Has anybody here tried this combination yet? The S-10 forums have tons of V8 equipped S-10s - most are SBC, but there are a couple of BBC. A few people have talked about stuffing a 6.2 into the little truck, but I have yet to hear about anybody completing the task.

I've got a few extra 6.2L's sitting in the garage that need a home and I've come across a low budget '95 S-10 that would make a great little recipient for the transplant. I was just curious if anyone else here has tried this yet.

Never heard about anyone actually doing the swap just speculating. I'd be interested in seeing the swap done but from what I understand it takes quite a bit of fabrication to put a BBC into the S10 already. I've thought about it a few times but If I was going to swap a bigger motor into an S10 I would make it a high horsepower Small Block. I had an S10 Blazer with a 350 and it was pretty sweet except for the 2.73 gears that sucked.

A guy over at TDR put a 6B into an S10!

A guy over at TDR put a 6B into an S10!
I've seen the pictures - that man is just insane. My wife's old '93 1 ton had 3 cracks in the frame that we had welded - it was the older body style and the frame wasn't quite up to the abilities or the weight of the engine. The 6.2L is diminutive and dainty next to the 6B. It's still plenty big enough to push a little truck around. With little weight, a small front profile and the right gearing, it should do ok on fuel consumption. I'll have to find some little bitty smokestacks that will fit...

The 6.2 could probably be stuffed in there. It might take some "modifications," but I think it could be done. It sure would be neat...

I'm planning to put my 5.7 diesel in an S-10 when I finally have the money. That should be pretty cool and get good mileage.

The problem with most S-10s with bigger engines is that they usually don't get very good gas mileage. That's where the diesel would come in... :cool:

Sounds like a cool swap:)

slightly off the subject but....


Anyone have any pics and/or links of a 6.2/6.5 being installed into a 68-72 El Camino.

Sounds like a cool swap:)

slightly off the subject but....


Anyone have any pics and/or links of a 6.2/6.5 being installed into a 68-72 El Camino.
I don't think the years match, but the first I've heard of that crazy idea came from CoyoteStarfish on www.elcaminocentral.com (http://www.elcaminocentral.com). He's stuffed the 6.2 into the engine bay after cutting the frame and modifying what was necessary - the starter conflicted... One guy was talking about stuffing a Duramax into a '72, but he later wimped out and went for the weeny LS6 instead.

The 6.2 could probably be stuffed in there. It might take some "modifications," but I think it could be done. It sure would be neat...

I'm planning to put my 5.7 diesel in an S-10 when I finally have the money. That should be pretty cool and get good mileage.

The problem with most S-10s with bigger engines is that they usually don't get very good gas mileage. That's where the diesel would come in... :cool:
I've wimped out - rather than stuffing the 6.2L into an S-10, I've found a nice C1500 Stepside that will gain a diesel. I'll have a couple of good 350's for sale soon!

Honestly, neat idea but I think a waste of time and money. First, it weighs alot more than any BB chev. Your going to need custom springs, weld up the frame rails etc and for what, a few more mpg. It will corner and handle like a pig, be extremelty front heavy, might even need a front brake upgrade then of course, the rears will need doing too. You can stick a newer V8 in there, make more power and get better fuel economy. My 2 cents.

If you have a donor engine and trans and able to do the work yourself it won't be too bad. I did have an '82 BBC, M20 S-10. It still had the original 4 cyl front springs. A 2wd 6.2 auto would be a piece of cake compared to what I did. The biggest problem is cooling. I put a three core and had to modify the frame and front collar to get it to fit.

Honestly, neat idea but I think a waste of time and money. First, it weighs alot more than any BB chev. .

Big-block Chevy weighs about 685 lbs., a 6.2 diesel weighs 680 lbs. Just about exactly the same.

Honestly, neat idea but I think a waste of time and money. First, it weighs alot more than any BB chev. Your going to need custom springs, weld up the frame rails etc and for what, a few more mpg. It will corner and handle like a pig, be extremelty front heavy, might even need a front brake upgrade then of course, the rears will need doing too. You can stick a newer V8 in there, make more power and get better fuel economy. My 2 cents.
A few more MPG? At $3.139/gallon for high test - and given that a BBC swills down the stuff like a Kennedy does booze, I'd think double the mileage would be good! If I want to go fast, I'll bomb my Cummins and teach the big blocks what fast really means - without having to rebuild after every 1/4 mile.

