picked up a toyo diesel pickup :)

[kyradawg]

Peace&Love , Darren

[Firebrick]

"The G.M. 6.2-6.5 diesels are pretty good engines" Now I really think your nuts Kyradawg.

I have two chevys, one even has a diesel, but thank god not a 6.2 or 6.5 (it has a detroit 8.2).  They have had nothing but trouble with these engines, long life is the exception, not the norm.  The military humvees had the non turbo models of these engines, and besides being gutless the were unreliable and it wasnt uncommon for a brand new engine to be replaced after 2 or 3 thousand miles,  50 thousand was a high milage engine.  They are especially stricken with glowplug problems and therefore starting problems.  Rest of the machine wasnt much better, half shafts, differentials, portal gearboxes, transmissions, all plauged by problems.  It has even gotten worse as they have been putting on more armor, increasing the weight.

I have seen 5 or 6 gm pickups have the 6.2/5 replaced with a 5.9 cummins recently because the truck wasnt wore out but the engine was kput.  On the other hand, a high school buddy that works at a dodge dealer, has had several people ask if dodge would sell just a frame and body because after 500 or 600 thousand miles the chassis is wore out but the cummins engine is running strong. 
I do agree  that the international engine is pretty good, that is until they came out with the 6.0.

[mobile_bob]

i gotta chime in here

the 6.2 and 6.5 are adequate engines for most folks for maybe up to 150,000 miles if well maintained

the 7.3 liter and later the powerstrokes are infinetely better and more durable in design.

the 8.2 liter detroit is the all time worst american made diesel to ever sit on this planet bar none!
Detroit should have had a class action law suit filed against them for that pathetic piece of scrap iron!
i could go on and on reguarding design flaws with this engine, but i won't at this time.

the bottom line is in my opinion, there really isn't a good pickup size diesel being built in this country today.
with the new epa reg's the manufactures are being forced to move far to fast to market their designs without
sufficient time to find and correct the flaw's and it is going to get nothing but worse.

i for one do not want to be the "test bed" "guinea pig" while they work out the kinks, when a 1 ton dually diesel will set me
back 50 grand.

makes me sick to see how the epa is beating the shit out of all of us, from the manufacture down to the consumer.

bob g

[hotater]

The mention of the EPA makes me wonder if my 2K 7.3 Ford might get me hung. 

 It's got some kind of wizard re-programmable chip and straight 4" pipes and K&N air cleaner.   I averaged 21.8 mpg over 5100 miles pulling a four wheel flat bed trailer lightly loaded but aerodynamically dirty at 77 mph.

[fuddyduddy]

Thank you Bob,
Once again, you are spot on the money.

 The Dodge Cummins diesel engines (6BT5.9) are great, but the V-44 pumps in them were and are garbage.

The two pickups I mainly run are a '96 and a '93 Chev, both 6.5s. One has about 110,000 miles on it, the other about 180,000 miles. Neither have been touched, except for replacing one alternator, and the clutches. (Both are 5 speeds, NV4500) 

Yes, the older one has also had the NV4500 transmission replaced. It was hurt already when I got the pickup, and I pulled a HEAVY 37' 5th wheel with it for ANOTHER 100,000 miles before it puked.

The  DT-466 IH engine is great, but  not available in a pickup now that I know of.

What crap we get to read on this forum!!!
Fuddy Duddy

[hotater]

 A lawyer once told me , "When the experts argue the novice learns."        I'm listening.

[mobile_bob]

FuddyDuddy:

yes the DT-466 is a killer design, they didnt release them into mid size trucks (IH) until 1975 after about 10 years or better in off road applications ie. farm tractors, construction equipment.

the DT 360 is about 2/3 the size physically of the DT466, they were rated around 160 to 180 hp or so, and were also a very good design, but sadly they found service in mid size trucks where they were misapplied and were on the gutless side of things.  A DT-360 would make a great 1 ton engine, probably last friggin forever, and could be rebuilt very inexpensively.

i passed up the oportunity to buy a 4700 series international with a DT360 that had a bad clutch, for 1700 bucks, that little truck with a frame shorten would have been the last p/u i would have ever bought! with a 5 speed and 2 speed rear axle, i am still kickin my a** over that one. if i recall it was a air to air intercooled one at around 210 hp. damn.

