IF I could put a 6.2 in a S-10 what kinda MPG you think it would get?

[HANK1948]

Iam tired of spending 80 to 100 bucks a week in fuel (120 miles back and forth to work) my buddy at work has a diesel S-10 with the Isuzu diesel and it gets 33 MPG but it is guttless as hell and if you find a small diesel pickup Chevy luv, Isuzu pup or toyota there going for 2500 to 4000! people are looking for these to save money on the damn fuel prices ,I remember reading an article in the Diesel Page about somebody putting a 6.5 in a Vette and was getting 57 MPG! so I was thinking of putting a 6.2 in a S-10 I think I can get at least 30 MPG,I know there is things to overcome (like springs) but Iam up for the challange. so what do you guys think?

[a5150nut]

My guess would be what you save in fuel, you will spend in front end parts. That is a lot of weight on a little truck. Maybe you could put a skate board under the cross frame. Might be a problem of too much weight for the tires too.

I had a brotherinlaw that put a 289 in a Ford Currier. Same problem, couldn't keep the front end under it. And don't even think about cornering....

[NH2112]

Look for a 4.3l Olds V6 diesel, this will weigh quite a bit less than a 6.2l and be more suitable for the S10's front end. Situations like this are the reason I'd like to see Cummins make an aluminum-block 3.9l!

[Craig M]

The 4.3L GM V-6 is a nice candidate. Unfortunately most were front wheel drive. There was a rear wheel drive 4.3L, but they are harder and harder to find. The 4 cylinder Cummins is a great choice. I also saw the claimed 50+ mpg on the vette. Still do not believe it. My 2300 pound rabbit with a 2.0 liter 4 cylinder diesel and 5 speed manual transmission will not get that good a mileage. A V-8 6.2 in the heavier vette chassis will would have to be going down hill for half the fuel tank to get 50 mpg!

[arveetek]

If you read the Corvette article (http://www.thedieselpage.com/readers/vet.htm)again, you'll see that the writer stated he got an average of 48 CANADIAN miles per gallon, with a high of 55 CANADIAN mpg. I'm not sure how to calculate that into US mpg, but it will be quite a bit lower.

Still, I agree with the others that a smaller, 4 or 6 cylinder diesel would net a higher mpg. A V8 diesel like the 6.2L is the perfect power plant for a larger, full-size truck that still gets decent fuel economy. But, that same 8 cylinder 6.2L can only get so much mpg. It's a very large, heavy engine for such a small truck. A 4 cylinder, turbocharged diesel would probably yield 40 mpg fairly easily.

Of course, a 6.2L diesel could probably be bought and installed for a lot less than a good 4 cylinder diesel, like a Cummins or even an old Detroit. Of course, you could save all that money that a conversion would cost and just put it in your current fuel tank.

It's really funny to me that people will spend thousands of dollars in order to "save" a few dollars' worth of fuel. You would have to drive a converted truck for years and years to recoup the cost of building it for the fuel mileage.

But then again, I'm all for converting vehicles to diesel! :D I think all vehicles should be diesel....but I'm strange that way! :D It's just that, realistically, you won't really save that much money in the long run when you spend money to build a vehicle for fuel economy. Unless you drive it a long, long time. I converted my '81 9 years ago, but I'm not sure I've really saved all that much money. However, I love the 6.2L and would never own a gasser again.

So, I guess what I'm saying is, it would be really cool to have an S-10 with a 6.2L, and I'm all for it. But if you're doing it solely to save money, it probably isn't going to help much in the long run. If you want to do it for fun reasons, and to have a cool truck that gets better mileage than most, then go for it. I mean, a stock S-10 with a 4 cylinder gasser already gets fairly decent fuel economy, after all.

Casey

[Dan Wilson]

I had a olds cutlas rear drive v6 diesel from 82-91. It got 44 highway 32 city. It burn up with all the other great stuff I had at the time when my shop burn down. I even had a spare v6 in the shop and melted with every thing else. I was the best car but if you wanted to pass a 18 wheeler you better take a running start.
Dan

[mhagie]

When I built my truck it was powered by a built 383 small block,ran good had lots of power but was still just like ever body else's truck.
After finding this web site I got the ITCH to be a little different.
So here I am now with a Built 6.5 many thousand dollars poorer but with a definitely different truck.
Not too many 1980 6.5TD 700R4 trucks around, don't have a clue what the mpg is,don't really care, I built it for fun not economy. :D
Merle

[NH2112]

Originally posted by arveetek:
If you read the Corvette article (http://www.thedieselpage.com/readers/vet.htm)again, you'll see that the writer stated he got an average of 48 CANADIAN miles per gallon, with a high of 55 CANADIAN mpg. I'm not sure how to calculate that into US mpg, but it will be quite a bit lower.