My goal is to set this Stepside up like a small version of a "lil Red Express" truck - only using a diesel so the smokestacks will be functional. The 5 speed tranny should make for plenty of gears to use the torque with.

Given that I can make my own biodiesel for ~ $0.75/gallon as well as use WVO - which I can get for free - for 90% of my driving, it comes down to how many tanks of fuel will it take before the truck pays for itself, along with all of the costs of the swap?

The truck cost me $2300, the engine was $140 - I'll add maybe another $1500 in parts and fixing the A/C, pull back maybe $500 on the used 350 - it's still an inexpensive project. That puts the entire project at ~ 1300 gallons of high test. At $60/tank (filling from a ~5 gallon reserve) for ~ 20 gallons, that's only 65 tankfuls of fuel.

Thanks for your $0.02, but we are coming from a different perspective. My wife will be driving this truck - and I'd rather keep her speed down!

I'd think double the mileage would be good! If I want to go fast, I'll bomb my Cummins and teach the big blocks what fast really means - without having to rebuild after every 1/4 mile.

My goal is to set this Stepside up like a small version of a "lil Red Express" wife will be driving this truck - and I'd rather keep her speed down!

I'm no expert on modern engine swaps - but I did a lot back in the 60s and 70s. Some things don't change. I did a Chevy 409 into a 240Z, also a 327 into a Triumph GT6 and a Ford 427 into a 1960 Falcon. Also a GM 215 V8 into a MGB - but in that case, the GM V-8 was lighter than the original British four-banger. 4.3 Chevy V-6 weighs 425 lbs., 6.2 diesel weighs 650 lbs. (using the same type of weight comparison). And, you'll need dual batteries. If you found a way to mount the batteries in the rear somewhere and could also add a larger or additional fuel tank - the extra weight from the 6.2 could be counter-balanced. The added couple of hundred lbs. up front probably wouldn't be hard to deal with. My concern would be clearance with a wide V-8 stuck in there. I wondering if you're going to have enough room so the engine can be worked on. You don't want to have to pull the engine to do a head-gasket or injector change.

Gotcha on the speed thing. The homemade fuel is a great idea, definately keep costs down. As for keeping A/C, I know that 350's you can keep the A/C if you use regular valve covers but tall ones won't clear, but BB's you can't as you need to remove the a/c box. The 6.2's are wider than a BB aren't they? if so, then a custom unit would need to be made.

I honestly thought the 6.2 was heavier than a BB, my bad, ;)

I'm no expert on modern engine swaps - but I did a lot back in the 60s and 70s. Some things don't change. I did a Chevy 409 into a 240Z
I used to have a 240Z - it was a blast to drive. I'm not sure the weight and balance would be too good with a 409 - and unless you added a lot of bracing to it, wouldn't that much power twist the body up? I've seen a few Z cars that couldn't put more than 3 tires on the ground because they were torqued up pretty badly.

Just FYI - I am talking about a C1500 Stepside, not an S-10. I kinda switched when I got the deal on this pickup - I do believe GM stuffed some 6.2's in them at the factory too. There appears to be room for ~ 3x 350s under that cavernous hood - so squeezing in a 6.2L shouldn't be as tough as any of the conversions you were mentioning.

I've wimped out - rather than stuffing the 6.2L into an S-10, I've found a nice C1500 Stepside that will gain a diesel. I'll have a couple of good 350's for sale soon!

Thats good to hear. That S-10 conversion will easily become a money pit. And good luck trying to keep the 6.2 cool, and not meiting yourself down while driving it. Keep us posted on the fullsize swap.

JMHO.

I used to have a 240Z - it was a blast to drive. I'm not sure the weight and balance would be too good with a 409 - and unless you added a lot of bracing to it, wouldn't that much power twist the body up? I've seen a few Z cars that couldn't put more than 3 tires on the ground because they were torqued up pretty badly.

