6.2L vs 6.5L

[JLanzino]

Hi Guys Over The Years I`ve Heard Both Sides and Was Wondering Which of The Two Engines (6.2 vs 6.5) is Really The Better One.

Thanks Guys

JL

[mattthebrat]

It really depends on what you want to do.....If you want to go fast and tow big loads, the 6.5 is for you, if you want to get the best possible fuel mileage, and do it on the cheapest possible budget, the 6.2 is for you.

Of course some will argue that a 6.2 turbo is the best combination of the two......

[vstech]

the 6.5 599 block is a better stronger block than the majority of the 6.2 blocks and it rarely cracks... I have three 6.2's and one 6.5... like said above, it depends on application.

[4320Diesel]

6.2s FTW! lol yea like matt says. im still a die hard 6.2'er youll never find me drivin a 396 CID diesel when i can drive a 379!

[jdemaris]

Originally Posted by JLanzino

Hi Guys Over The Years I`ve Heard Both Sides and Was Wondering Which of The Two Engines (6.2 vs 6.5) is Really The Better One.

Thanks Guys

JL

Not all 6.2s are the same, nor are all 6.5s. Probably one of the strongest blocks ever made are the ones that both the 6.2s and 6.5s used in 1992, casting #10149599 . Since the 6.2 version has a smaller piston bore, the cylinder wall is heavier and more rugged. So, depends on how you want to look at it. The 6.2 version is more rugged, and the 6.5 version has more power.

Ford had the same thing going on with their IH 6.9s and 7.3s. Same engines with different bores. The 6.9s are more resistant to cyliinder-wall corrosion because they are thicker.

[4320Diesel]

what about the redblock 6.2's?

[Wa_rWagon]

6.5 Turbo hands down. Has decent power and no smoke. (same 200HP, 1993, as a 1995 5.7 gas and more TQ.) The 6.2 without a turbo in a 1500 suburban can’t get out of it’s own way and will roll the coal factory like the new diesel guys wish they could. (and have to spend money to do so.) Only the 5.7 olds diesel smoked worse.

[jdemaris]

Originally Posted by 4320diesel

what about the redblock 6.2's?

The 1982 engines had a lot of problems other then the block. Head gaskets leaked something awful (needed an update from GM), valves too big causing cracking, injector pumps with short lives due to the plastic governor rings falling apart (eliminated in 1985), etc. For those reasons, as well as the 700R4s failing often, many of those early 6.2 rigs got parked with low miles. So, I'm not sure if they were actually better or not.

I've got three of those engines sitting under my work-bench. All with less then 50K miles. I did a spark-test with a grinder, and the metal on the blocks makes sparks a different color than later blocks. So, I assume the alloy is different somehow. The theory is it has more nickel content, just like the new 6.5s being made now have.

With the 1992 engines, in 6.2 or 6.5 version, they pretty much had the best of everything. Different crank, block, injection pump, heads, etc.

[meb727]

Originally Posted by jdemaris

The 1982 engines had a lot of problems other then the block. Head gaskets leaked something awful (needed an update from GM), valves too big causing cracking, injector pumps with short lives due to the plastic governor rings falling apart (eliminated in 1985), etc. For those reasons, as well as the 700R4s failing often, many of those early 6.2 rigs got parked with low miles. So, I'm not sure if they were actually better or not.

I've got three of those engines sitting under my work-bench. All with less then 50K miles. I did a spark-test with a grinder, and the metal on the blocks makes sparks a different color than later blocks. So, I assume the alloy is different somehow. The theory is it has more nickel content, just like the new 6.5s being made now have.

With the 1992 engines, in 6.2 or 6.5 version, they pretty much had the best of everything. Different crank, block, injection pump, heads, etc.

The '93 6.2s are #599 blocks as well, and the advantage of the '92-'93 6.2 blocks is that you can put the NEW FORGED 6.5 cranks in them, eliminating the (IMHO) #1 weakness of these motors-premature & unpredictable crankshaft failure, usually with little or no warning. The '82 red blocks would probably be decent as well, but the heads were weak, and you'd be forced to use a used crank for them (due to the 2-piece rear main design).

[4320Diesel]

yea a 599 block 6.2 is in my future when i build up a good power 6.2