All of the 6.2's I've been into had iron cranks. The turbo charged 6.5.s are supposed to have steel cranks, but I'm not sure?
The 6.2's come in several "flavors", very early units have different rocker arm set-ups, water pump, etc.
None of those engines are overly impressive, in any configuration, and every single one I've had apart had major cracks in the pre-combustion chambers, and some across the exhaust valve seats.
Those engines are NOT direct injected, or did they have intercoolers on the later turbo charged versions, they are basically considered TURDS in the diesel world, at least compared to other designs. Some folks have still spent the time/funds to get some pretty impressive power from them, so they do have some potential.
The later Duramax engines, at least those I've driven, are much better, but seem to be pretty thirsty. We took a friends 2005 Duramax to Daytona last year for bike week, pulling a small trailer with 2 bikes in it, and it never did hit 10 miles to the gallon! It's pretty much "stock" except for some sort of "chip" in it......Cliff
__________________
If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read this in English, thank a Veteran!
https://cliffshighperformance.com/
73 Ventura, SOLD 455, 3740lbs, 11.30's at 120mph, 1977 Pontiac Q-jet, HO intake, HEI, 10" converter, 3.42 gears, DOT's, 7.20's at 96mph and still WAY under the roll bar rule. Best ET to date 7.18 at 97MPH (1/8th mile),
|