My Z with the 409 did not handle very well - but by today's standards, Zs in original fashion didn't handle all that well either. I still have a 79 280ZX. Great car - but most modern 4-bangers will beat it and out-handle it. The engine has never been apart since new, and it still has the original exhaust system on it (must be stainless to last this long).
About engine-swaps. I used to have a bunch of Subeam Tigers. They got "professional" engine conversions designed by Carol Shelby. British Sunbeam Alpine originally - but Shelby put Ford SB V-8s, Ford 4 speeds, and Jeep rear-ends in them. And, they handled terrible! Pretty fast, though. If you drove one too long - the floor got so hot it would almost melt your sneakers.


Just FYI - I am talking about a C1500 Stepside, not an S-10. I kinda switched when I got the deal on this pickup - I do believe GM stuffed some 6.2's in them at the factory too. There appears to be room for ~ 3x 350s under that cavernous hood - so squeezing in a 6.2L shouldn't be as tough as any of the conversions you were mentioning.

C1500 ought to be bolt-in swap since GM made them that way since 82.

My Z with the 409 did not handle very well - but by today's standards, Zs in original fashion didn't handle all that well either.
My 240Z was pretty much stock - with decent tires. I had no troubles showing the taillights to all of the Yuppies in their Porsche 944's. I heard the 944 could handle well, but I never had one catch up to me in order to find out. The ZX was a bit of a pig - much heavier and without the balance. Better than the 240Z was the handling in the Datsun 2000 - I've had a couple of them and putting them into a controlled 4 wheel drift was amazingly easy. It was a tiny car with a lot of power and near perfect handling. They raced a lot - and the Tiger was in the same class. Not that the Tiger could keep up - Datsun's overwhelmed their class on the track back then.

Any idea if the flywheel on the 350 would fit on the 6.2L? I've also got the full serpentine belt setup on the 350's (one truck, one Suburban) - can anyone give me an idea of how much of the 350 accessories and gear will work on the diesel? I do plan on replacing the old radiators - after 16 years, I'm sure a new, thicker one is a good idea. I was also going to toss in electric fans - working to put as much power to the wheels as possible. I'll also be pulling a lot of heat out of the system with a flat plate heat exchanger heating the WVO - along with the extended run of heater hoses and an auxillary coolant pump.

My 240Z was pretty much stock - with decent tires. I had no troubles showing the taillights to all of the Yuppies in their Porsche 944's.
They raced a lot - and the Tiger was in the same class. Not that the Tiger could keep up - Datsun's overwhelmed their class on the track back then .

I was very much involved with foreign sports cars when the first Datsun "Fair Lady" came out. The name "Fair Lady was a flop in the U.S. and was quickly changed to 240Z. It is still called the "Fair Lady" in most of the rest of the world. The Z was made from a pile of copied parts - from Mercedes, BMW, etc. Z engine was modeled after a Mercedes 4 banger with two cylinders added. Although the 240Z is "barebones" by today's standards - put into context - it was very fancy - with roll-up windows, independent suspension, overhead-cam engine, etc.
240Z could beat an early 260 powered Sunbeam Tiger, but not a later one. First Tigers had 150 horse 260 Ford V-8s, later got 289s with 200 horse. I had versions of all of them. But, back then - most Tigers were modified since SB Ford parts were so common. Many Tigers had highly built engines pushing over 300 horsepower and many had 302s or 351s - since the swap was a "bolt-in" job. My last Tiger - that I wrecked - had a 351 with 11 - 1 pistons, headers, 650 Holley double-pumper, Crane cam, ladder-bars, etc. I beat a lot of BB muscle-cars with it until I drove it into a tree.
Biggest problem with a Tiger was getting it going from a stop. If you didn't hold back, it would burn rubber for a 1/4 mile.
Chrysler ruined Carol Shelby's Tiger. When they bought Sunbeam - they no longer wanted to sell a car with a Ford engine in it. They considered putting the very-heavy Chrysler 273 or 318 into it, but found it to be too big and too heavy - and the Sunbeam Tiger was ended.

