks and 2 serious buyers that have bid themselves up to 25 grand, but Im not selling.I was wondering how you were makeing out ,it will cme to you in time keep the dream up ,it took me a few years to finnally get started. good luck keep in touch.
Looks great. I thought about doing a 4.5 litre John Deere a few years ago. Would really love to see someone do the 6.6 Duramax. Sadly they dropped the smaller duramax project.
dargreg
Question for you about the 6.2 motor mounts. You seem to know your way around these 6.2 motors, are the motor mounts spaced/set the same as the SBC mounts? I am looking into the SBC mounts built and sold by Matt Bier (formerly by Bob Firestein). I am thinking that they must be the same but have no way to measure anything.
Don
Question for you about the 6.2 motor mounts. You seem to know your way around these 6.2 motors, are the motor mounts spaced/set the same as the SBC mounts? I am looking into the SBC mounts built and sold by Matt Bier (formerly by Bob Firestein). I am thinking that they must be the same but have no way to measure anything.
Don
kcustom73
Stretched it...
Don,
Not sure if I would use the Matt Bier mounts with the 6.2. They look like they center the engine between the frame rails and the engine needs to be offset to the passenger side a bit to clear the steering. They a look at post #20 & 21 of this thread where dargreg and I talk about this. I'll be using a combo of the original mounts and something I fab myself.
Not sure if I would use the Matt Bier mounts with the 6.2. They look like they center the engine between the frame rails and the engine needs to be offset to the passenger side a bit to clear the steering. They a look at post #20 & 21 of this thread where dargreg and I talk about this. I'll be using a combo of the original mounts and something I fab myself.
Kevin
Some good info to consider. I went back and looked at the posts you noted and also all the pics that showed dargregs steering shaft, (posts # 11 & 15). He used a standard saginaw PS setup which puts the shaft inside the frame rails and above the motor mount. I'm in the process of installing a Scout box. After reading up on the Scout box and Mark W's posts on this box I am using a pc of 3/4" thick steel between the box and frame to set the box out away from the radiator support. After spending some time building this in my mind I think I'll be OK with the Matt Bier mounts BECAUSE of the Scout box. Otherwise, yes you would be right about the steering problems, good call.
About the origional question, I found an answer today. Motor mount locations are the same, the big change between the diesel and gasser is the mounts. The big question I have left is if indeed the Matt Bier mounts center the motor between the frame rails how much space is left available for drive shaft clearance.
Thanks for the heads up.
Don
Some good info to consider. I went back and looked at the posts you noted and also all the pics that showed dargregs steering shaft, (posts # 11 & 15). He used a standard saginaw PS setup which puts the shaft inside the frame rails and above the motor mount. I'm in the process of installing a Scout box. After reading up on the Scout box and Mark W's posts on this box I am using a pc of 3/4" thick steel between the box and frame to set the box out away from the radiator support. After spending some time building this in my mind I think I'll be OK with the Matt Bier mounts BECAUSE of the Scout box. Otherwise, yes you would be right about the steering problems, good call.
About the origional question, I found an answer today. Motor mount locations are the same, the big change between the diesel and gasser is the mounts. The big question I have left is if indeed the Matt Bier mounts center the motor between the frame rails how much space is left available for drive shaft clearance.
Thanks for the heads up.
Don
From the info I have found they are a straight bolt up. Bellhousing to block for sure and after what I found today, motor mount locations also, just need to use diesel motor mounts instead of gasser mounts. Many people in the early 80's got tired of diesel problems and swapped straight over to 350 motors.
However, the 6.2 and 6.5 are NOT the 350 block. They were designed as an all new block seperate from the 350. The 6.2 and 6.5 were designed by Detroit Diesel and, as GM has done for so many other motors, set them up to interchange with most of their line of motors and trannies. The 350/diesel fiasco was something that caused a lot of problems for GM, including having a hard time seperating the 350 from the 6.2 and 6.5 as a totally different design. GM/Detroit Diesel still didn't get things totally right with a new design and due to too light of a block had more problems ( this info I got off another web site, dieselplace.com).
Don
kcustom73
Stretched it...
handcannon
drive shaft clearence might or might not be an issue depending on what tranny you run. I plan on running the 700R4 auto that came with the 6.2 so I already know that I will have clearence issues, so for me the Bier mounts are out. I a did search for pics of the Bier mounts here on MUD and did find a pic that showed the Bier mount with what looked like a rubber mount from the 6.2 I have. I've heard that the rubber bushing you get with a 350 kit will not survive very long under the weight of the 6.2. If you could use the Bier brackets with stock 6.2 rubber mounts and have no clearence issues, I think that would be a great setup (those brackets are beefy).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In2crsuiers
From what I've read the 6.2 falls in the same weight category as the 2F (around 700lbs).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6.2 got a bad rap for not being a reliable engine. It does have a few shorthcomming but which engine doesn't. It was never designed to make huge power, but more of a fuel economy engine. The main issues about crank web craking and cranks exploding have all been resolved by the aftermarket crowd. The web cracking (if minor) can be fixed by using a "lock & stich" system (similiar to a helicoil) and adding a stud girdle. The exploding crank was mostly due to bad balancers. There are shop out there like dieseldepot.com that can build very strong and reliable 6.2 as long as they are used for there intended purpose.
