GunnerJ
Full Access Member
Those are rated to 30 more horses (the 6.2s when they were still using them)
Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk
Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk
Diesel emblem
- Thread starter GunnerJ
- Start date
79jasper
Chickenhawk
Correct. I'm just talking on the longevity aspect.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
GunnerJ
Full Access Member
I've always heard bad things about the blocks cracking around the crank on the 6.2s, but I'm not sure about the truth in it as I have never seen it happen
Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk
Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk
79jasper
Chickenhawk
Yes, it is common on most blocks, except the newer blocks. Can't remember the name, still being produced though.
Even though the hairline cracks would be there, most of the time wouldn't cause any actual problems. Kinda surprising actually. Lol
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
Even though the hairline cracks would be there, most of the time wouldn't cause any actual problems. Kinda surprising actually. Lol
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk
IDIBRONCO
IDIBRONCO
From what I've seen and heard, GM cast the problem areas either .020" or .030" thicker on the later 6.2 (1 piece rear seal) blocks and the 6.5 blocks. On the n/a applications, this took care of the problems. When you use the turbo engines hard, like pulling heavy loads, they would crack easier. Then in 1997 (I think) they put piston cooling jets in the blocks and gave them another place to crack. I've seen that.
