D.Camilleri;1532386; said:
The 6.2 and 6.5 are externally balanced engines just like high sierra 2500 stated! To prove this point, look at a 6.2 or 6.5 balancer, flywheel or flex plate. One side of the balancer has a great deal more mass just like a small block 400 or 454.
The fact that some external components have some offset weights does not prove a thing. Many engines have the same and are classified as "internally balanced." I don't believe there is any set rule that any company has to use - when describing their engines. But from anything I've read on the subject of engine design - the phrase "externally balanced" denotes and engine that MUST have external balancing or will fail prematurely. An "internally balanced engine" has enough internal mass to hold itself together - but often can still benefit from additional external balancing to eliminate vibration. General Motors lists the 6.2 and 6.5 as "internally balanced" in many sources - and I've yet to see any source list it as an "externally balanced" engine. If you have one - please post.
I have had many engines custom balanced over the past 40 years including many SB Fords and Chevys. None were ever perfectly balanced and with some we'd even balance the clutch-assembly and used larger than stock harmonic balancers and put "timing marks" on the clutch when done. When I worked as a Deere mechanic, we had several engines that Deere considered "internally balanced" engines - and they did so with internal balancing shafts. Later, as a cost-cutting measure - Deere left the shafts out and stated it would not affect engine life. But . . . vibrations were so bad at certain RPMs that the exhaust pipes would crack. I suspect GM used many external parts to cut down on "nuisance" vibrations. GM service bulletins discuss this with the 6.5 and the dual-mass to solid flywheel conversion.
Again - I don't see where you've proved anything. You have made some technical claims in the past that also seem to be from anecdotal sources e.g. like GM having TBI on all 84 and later trucks? Or one test on one 1982 block for nickel content thus proving none had it? If you have verifiable information, please provide some sources.
The reality is - I don't care what the 6.2 is called. I do care about proper engine setup and part's matching.
D.Camilleri;1532386; said:
Back to the flywheel discussion. When I discuss flywheel part numbers, they are factory GM numbers only. I suggest you do your research a little better to be better informed.
I don't claim to know it all, and I also cannot verify every source I read. I am well trained as a records researcher and learned the need for primary source citations long ago. But, this is not a Master's Thesis or a Doctoral Dissertation. I have to mix a little common-sense along with prior experience and sort this stuff out best I can. That being said, I have discussed this subject with some part numbers as well as casting numbers.
GM had two different flywheels for use on the 6.2 diesel. Casting #14050525 weighs 45 lbs. and seems to be the most common. It is GM part # 14077160. Counterweights are symmetrical. Several GM parts lists as well as military documents describe it "internal balance" and GM lists it for use with the Muncie trans. only. Casting #14022675 weighs 31 lbs. and counterweights are not symetrical -and I think this is the flywheel used in light-duty manual trans. setups, e.g. the NP833 four-speed overdrive.
D.Camilleri;1532386; said:
I personally ran several 6.5's with 6.2 flywheels and center force clutches for over 400,000 miles. Might I add, that with over 1,000,000 miles driven, I never suffered a crank failure!
Since you mention Centerforce, here's a blurb from their catalog for their 6.2 diesel flywheel.
" . . . Centerforce flywheel - Part #: 700100
Notes: CENTERFORCE BILLET STEEL FLYWHEEL -- SFI Spec 1.1, Weight 30.2 lbs., No Counter Balance Fits - 6.2L V8, Diesel . . ."
In regard to you driving X amount of miles and never having a crank break? Do you truly think that means anything? I drove my 87 6.2 Suburban 520,000 miles before the crank broke. So - does that make me some sort of diesel god? I don't think so. I took good care of it and I consider myself lucky. I've been driving 6.2s since they came out including our 1 ton service truck. Personally, I've had only one failure and I've presently have many 6.2 trucks with well over 200K each. I have also known of well-cared-for 6.2 engines that broke cranks at less than 100K. Some of those were only used for transportation and never worked hard. One still ran fine, didn't even vibrate. The crank broke right off at the flywheel mouning area and the flywheel was no longer turning. And, of the ones I personally worked on - none had a bad harmonic balancer.
D.Camilleri;1532386; said:
If you get a flywheel that doesn't have a heavy side cast into it take it back or be prepared for a broken crank.
Yeah - like my 1982 K10 with the NP833 and 240K miles on it. I guess you better be prepared for any 6.2 to break a crank - because with some, it happens. And, I have yet to see anyone offer anything that even closely resembles proof of what causes some 6.2 blocks to lose their main bearing webs and some to break crankshafts. It seems to me - that often when someone posts something that sounds good ( and may, or may not actually be good), thanks to the Internet, it gets repeated all over the place - and then just the repetition is given as its proof.
Here are a few aftermarket photos of flywheels. I don't have any from GM that show the backs.
And again - if you can show any reputable source that denotes the 6.2 as an externally balanced engine - please cite it.
(Image has been resized. Click it for full size.)
(Image has been resized. Click it for full size.)