New member here

[JPalmer81]

That is a nice looking crew cab. Why dont you want to turbo it?

If you want to make meaningful improvements in horsepower in the 6.2/6.5, you will need to turbo. still, you will be limited due to the lack of oil cooling jets on the bottomside of the pistons. otoh, the upside is you have less rotating mass in the 6.2/6.5 compared to the 6.9/7.3 so you can spin faster than a 6.9./7.3. I've pretty much patterned my 6.5 after what Oliver Diesel has done to their 'burb. and have been very impressed with the results. my buddy's C20 will leave my F350 standing still at a light and all I did was add a WG Banks TE06H turbo from a 7.3 to where a OEM turbo was at on a 6.5. don't try to kid yourself, by the time you have ported your heads and added headers, you minus well have saved up your money for a turbo kit. Want to be "different"? work on adding a water to air intercooler to the turbo setup.

I agree, but I wanna do this and see what it does cause really no one has done it like this that I can find. It is not going to hurt me any, and if I wanna add a turbo later down the road cause I need that extra little umph then so-be-it, I will be ahead of the game.

 

[91idi]

Not to many would understand doing something that no one else has. I do thats why I did it with my 6.9. Best thing to do is just build it. Its YOUR truck.

 

[JPalmer81]

Not to many would understand doing something that no one else has. I do thats why I did it with my 6.9. Best thing to do is just build it. Its YOUR truck.

Couldn't of said it better myself

 

[91idi]

Craigslist is where I got my headers. They are stan's also. Got them for $80. Watch ebay for banks lids. I will also keep my eye out for you.

 

[JPalmer81]

Hey man I appreciate it, I look at CL everyday, but it is nice to have 2 sets of eyes.

On a different note, I posted a thread over at dieselplace(a gm diesel forum) and they are hating on me big time, if you ain't in the turbo club then please keep your comments to yourself.

 

[Black dawg]

Hey man I appreciate it, I look at CL everyday, but it is nice to have 2 sets of eyes.

On a different note, I posted a thread over at dieselplace(a gm diesel forum) and they are hating on me big time, if you ain't in the turbo club then please keep your comments to yourself.

I have had several 6.2 and 6.5, and I have had 2 that had banks kits, never had any trouble with the non turbo ones. Both turboed ones got head gaskets more than once, and one had a bottom end failure. Too bad you are not closer, I have some turbo kits that I would like to go away, and a really good 465/205 combo.

 

[JPalmer81]

I have had several 6.2 and 6.5, and I have had 2 that had banks kits, never had any trouble with the non turbo ones. Both turboed ones got head gaskets more than once, and one had a bottom end failure. Too bad you are not closer, I have some turbo kits that I would like to go away, and a really good 465/205 combo.

I would love to get that 465/205 combo from you, but shipping to Alaska would be outrageous. I have a good 465 with the 10 spline output, looking for the 205 with the figure 8 adapter and 10 spline. One problem is is that I am deployed and haven't been home to actively search for some good deals, I am sure there is something up here in AK that I can make work.

About the 2 motors with the banks kit, how much boost did you normally run?

I have always thought that a NA 6.2 would hands down be more reliable than a turbo charged ones just for the fact of the extreme amount of PSI on all the internals, I didn't think they were designed for that. I know I am not the only one out here who thinks this, glad to here someone actually chime in about engine failure with the turbo. Everyone at the above stated forum all have the most reliable 6.2 that they are running 20+ PSI of boost with no other modification except the turbo install and they just go on about how reliable they are. I'm not buying it, not saying you can't get away with a few PSI of boost, but you go any over 7 PSI and you are just tempting fate and if you go over 20 then your asking for trouble in my opinion.

 

[Black dawg]

The 6.2 that blew up would make 15psi. I have no idea why it ran as hard as it did. The other one would make 10 with the pump cranked, but I had it set to make about 5 psi.

I really liked the old 6.2s in my burbs, but they just didnt cut it for the towing I use them for.
I am using a slightly hotrodded tbi 454 now, and it is working out much better for towing. Unloaded mpg is about half though...

 

[chvycmnslvr68]

I would love to get that 465/205 combo from you, but shipping to Alaska would be outrageous. I have a good 465 with the 10 spline output, looking for the 205 with the figure 8 adapter and 10 spline. One problem is is that I am deployed and haven't been home to actively search for some good deals, I am sure there is something up here in AK that I can make work.

About the 2 motors with the banks kit, how much boost did you normally run?

I have always thought that a NA 6.2 would hands down be more reliable than a turbo charged ones just for the fact of the extreme amount of PSI on all the internals, I didn't think they were designed for that. I know I am not the only one out here who thinks this, glad to here someone actually chime in about engine failure with the turbo. Everyone at the above stated forum all have the most reliable 6.2 that they are running 20+ PSI of boost with no other modification except the turbo install and they just go on about how reliable they are. I'm not buying it, not saying you can't get away with a few PSI of boost, but you go any over 7 PSI and you are just tempting fate and if you go over 20 then your asking for trouble in my opinion.

I would go to a five speed instead of a 4... My 85 6.2 made 29 mpg before I lifted it and went to 35" tires ...I had a 700R4 with 3.73 gears 3/4 ton 4X4 with a flatbed ... I think that a five speed would have made around 33-35 MPG on hwy ... My 91 Dually has a5.9 with a 93 dodge five speed behine it and does almost 27 if I keep my speed down on the open road ... (442 miles on a 18 gal tank...) I am going to put a 4Bt in the 85 next with a 5speed manual od ... found a nv4500 truck on CL for 500 and am trying to get the money together to buy it ...

Really sharp looking truck by the way .... I love the chevy cc p/u's ... I want to get rid of the duals on mine and go to the single wheel axles ... but I pull a 40' goose neck once in a while and it sure runs down the road nice now .... get about 14 mpg with three cars on it ... good luck with your project ... but I think yoyu would be much happier with a turbo'd engine in the long run ... I love my cummins .... putting out around 400 HP now and working on some more mods ... Hydrogen injection ... and water/**** injection ... plus a twin turbo setup ... with an exhaust brake ... should be over 500 ponies when I get done ....

 

[JPalmer81]

I would go to a five speed instead of a 4... My 85 6.2 made 29 mpg before I lifted it and went to 35" tires ...I had a 700R4 with 3.73 gears 3/4 ton 4X4 with a flatbed ... I think that a five speed would have made around 33-35 MPG on hwy ... My 91 Dually has a5.9 with a 93 dodge five speed behine it and does almost 27 if I keep my speed down on the open road ... (442 miles on a 18 gal tank...) I am going to put a 4Bt in the 85 next with a 5speed manual od ... found a nv4500 truck on CL for 500 and am trying to get the money together to buy it ...

Really sharp looking truck by the way .... I love the chevy cc p/u's ... I want to get rid of the duals on mine and go to the single wheel axles ... but I pull a 40' goose neck once in a while and it sure runs down the road nice now .... get about 14 mpg with three cars on it ... good luck with your project ... but I think yoyu would be much happier with a turbo'd engine in the long run ... I love my cummins .... putting out around 400 HP now and working on some more mods ... Hydrogen injection ... and water/**** injection ... plus a twin turbo setup ... with an exhaust brake ... should be over 500 ponies when I get done ....

That is an awesome setup you have there man, would love to go to a Cummins, but they are not cheap up here in Alaska, nothing under $3000 for sure and most of them are above $5000, to steep for me for a donor truck. I have heard good things about the 4bt, but again, those are not common place up here at all. One good thing is there are a ton of 6.2 and 6.5's up here on the cheap too.

How did the 700r4 do behind your 6.2? I am assuming you had the "C' code motor? Don't know how much torque a 700r4 can handle, but would love the OD. What I am thinking of with my sm465 is putting a Ranger gear splitter in front of it to give me the overdrive. It would take some getting used to but for towing anything heavy with a NA diesel, the "8" speeds available would be invaluable, and the better fuel economy would more than pay for it. I need to get my RPM's down to the 2000 mark at 65 MPH, that is where these motors make all their torque and with a .76:1 final drive I would get from a ranger OD would put me at 2038 RPM's @ 65 MPH which would be perfect.

You said your MPG's were 29 with stock tires, what did it jump to when you went to the 35's? I am going to be putting on 33x12.50 TSL's, so not very MPG friendly at all.

 

[chvycmnslvr68]

That is an awesome setup you have there man, would love to go to a Cummins, but they are not cheap up here in Alaska, nothing under $3000 for sure and most of them are above $5000, to steep for me for a donor truck. I have heard good things about the 4bt, but again, those are not common place up here at all. One good thing is there are a ton of 6.2 and 6.5's up here on the cheap too.

How did the 700r4 do behind your 6.2? I am assuming you had the "C' code motor? Don't know how much torque a 700r4 can handle, but would love the OD. What I am thinking of with my sm465 is putting a Ranger gear splitter in front of it to give me the overdrive. It would take some getting used to but for towing anything heavy with a NA diesel, the "8" speeds available would be invaluable, and the better fuel economy would more than pay for it. I need to get my RPM's down to the 2000 mark at 65 MPH, that is where these motors make all their torque and with a .76:1 final drive I would get from a ranger OD would put me at 2038 RPM's @ 65 MPH which would be perfect.

You said your MPG's were 29 with stock tires, what did it jump to when you went to the 35's? I am going to be putting on 33x12.50 TSL's, so not very MPG friendly at all.

I am not sure what the torque range is on the 700R4 but one trans expert told me that he could make it hold up to my cummins at 400+HP with an aftermarket O/D band and drum (the weak part of the R4) ... On my 85 I first put on the 6" lift and it went to 22-24 mpg and when I put on the 35" tires it dropped again to around 18 .... I had a gear vendor O/D behind my five speed cummins and it made 34 MPG on the hiway ... Yes the big blue dually in the sig pic ... I have a set of gears from a semi truck trans I want to build a prototype O/D unit with ... just need to have the shafts made and the case ... should be a bullet proof setup ... I am looking for a shop that can custom cut a shaft for me ... and then the case will be easy ...

 

[Black dawg]

The 700 would cost so fricken much to get halfway bulletproof, that you could build a real trans and put it in there. I never had any trouble with the 700 in an na 6.2 burb, but last turbo 6.2 burb got another 700 every year. This was with no towing, just random hard part failures. This was our family car, that we needed to depend on, and was let down at least once a year.

I put a th400 in that burb 3 or so years ago, many miles later and now with a 454 in front of it it is still working great. I really dont think a 700 belongs in anything 3/4 ton or bigger even if not towing. I HATE 700R4 TRANSMISIONS!! There is a reason trans guys love them and know so much about them.

 

[JPalmer81]

I am not sure what the torque range is on the 700R4 but one trans expert told me that he could make it hold up to my cummins at 400+HP with an aftermarket O/D band and drum (the weak part of the R4) ... On my 85 I first put on the 6" lift and it went to 22-24 mpg and when I put on the 35" tires it dropped again to around 18 .... I had a gear vendor O/D behind my five speed cummins and it made 34 MPG on the hiway ... Yes the big blue dually in the sig pic ... I have a set of gears from a semi truck trans I want to build a prototype O/D unit with ... just need to have the shafts made and the case ... should be a bullet proof setup ... I am looking for a shop that can custom cut a shaft for me ... and then the case will be easy ...

That is some fricken awesome MPG numbers man, you don't see any of the big three pushing out trucks with those numbers nowadays.

The 700 would cost so fricken much to get halfway bulletproof, that you could build a real trans and put it in there. I never had any trouble with the 700 in an na 6.2 burb, but last turbo 6.2 burb got another 700 every year. This was with no towing, just random hard part failures. This was our family car, that we needed to depend on, and was let down at least once a year.

I put a th400 in that burb 3 or so years ago, many miles later and now with a 454 in front of it it is still working great. I really dont think a 700 belongs in anything 3/4 ton or bigger even if not towing. I HATE 700R4 TRANSMISIONS!! There is a reason trans guys love them and know so much about them.

I would have to agree with you, I had one in my s-10 that burned up on my towing a compact little honda on a car dolly. It had the tranny cooler on it and I changed the fluid and filter right before the trip. I couldn't believe it. That was my one and only truck with a 700r4 in it. Oh and I never put it in overdrive while I was towing either, so I don't think the only weakness is the OD, I think they have cooling problems, why else would a tranny cooler come stock on a little ole s-10? the 4.3 was a great motor though

 

[chvycmnslvr68]

No you dont see good MPG's from the factory .... I like taking an auto vehicle and putting a manual tranny in ... you always get a MPG gain you can't get the gearing combination with a factory setup .... they have the cams and gears all set so that all the vehicles in the same size and weight range are close on MPG numbers ... I had a '66 chevelle that I put a 4-door frame under that came with a powerglide tranny and then I dropped in a 4-speed muncie ... The high geared rear diff with the long range cam in the engine for the P-G trans ... with the Muncie the car got 42 MPG no matter how you drove it ... It wasn't the fastest in the quarter but it took quite a few pinks in its day ... then I put a 700 in it and the fuel mileage fell off ... I have heard that it takes between 25 and 35 ponies just to turn the pump in the auto trans ... I would rather have them going to the ground with a manual .... and then you have the issue of trying to cool all that extra heat ... every truck I ever had with an auto had issues with heating on long grades ... you can't make my cummins get hot with the factory 454 rad in front of it ...The oil companies have too much influence in the auto manufacturing ... dictating what the fuel mileage is going to be ... I had a '77 toyota Celica that I dropped a hopped up 22R motor in and it went from around 38 with the 18R to 54 on hiway and would out run a 5.0 mustang ... I spun the rims in the tires on more than one occasion ... and then I had a '79 3\4 otn chevy that had a turbo 350 in it with the 350 engine and when I converted it to a 4-speed tranny it went from 18 to 22 mpg on highway and sometimes got up to 24 ... and would pull like a diesel ...

 

[JPalmer81]

No you dont see good MPG's from the factory .... I like taking an auto vehicle and putting a manual tranny in ... you always get a MPG gain you can't get the gearing combination with a factory setup .... they have the cams and gears all set so that all the vehicles in the same size and weight range are close on MPG numbers ... I had a '66 chevelle that I put a 4-door frame under that came with a powerglide tranny and then I dropped in a 4-speed muncie ... The high geared rear diff with the long range cam in the engine for the P-G trans ... with the Muncie the car got 42 MPG no matter how you drove it ... It wasn't the fastest in the quarter but it took quite a few pinks in its day ... then I put a 700 in it and the fuel mileage fell off ... I have heard that it takes between 25 and 35 ponies just to turn the pump in the auto trans ... I would rather have them going to the ground with a manual .... and then you have the issue of trying to cool all that extra heat ... every truck I ever had with an auto had issues with heating on long grades ... you can't make my cummins get hot with the factory 454 rad in front of it ...The oil companies have too much influence in the auto manufacturing ... dictating what the fuel mileage is going to be ... I had a '77 toyota Celica that I dropped a hopped up 22R motor in and it went from around 38 with the 18R to 54 on hiway and would out run a 5.0 mustang ... I spun the rims in the tires on more than one occasion ... and then I had a '79 3\4 otn chevy that had a turbo 350 in it with the 350 engine and when I converted it to a 4-speed tranny it went from 18 to 22 mpg on highway and sometimes got up to 24 ... and would pull like a diesel ...

Not to get political here, but it seems to me that cars in the 70's and 80's were way more fuel efficient, and I think it is not the oil companies but rather the EPA dictating what fuel mileage is gonna be, but that is all I will say about that I def need to get a OD gear in this truck for it to be happy going down the highway, and I think a NV4500 if I can find one or the ranger gear splitter since I already have almost everything for the swap to the sm465, the $1400 the ranger splitter costs will be taken care of quickly with the fuel savings. I have heard the parasitic drag for the TH400 is 46 HP's, that is unacceptable in my book. The parasitic drag for a manual tranny, 0 HP that i know of.