drive shaft clearence might or might not be an issue depending on what tranny you run. I plan on running the 700R4 auto that came with the 6.2 so I already know that I will have clearence issues, so for me the Bier mounts are out. I a did search for pics of the Bier mounts here on MUD and did find a pic that showed the Bier mount with what looked like a rubber mount from the 6.2 I have. I've heard that the rubber bushing you get with a 350 kit will not survive very long under the weight of the 6.2. If you could use the Bier brackets with stock 6.2 rubber mounts and have no clearence issues, I think that would be a great setup (those brackets are beefy).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In2crsuiers
From what I've read the 6.2 falls in the same weight category as the 2F (around 700lbs).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The 6.2 got a bad rap for not being a reliable engine. It does have a few shorthcomming but which engine doesn't. It was never designed to make huge power, but more of a fuel economy engine. The main issues about crank web craking and cranks exploding have all been resolved by the aftermarket crowd. The web cracking (if minor) can be fixed by using a "lock & stich" system (similiar to a helicoil) and adding a stud girdle. The exploding crank was mostly due to bad balancers. There are shop out there like dieseldepot.com that can build very strong and reliable 6.2 as long as they are used for there intended purpose.
Kevin
My plans are for using the 700R4. I also am hoping to be able to use a 203 doubler mated to a 4 sp TC that I have. The big "IF" is with the length. The doubler adds about 2-3 inches over the AA 700/Toy TC adapter length so I'm hoping to be able to make that up by using 55 rear springs and pushing the axle back as far as possible. "IF" I am able to use the doubler then I feel confident I'll have no drive shaft clearance problems. Otherwise????
Don
My plans are for using the 700R4. I also am hoping to be able to use a 203 doubler mated to a 4 sp TC that I have. The big "IF" is with the length. The doubler adds about 2-3 inches over the AA 700/Toy TC adapter length so I'm hoping to be able to make that up by using 55 rear springs and pushing the axle back as far as possible. "IF" I am able to use the doubler then I feel confident I'll have no drive shaft clearance problems. Otherwise????
Don
Just what is the max sustained rpm limit for the 6.2 and 6.5? Is there a peak limit for maximum fuel economy?
kcustom73
Stretched it...
handcannon,
ever think about doing a Marlin Crawler toybox as an adapter between the toyota t-case and the 700R4. looks like you are going to add something between 9-10" to adapt everything with the AA adapter and 203. I guess you're using the doubler to give you back some of the low end from going to the 700R4? I think the toybox is around 12" (not sure on that one) and from what I've heard its as tough as you can get for our application. The only issue is $$$. I'm not taking the "spare no expense" route on this project, but I am trying to get things the way i want them the first time. Right know my planned combo is the 6.2 (maybe with some sort of force induction
) with the 700R4, 2.28 toybox, stock 16 spline t-case, 3.7 gears and 33" tall tires. With this setup I'll be able to cruise at 68 mph at 1800 rpms in overdrive and still have a crawl ratio of 50. Something to think about.
Brian,
Like most older diesel it likes its RPM low for fuel economy. Most say around 1800RPM is the sweet spot, which happens to be where this engine seems to make most of it torque. This might vary a bit depending on mods. As for MAX RPM, I think it 4500RPM but I would have to check to make sure about that one
ever think about doing a Marlin Crawler toybox as an adapter between the toyota t-case and the 700R4. looks like you are going to add something between 9-10" to adapt everything with the AA adapter and 203. I guess you're using the doubler to give you back some of the low end from going to the 700R4? I think the toybox is around 12" (not sure on that one) and from what I've heard its as tough as you can get for our application. The only issue is $$$. I'm not taking the "spare no expense" route on this project, but I am trying to get things the way i want them the first time. Right know my planned combo is the 6.2 (maybe with some sort of force induction
) with the 700R4, 2.28 toybox, stock 16 spline t-case, 3.7 gears and 33" tall tires. With this setup I'll be able to cruise at 68 mph at 1800 rpms in overdrive and still have a crawl ratio of 50. Something to think about.Brian,
Like most older diesel it likes its RPM low for fuel economy. Most say around 1800RPM is the sweet spot, which happens to be where this engine seems to make most of it torque. This might vary a bit depending on mods. As for MAX RPM, I think it 4500RPM but I would have to check to make sure about that one
Going from my reading about them, 1800 to 2200 RPM is the best running range with about 2000 to 2100 as optimum for economy. I think 3500 is max RPM. Don't have a tach in the 83 pickup yet so no first hand info.
Don
Was going from memory on these numbers, take with a grain of salt. Didn't read Kevin's post before posting.