1970 240Z 0-60 in 8.7 seconds, 1/4 mile 17.1 seconds

1967 Sunbeam Tiger II 0-60 7.5 seconds, 1/4 mile 16 seconds

Later Nissan 1991 240SX was faster than the first Z. 0-60 in 7.9, 1/4 mile 16.1 seconds.




Any idea if the flywheel on the 350 would fit on the 6.2L?


You've got to use a 6.2 flywheel. Manual trans. has two different flywheels, and auto. has two different flexplates.

.......... I'll also be pulling a lot of heat out of the system with a flat plate heat exchanger heating the WVO - along with the extended run of heater hoses and an auxillary coolant pump.

Same here, my 6.2 runs well even with heating 20' HIH, HE, the tank, and I still can pour out a good bit of heat at the heater core so I'm not worried about having too cold an engine, besides the fact that it may be taking longer to heat the engine. I dont even have an aux coolant pump, but then again, maybe that's why my water pump went out in the first place..........

Its been good so far running WVO in my 6.2 and I want it to stay that way.....

I was very much involved with foreign sports cars when the first Datsun "Fair Lady" came out.
I think the first "Fair Lady" was the 1500cc SPL310. As you said, the name stuck everywhere else but here. The SRL311 (2000 Roadster) had far more predictable handling than the 240Z. It was underpowered in it's class (the 2000), but it outhandled everything. Toss in the "Solex" conversion - a hot cam and twin two-barrel Mikuni's, it started catching up on power. My last one had a header, aluminum flywheel, 4.39 gears - it was quite capable of keeping up with a stock 302 Mustang - up until you hit a corner. At the first corner, the Mustang had to slow down.

I never lost control of a 2000 - I could take it to the ragged edge and keep it there. The 240Z wasn't as forgiving - when the back end started coming around, it didn't surrender control back easily. The 2000's engine was almost a direct copy of the Benz - the 240Z was the same thing with 2 more cylinders. I'm sure a 289/302 could be built up with a lot more power than either (or boths!) Datsuns, but I'm not sure the handling could ever come close.

Thanks for the info on the flywheel. Any idea on the serpentine belt system? I'll make sure I do a full photo-documentary/parts list when I do this conversion - I'll need it for the Suburban and it may be worth posting all of this info on the forum for other people following suit.

jdemaris - I'm gaining on you on the 6.2 collection! I'm up 3 in the last 8 months! I'm having to restrain myself now - the current govliquidation auction has a bunch of 6.2's and at last count none of them had been bid on! There are 30+ engines - some lots have 2 engines to them - with starting bids of $50. I'm just out of storage room, so I'll have to hold off this time...

Any idea on the serpentine belt system?

Brief note about older sports cars. Best handling older car I ever owned was a rear-engine Abarth Fiat 850. Not very fast with a high-strung 850 c.c. engine but handling was amazing.

I think I read somewhere that the tensioner is the same for most of the engines, but I don't know about the rest of the parts. For sure, the bottom-crankpulley dampener is different. And, I don't mean the harmonic balancer - I'm talking about the rubber-cushioned bottom pulley held on by four bolts. Came out in 1985 as a V-groove - then changed later for the serpentine. I think first OEM serpentine setup of a 6.2 showed up with the new body style 1/2 ton pickups in 88.

jdemaris - I'm gaining on you on the 6.2 collection! I'm up 3 in the last 8 months! I'm having to restrain myself now - the current govliquidation auction has a bunch of 6.2's and at last count none of them had been bid on! There are 30+ engines - some lots have 2 engines to them - with starting bids of $50. I'm just out of storage room, so I'll have to hold off this time...

Yeah - well watch out for the curse of buying "parts vehicles." There have been many I bought with the sole intention of stripping and parting out. Then, I get attached to them and wind up spending the rest of my life fixing them all up - instead of cutting them up. I've got over 20 good running 6.2 vehicles now - and many more waiting out in the field - but that wasn't my original intention.

Looking at my customers 6.5 serp system and knowing 350's inside and out, its not a direct swap or bolt on. As stated, you will need to get the serp system of a later 6.2 or 6.5 engine, and remember to change the waterpump, they spin backwards.