As far as i am concerned the DT engine was probably the finest mid size diesel ever sold in this country.

maybe i should start lookin for another DT 360? hmmmm

bob g

[Firebrick]

Mobile bob, I would agree that the 8.2 had some problems, mainly head bolts that are to small(14mm).  If it was turbocharged I would agree that it was junk(really stretched those head bolts).  But a NA 8.2 with the 15mm bolt upgrade was a decent engine and pretty good with fuel, but is loud and you have to keep them wound up, but so did you with the competition, a 3208.  If people ran either of them like most other diesels, ie around 2000 rpm, trouble always followed.  If I was there I would have sprung for that 4700, I agree that the DT engine was probly the best for a long time in the 80's/90's

[wldhoss]

I have never met a dodge cummins owner that didn't think their engine was the best available.  Many have lasted longer than a million miles.  I have met many ford owners that would love to have the cummins in their ford.  I don"t think there is a big problem with the vp-44 pump.  There is problem with the lift pump that feeds it.  Many change out the computer controled vp-44 and use the p-7100 pump which was used in the 12 valve engine.  The p-7100 can pump more fuel.  The Dodge cummins still rules at the drag race track.

[mobile_bob]

the 8.2 and the head bolt problem was one of a series of problems

what i mean in a series are the problems associated with overhaul of these pieces of crap.

1. unfinished cam brgs, you install them and then have them align bored, what a bunch of crap

2. the oil pump bushing pressed into the front of the block, also unfinished and requiring a bridgeport to size and locate for fit and
for gear clearance, oh really!

3. base circle timeing of each injector? you gotta be kidding!

4. open top block, no deck?  ya right maybe on a car engine, but seriously on a diesel?

if you have one and it is running, sell it while you are ahead.

those things are a miserable piece of crap to work on.

this coming from a guy who has built many of them, and other manufactures and families of engines.

the 8.2 is a the bottom of a long list of possible engines.

i get mad just thinking about those days. does it show?

bob g

[hotater]

I'm learning a LOT....what I *don't* know is what an  "8.2" is.   

One big reason I'm asking is because the 'keep it revved up' and 'really loud',  sounds a lot like my old '54 FWD snowplow with the Detroit 4-71 in it....model 4029-C?

It's a spooky feeling to leave a warm house in that thing at ten degrees above and nothing but snow drifts and wind for 22 miles.
http://community.webshots.com/photo/2098541810028237237eZizPZ

[mobile_bob]

the 8.2 was introduced back in the early 80's by detroit diesel as their first 4 stroke mid size engine,
it was to show alot of promise but failed miserably, because of the numerous problems associated in my
opinion of rushing to market.

it is a V8 configuration, and ran typically best between 1800 and 2400 rpm IIRC

it was a bold step for detroit, and i think they probably learned alot from it. they tried alot of
then new concepts in design and casting, to try and make an economical to produce engine.

the short cuts they took cost big bucks to overcome during overhaul, and most of the applications
they found service in were so tight that even routine maintenance was a horror.

Their tolerances were so poor that to set the injectors correctly one had to use a base circle scheme which added
alot of time and specialized tooling to accomplish, a departure from the timing picks common to all their previous
2 cycle offerings, (something i still dont understand, given the unit injectors were of the same basic design.)

They were a bore type engine without liners, with free standing/no deck cylinders like what cadillac used on there 4.2 engines that had all sort of sealing issues. These free standing cylinders without support and without sufficient gskt surface cause alot of gskt failures. These failures were blamed on too small head bolts which they later updated to larger bolts as a patch at best, it helped but didnt eliminate the problem.

without upper cylinder support the casting will move under stresses of ignition and temp changes which eat up the head gskts.

many years ago my boss at the time demonstated how little pressure will distort a small block chevy bore:

we had a 350 chevy block on the stand to do a bore job on, he had me install the inside mic tight enough to hold itself in the bore(mounted parrallel with the adjacent cylinders). He then locked both hands together over the bore(perpendicular to the mic) and squeazed, the mic fell out.  he had me try it and i too could distort the block with hand pressure.

what do you suppose happens when the head is torqued?  when ignition takes place? with temp changes?

now compound this phenomena with an open top deck, it is no small wonder why the 8.2 is a miserable design.

bob g

[GuyFawkes]

once knew a bloke who spoke of owning a powerboat with two of em, glass hull and glassed on deck after the engines were installed of course, said the best day of his life was either getting divorced or selling that boat, he never could decide which...

[mobile_bob]

that would be quite a toss up

prolly have to pic the divorce tho, cuz you can always burn the boat.

bob g

[hotater]

Definition of "BOAT"  ---  Hole in the water expecting to be filled with money.

Wife--- much the same.