Them's Fightin' Words!
Because...
I'm a mechanic in the Army and I have experience with the engine.
There are always old CUCV's being sold by the DRMS so getting an engine and tranny is cheap.
I don't mud or offroad so I don't need a 1,000 Hp mill, just a daily driver and maybe a snow pusher.
True, 135 Hp @ 3600 RPM from a 379 cu in engine is nothing compared to an equally sized gasser. Especially when the 6.2 operates optimally at 1800-2400 RPM. However, 240 ft/lbs @ 2000 RPM is plenty of torque to keep up with traffic and still get anywhere for 17-25 mpg unloaded.
Properly maintained, you won't be servicing the internals of the engine for 300,000 to 500,000 miles, maybe more.
The J code 6.2NA has been powering the military fleets of Chevrolet Blazers and Pickups as well as the early AM General Hummers for some 20 years now. I'm surrounded by them over here in Kuwait.
Not too bad for a 'dog',eh?
I had a 78 Bronco before I deployed that was held together by the outer-most layers of rust. The steering gear wouldn't hold fluid so I had no power steering. The engine had a blown rear main and the C6 pissed ATF everywhere. I drove that tank on many 300 mile trips to Northern MN and back again and never had a problem...mechanically.
Monetarily was another story, sure the mileage would have been better if I had fixed all the leaks but then my truck would have no character and I wouldn't have been able to leave that patch of oil spots as a calling card when I drove out of a parking lot.:toothless
I have an 83 Suburban with a 6.2NA and a 700R4. It's very reliable and get's great mileage, but it is still just another 80's Chevy Truck driving down the highway.
You ALWAYS recognize a 78 Ford for what it is.:thumbup
That is why.
-Adam F King
PS- Make sure that you don't confuse reputation of the 6.2 diesel with that of the 5.7 diesel. The 5.7 was a reworked gas engine that was found in some GM passenger cars in the early 80's. Now
that motor was a dog.
