HMMWV (1 Viewer)

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.

veeLC

veeLC

Joined
Apr 20, 2008
Threads
9
Messages
256
Location
In the middle of a big lake
Hey guys,

Has anyone out there ever seen or heard of a General Motors Corp. GM 6.2 L Diesel being dropped into an 80 series frame? These are the same engines that come out of the M998's (HMMWV).

Aloha
 
There's quite a few threads on mud about it. Check out Rusty's swap. That is an extensive write up, and he is a big fan of the 6.2 diesel. Knows alot about and is very generous with is knowledge.
 
Mahalo much braddahz!
 
i had a HMMWV and never was a fan of the 6.2 they have a #6 i think cylinder weakness and just didnt have any power. if you are just set on this swap locate a 6.5 with turbo even. .02

i would love to do a 4BT. since my tow rig is a 02 Ram i am a little biased :)
 
I looked into the 4BT. They just shake too much, are too tall, and their torque range is too small in my opinion. You have to keep the rpms crazy low and it just doesn't float my boat. I've got an Isuzu 4BD1 in an 83 Toyota pickup. It has an SAE #3 bellhousing pattern then from that it goes to a ford T18. I'm going to do a Ranger overdrive with the ford pattern on the front and the FJ60 manual pattern on the back. That'll go into a 91 or 92 FJ80. :).
 
ThePookieBear said:
There's quite a few threads on mud about it. Check out Rusty's swap. That is an extensive write up, and he is a big fan of the 6.2 diesel. Knows alot about and is very generous with is knowledge.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the kind words PookieBear.
I personally loved the 6.2. It was not one of my first thought though, I always heard bad things about them so never really considered one. My first thought was a 1HD-T but the price and availability quickly took that off my list. The Cummins required a huge lift and is extremely loud, not what I wanted. I was all set to do the Isuzu 4BD-1, thought I had one purchased but it never came through. While I was waiting I found a guy selling military take out 6.2's about 30 minutes away. I started researching the engine and after talking to people on The Diesel Place forum found out it really is a good engine.
Granted by todays standards it is low powered, that is why GM gave up on it, the diesel HP wars made them go another direction.
Power and mileage it is better than the 1FZ-E. The HP on the military engines is about 165, to compare that to a gas engine they say add 30%. Seat of pants it felt much more powerful, a blast to drive and the V-8 rumble was great. Mileage wise, I got about 19-20 mpg on the highway, could have done better if I could have kept the rpm's down a bit, I have spoken to several Suburban owners who typically get about 25 mpg so it is possible.
Reliability? I only kept mine about a year but it is a dead simple engine, extremely easy to work on, fits in the engine compartment great, requires no lift, is fairly quiet, parts are cheap and easy to come by, doesn't weigh any more than the 1FZ-E. The reasons go on as far as I am concerned, the price being the best reason.
I have kept in touch with the person who bought mine a couple years ago, it is still running trouble free if that helps any.
Happy to answer any questions.
 
Why would you add 30%?

I never got close to 20 in my 60 series 6.2. I suppose if you re-gear to match the rpm range of the diesel you could get better. At .40/gal more for diesel even getting close is no savings. It would have to be significantly better.

What do you do for a torque converter? The 80 series tc is going to have a way too high stall for a diesel.

The non-military 6.2s had substantially lower HP and torque numbers than the military versions. I wonder what the mileage trade is for the higher power numbers?
 
i have a 6.2 in my hmmwv.

power is not bad. certainly not spirited. i wouldn't use it in a swap. low down torque is nice compared to the relatively high revving 1fzfe (and if you arn't revving the 1fzfe you are missing out)

and Gumpy is right. the torque converter stall in the 1fzfe is way off for the 6.2

in low range esp where the 6.2 will be redlining right as is shifts
 
I used a 700R4 transmission in my swap which has a better final drive than the A442.
The 6.2 gets the best mileage at around 1,800 rpm and looses quite a bit for every 100 or so over that. I get this information from a book on the 6.2.
With the 700R4 transmission and 33" tires I was turning closer to 2,000 rpm at around 65 mph, normally I cruised closer to 2,100 rpm so my mileage was normally around 18-19 mpg. One time I made a short trip of about 150 miles and kept the rpm's down closer to 1,800 and got around 21 mpg so I know it is possible, and yes, I did correct for speedometer error (had the speedo correction gear installed)
I am not saying it is the best diesel engine but when you take all the factors into consideration I felt it was the best choice.
By the way, the 30% is a number I read on another site about diesel hp, can't remember where but they say add 30% to a diesel HP and it will give you some reference as compared to a gas engine. Seat of pants feel I would say this is correct.
My Mercedes G350DT was rated right around 160HP and seat of pants feel was about exactly the same as my Land Cruiser rated at 212HP? The 6.2 diesel seemed even more powerful.
The early 6.2's were built more for economy, later years were built more for power, I think originally they might have been around 135 HP? Not sure but the mileage went down with the more powerful versions as well.
Rusty
 
Mahalo much for all the great feedback rtarh2o.

As some of you had pointed out, while there may be other more "desirable" diesels out there, when all things are considered, for me at least, the 6.2 diesels are something that deserves serious consideration. Initial price, parts availability, swappability etc... Governmentliquidations.com has a lot of these engines up for bid. Some are in the shipping crate some in the vehicle.

Also the 6.2 is an easier sell to the missus while a pitch for a 12HT will be an all around tougher effort. Any tips?:crybaby:
 
veeLC said:
Mahalo much for all the great feedback rtarh2o.

As some of you had pointed out, while there may be other more "desirable" diesels out there, when all things are considered, for me at least, the 6.2 diesels are something that deserves serious consideration. Initial price, parts availability, swappability etc... Governmentliquidations.com has a lot of these engines up for bid. Some are in the shipping crate some in the vehicle.

Also the 6.2 is an easier sell to the missus while a pitch for a 12HT will be an all around tougher effort. Any tips?:crybaby:
Click to expand...

the 6.2/6.5's are certainly cheap cheap cheap.

even turbod low miled motors are cheap and plentiful. cummins are not cheap
 
Try to get one out of an Up armoured HMMVW or the GMV. ( ops version ) I know they were alot better with the turbo in them.
 
Up to this point i've only looked at Government Liquidations for the 6.2's.

Are there any other places you recommend to search for these powerplants?

Aloha...
 
Last edited:
I've heard some of the later 6.2s were 190 hp.
 
veeLC said:
Up to this point i've only looked at Government Liquidations for the 6.2's.

Are there any other places you recommend to search for these powerplants?

Aloha...
Click to expand...

Ebay, Craigslist, tons on there
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom