6.2 GM for pulling trailer???

Got a chance to buy an 86 Chevy, half ton but I believe it has a stiffer spring pack than stock used to be a roach coach, nice truck, automatic overdrive, needs a bed which I have. I'd like some real world experience on a similar truck pulling about 4k lbs.

I know its 130 hp but the torque number is not bad, CRS but think its close to 400? I'm interested in fuel economy and getting where I'm going. Fast is not too much of a concern but I dont want 5 miles of traffic stacked up behind me.

I know not to pull in O/D.

I got one in my 84 chevy rollback wrecker. I get 20mpg empty, and i have a 4 speed on it...56mph flat out...you will get to where you need to go...but your not gonna have a ribbon for first place...

I have over a dozen 6.2 powered trucks, and have been using them since they first came out. I like them because they're cheap and lots of parts around. I've got many good running 6.2 trucks for free. The 6.2 engine is not built near as rugged as the 6.9s and 7.3s that IH built for Ford trucks (never sold in 1/2 ton though). That being said, I've gotten over 200K on a few and 500K on one, before it blew to pieces with no warning.

It has a little less horsepower and torque then a 305 gas engine and that's at sea level. Drops like a rock if you use it over 5000 feet elevation. The 6.2 was designed by Detroit Diesel to be a power-replacement for the 305 gasser, and nothing more. Obviously, many efforts were made to make it more then that, as time went on. A J-code 6.2 in a 3/4 or 1 ton with a T400, or standard trans, and at least 3.73 axle-ratios can pull a 5000 lb. trailer no-too-bad on flat highways or mile hills.

C-code 6.2 diesel - 130 HP @ 3600 RPM and 240 TQ @ 2000 RPM (mostly used in 1/2 ton rigs)

J-code 6.2 diesel - 148 HP @ 3600 RPM and 248 TQ @ 2000 RPM (3/4 ton and 1 ton and military K5 Blazers)

F-code 305 gas engine - 155 HP @ 4000 RPM and 245 TQ @ 1600 RPM

Also remember the pre-1992 blocks (#660 casting) tend to crack at the main bearing webs once they get over 150K miles on them. And, the 1986 700R4 transmissions are pretty bad and not really suited for towing unless modified. They got much better in late 1987.

For fuel mileage?

Empty 87 3/4 ton 4WD Suburban with 3.73 axles and TH400 trans - 18 MPG best highway mileage and 13 MPG around town.

Empty 87 and 88 Blazers -both with 700R4 trans and 3.08 axles. 20 MPG highway and 16 MPG around town. Pulling a 4000 lb. trailer - 12-13 MPG.

Empty 1982 K10 4WD 1/2 ton pickup with 3.08 axles and four-speed overdrive manual trans. 23 MPG highway and 17 MPG around town.

86 mini-motorhome 4WD with 6.2 diesel and Banks turbocharger. 3.08 axles and 700R4 trans and a weight of 7400 lbs. 16 MPG best highway mileage.

I'd have to see that to believe it. 20-21 MPG is about the best fuel mileage I ever got with a LD 6.2 in a 1/2 ton Blazer with 3.08 axles.

I had two 80s roll-backs, 1 ton trucks with the cast-iron four-speed manual trans and J-code engines. One I'd first driven when new (before I owned it). One had a 4.10 rear and the other 4.33. Never got better then 16 MPG with either when empty, and 13-14 MPG was more the usual.

I got looking through some of my data-bases. Here are some of my fuel milage records. Keep in mind that fuel mileage reports must be done over-time to be useful. One-time "highs" usually mean nothing. That because sometimes, at certain service stations, you cannot fill a diesel pickup truck properly and get false readings. Many places have "big truck" pumps only and make too much foam when trying to put fuel into a small hole.

1983 Blazer with 2800 lb. camper-trailer. 6.2 C-code engine, TH400 auto-trans and 3.08
axles. 7/10/97 Returned from trip to Québec (St.Maurice National Park), round trip total
miles of 1,001 miles. Got 13.2 MPG average for the entire trip - all highway and mostly
flat.

87 Suburban. J-code 6.2 diesel, 4WD, 3.73 axles and TH400 auto trans.

8/1/98 16.3 mpg pulling boat for 140 miles. Boat and trailer weight 1900 lbs.

8/4/98 68932 12.9 mpg home empty, but against the wind.

8/5/98 69106 19.5 mpg empty all flat highway

8/5/98 69422 16.7 mpg, fully loaded with cargo - no trailer

8/7/98 69839 17.5 mpg, fully loaded with cargo - no trailer

8/10/98 70071 18.4 mpg, fully loaded with cargo - no trailer

8/11/98 70259 16.6 mpg, fully loaded with cargo - no trailer

8/13/98 71080 17.5 mpg, fully loaded with cargo - no trailer

1983 Ford F250 4WD extended-cab with 6.9 diesel, C6 auto trans and 4.10 axles.

12/10/06 drove 200 miles with trailer -empty one way with 2200 lb. trailer, loaded with a
diesel Blazer the other. 7400 lb. total weight. Lots of steep mountain roads - got 9 MPG
for the entire trip

well i have owned a 1984 and 1986 bought new and both gave over 20 miles to the gallon.they were a good truck for highway driving but no hell for pulling power. the 86 i got 400,000 km out of it till the kids rolled it.then got a 1995 with 6.5 turbo lot better for power, around 17 mpg, but pull a trailer and mileage drops consideratly.have around 400,00 km on this one also.have a duramax now great pulling power but hook em a trailer loaded and fuel economy is gone probably by 40%which is how it works the bigger the load the more fuel it uses.they were all good engines but had to use them as they were designed for.

I pull a 2 ton trailer quite often with my Kia Sportage (2.0 liter 90hp). Not over 50mph and flat ground and a good tailwind helps, but it gets along (rated for 1.6 ton), Pulled the same trailer and load with my VW Passat (1.9 liter 115 hp) pretty decent. Wife's Kia Sorento (2.5 diesel 140 hp) pulls the same weight like it's not even there.

Dave

Several yrs back I owned an '83 3/4 ton 6.2L 4 speed manual,4.10 gears,4X4. I bought it used and put over 100,000 on it and hauled 11- 1000# bales with no problem many times. Granted manual trans will out pull an auto. This truck also got 16 mpg empty. Body rust put it in the graveyard.

When somebody cites fuel mileage figures, make sure you know what sort of MPGs they are using. That can be confusing on forums like this with people from various countries. Many auto sellers in the USA have had fits over high-mileage stats posted in Canada that looked much better then in the USA. Those specs led to claims that the USA-built cars sold in Canada somehow got better mileage.

20 MPG in Canada or England is only 16.5 MPG in the USA.

One Canadian (Imperial) gallon is equal to 1.2 USA gallons. Canada sells motor fuel in gallons and liters, but service stations are only required , by Canadian law, to post prices in liters. So, some places post gallons, some liters, and some both. If they post gallons, they are bigger gallons then here in the USA.

To the converse with MPG specs . .
20 MPG in the USA equals 24 MPG in Canada/England.

17's The best I've seen from my 1986 military M-1028 Chevy pick-up..Got a little better with the bad injector pump that was on it..It's running 33's on aluminum wheels for summer and 235-85R-16 for winter..I never could get a good mileage reading on them due to plowing snow and adverse road conditions..Good enough for who it's for..

I had a 83 k10 new in 83 those only had about 500 lbs. rating you could haul by the tag. It was right as those 15" tires were too squirly. Stay away from those 1/2 tons. Later model ones with 16" tires are likely better though.

Got a good chuckle from the below statement about liking the 6.2 because parts are cheap and plentiful. LOL From my experiences you will need them !

Do yourself a favor like I finally did. I bought a 1996 Dodge Ram 2500 4x4 with the 360 gas engine. Very capable and up for anything and way fewer repairs !
I trimmed my fleet down and only needed one vehical from then on. I just recently bought a small car to drive because gas is so expensive for just hauling me only around to work.

Yes, I've picked up many good running 6.2 diesel, 4WD trucks and Suburbans for $200 or less. And gotten many with blown transissions or rusted out frames for free. I've got several 91 4WD 6.2 diesel suburbans retired from school bus fleets. Run perfect, all with around 130K miles, and most I paid was $250 for the best of the bunch.

Now, if I ever needed some used engine parts for my 92 Dodge with the Cummins 5.9, I'd be screwed. VERY expensive. But, it runs like a clock and the truck rarely needs anything. It will work circles around any 6.2 I ever had.

Nice thing about 6.2s (besides being cheap) is they were available in 1/2 ton rigs. Nobody else ever did that except Dodge for one year in 1978 - and that truck was awful (had a Misubishi 6 cylinder diesel). For light work, 6.2s can be great. For heavy work, pretty useless. They were never designed for it.

I found that my Blazers handle much better with the stock 235/75-15" tires. Better handling, better fuel mileage and much better traction in snow and ice on my plow trucks. 31s, 32s, and 33s just amplify the bump-steer and handling and drop the fuel mileage substantially. I like the way the big tires look, but other then appearance, pretty useless. Even using 31 X 10.50s drops almost 2 MPG.

Even had any troubles with the rear U-joints going bad every 5-10K miles? I had that problem on all my K5s until I made a few modifications.

Also wondering how you put the 235/85-16" on your K5. Did you swap to 8 lug axles, or did you find some later 16", six-lug rims?

Forget my questions about the 16" tires. I was thinking you had a M-1009 (Blazer), not the M-1028.