Last edited:
handcannon,
ever think about doing a Marlin Crawler toybox as an adapter between the toyota t-case and the 700R4. looks like you are going to add something between 9-10" to adapt everything with the AA adapter and 203. I guess you're using the doubler to give you back some of the low end from going to the 700R4? I think the toybox is around 12" (not sure on that one) and from what I've heard its as tough as you can get for our application. The only issue is $$$. I'm not taking the "spare no expense" route on this project, but I am trying to get things the way i want them the first time. Right know my planned combo is the 6.2 (maybe with some sort of force induction
Brian,
Like most older diesel it likes its RPM low for fuel economy. Most say around 1800RPM is the sweet spot, which happens to be where this engine seems to make most of it torque. This might vary a bit depending on mods. As for MAX RPM, I think it 4500RPM but I would have to check to make sure about that one
Kevin
Sound like you have done a bit of research. I am open to all ideas. Here's where I am at right now.
I got a chance to get the 203 doubler already bolted up to the Toy TC a couple years ago for about the same price as the AA 700R4 to Toy TC adapter, so, no I never looked very much into the toybox. I'm hoping to eventually DD my 40 and my main concern with going the 203 route was keeping low gearing available with the option to go to 3:70's if my 4:10's proved too low for DDing the 40. Deciding to go the diesel route may require the 3:70's, time will tell. I've played with the gear ratio calculator at grimmjeeper.com and feel I am on the line for either ratio depending on the tire size I end up with (I am considering going with 315-75-16 tires which I am told are about 35") .
The thing that really swayed me to go the 203 doubler route is the overall length of the combo. The AA adapter for the 700R4 to Toy TC is 6.75" long. The 203 to Toy TC combo is 8.25" long, this includes the stock GM 203 to auto tranny adapter and the AA 203 to Toy TC adaptor along with the 203 doubler. The combo setup is only 1.5" longer and I figured I could somehow make up that extra 1.5" during the install. The 203 TC was origionally mated up to the 350 tranny so the 700R4 output shaft needs to be swapped to one that mimics the 350 output.
If you are keeping open the possibility of going turbo I'd be interested in what you have found about it as I am trying to keep that as an option when I do my swap. The stock GM pickup turbo location has me concerned about space on the underhood passenger side (battery) of the 40 since I've never seen the stock setup. The stock van turbo was top and center of the 6.5td which is making me wish I could compare the two systems side by side.
Don
kcustom73
Stretched it...
Don,
Looks like you already have some of the parts so I would make what you have work. I think its a good combo.
My 6.2/700r4 combo came out of a 2wd van so I'm thinking the toybox is a better option for me. Your going to have a really short drive shaft even with flipping the stock spring. You might want to look at what some of these guys did to give them a longer wheelbase (you've probably already seen this thread) https://forum.ih8mud.com/hardcore-corner/263347-whats-your-fj40-wheelbase.html
I'm definitly going to 3.70 because I'm litmited to 33" tires. I'm only going with a 2.5" lift on the truck and anything more then 33" will cause some issues. The 40 is going to mostly be a DD but will be used for some light offroad for now. Never done much offroad before so I want to see what my likes will be.
As for the force induction, I am worried about some of the same issues you mentioned when going turbo. So I'm thinking I might go supercharger. I has not been done much on 6.2 used on land but has been big with the 6.2 and 6.5 used in a marine applications. I think most guys go turbo because there are existing solutions. I've always been a fan of superchargers (don't know why, never own one) and I'm thinking that a M90 from a gm/pontiac 3.8 from the late 80-early 90 might work. They are cheap to get used and can be rebuilt for a little money. I talked about it with some guys from the Diesel page forum and I'm thinking that might be something interesting to try out. Take a look at the link: TheDieselPage.com Forums
Looks like you already have some of the parts so I would make what you have work. I think its a good combo.
My 6.2/700r4 combo came out of a 2wd van so I'm thinking the toybox is a better option for me. Your going to have a really short drive shaft even with flipping the stock spring. You might want to look at what some of these guys did to give them a longer wheelbase (you've probably already seen this thread) https://forum.ih8mud.com/hardcore-corner/263347-whats-your-fj40-wheelbase.html
I'm definitly going to 3.70 because I'm litmited to 33" tires. I'm only going with a 2.5" lift on the truck and anything more then 33" will cause some issues. The 40 is going to mostly be a DD but will be used for some light offroad for now. Never done much offroad before so I want to see what my likes will be.
As for the force induction, I am worried about some of the same issues you mentioned when going turbo. So I'm thinking I might go supercharger. I has not been done much on 6.2 used on land but has been big with the 6.2 and 6.5 used in a marine applications. I think most guys go turbo because there are existing solutions. I've always been a fan of superchargers (don't know why, never own one) and I'm thinking that a M90 from a gm/pontiac 3.8 from the late 80-early 90 might work. They are cheap to get used and can be rebuilt for a little money. I talked about it with some guys from the Diesel page forum and I'm thinking that might be something interesting to try out. Take a look at the link: TheDieselPage.com Forums