Casey Canadian miles are the same as what we use, but their gallon is the Imperial gallon, which is about 5 quarts. So 50mpg Canadian would be 40mpg US, still hard to believe though.

[DmaxMaverick]

40 MPG is very believable with that Vette. What is the drag coefficient of a Corvette, compared to any pickup, any size. Wind drag is the mileage killer at highway speeds, which is where most of us record our best mileage. My '85 Blazer, with stock (at the time) 6.2-C, 3.73 R/E, 700R4, 31X10.5 tires would ocasionally get 30 on highway trips at 55 MPH. The best at 70 was 22. The same trip, with the same vehicle, with the Vette's drag, would very likely be in the 40's. The design of the Vette makes it an excellent candidate for a fuel pincher. Sure, it's heavier than the compacts, but that only matters at low speeds. Who drives down the highway at 20 MPH? With the right combinations, that Vette may be capable of 50 MPG, US.

A 6.2 in an S-10 would sure peg the "cool meter", but that's about it. As said before, if mileage is what you want, find a smaller engine, and leave the speed to the folks not so concerned with economy.

[HANK1948]

I would love to find a 4 cyl. cummins or something simalar but that would cost me a 1000 or more I have a good 6.2 J engine, if I find a good s-10 with a bad motor for about a 1000 and this motor combo would work I think I would have a good truck ,since so many people put SBC in these trucks and the front end lives how much more does a 6.2 weigh more than a SBC?

[jcomp]

Just in case you need it (clicky): S-10 V8 conversion info (http://www.jagsthatrun.com/Pages/Chevrolet_S-10_V-8.html)

Are you planning on a 2WD or 4WD S-10? I'm interested in how this turns out. Hopefully in a few years I'll be going with a 6BT for my K5 and I'll have to find a new home for my 6.2

[NH2112]

Look for a 3.9l out of a bread truck, they're pretty common and I've even seen them on eBay. They've generally come with TH400s or SM465s but you can bolt up your current tranny to them. Then again, there are a lot of 2.0l - 2.5l industrial/marine diesels in the 50-75hp range out there, such as Kubota, Nissan, Isuzu, etc. If you don't mind taking longer than usual to get up to cruising speed and having to do some fabricating to make a bellhousing adapter, engine mounts, and cooling system, one of these could be a real fuel miser plus different from everything else on the road. Many of them have gear-driven water pumps and hydraulic pumps (for power steering) so they're ultra-reliable and you'll only have to worry about 1 belt.

[HANK1948]

Look for a 3.9l out of a bread truck, they're pretty common and I've even seen them on eBay. They've generally come with TH400s or SM465s but you can bolt up your current tranny to them. a 3.9 what? cummins? that sounds interesting, how much do they usally go for?

[4x4Dreamer]

Yeah, that's a cummins. It's basically the 5.9 minus 2 cylinders. They come in a N/A (4B I believe) and Turbo (4BT) models. They have more torque than our 6.2's, but are built like a Cummins and I hear they can go 500K between rebuilds.

One will be in my truck in the near future.

[trbankii]

I think the first question would be your overall intentions for the vehicle.

If you are looking for a diesel commuter vehicle that gets decent milage, I think that you'd be way further ahead buying a VW TDI Golf or Jetta. If you need the carrying capacity then look at a VW Passat wagon. Even looking at the cost of gas, as others have mentioned, you'd be far ahead paying for the gas over paying for the cost of the conversion. Even if you do all the work, the cost of parts plus the cost of your time to do the work adds up to something.

Now if you're looking for a cool project to have some fun with and end up with a truly unique vehicle, then by all means go for the 6.2 swap. I've seen a number of S-10s with small blocks in them and a few with big blocks. The diesel would obviously add quite a bit of weight over the gasser that would have to be dealt with. Again, if the main purpose would be for a commuter vehicle, this weight may be a negative issue.

I find it funny every time someone starts talking about the "expense" of a project vehicle not being worth it. Yet I know any number of people that get a new car every three to five years "before it starts costing them too much money" for repairs. They've already paid thousands of dollars in interest and depreciation and have just barely hit the point where the cost of ownership has leveled off.

I put between $500 and $1000 into my twenty year old truck each year to make repairs. That is one or two (at most three) monthly payments on a new vehicle. Which means at the very least I'm getting nine months out of the year "free" with my old truck. So that means that I have about $4500 this year to spend on my "project vehicle" instead of on car payments...

If you decide to go ahead with this, definitely keep us all posted! ;)

[HANK1948]

I really dont want to go the way of the diesel rabbit or jetta, I would hate to drive a foreign car plus Iam 6'6" and 230 I wouldnt fit very good in one of those little cars. The S-10 would have to be a extended cab of course or a S-blazer one or the other

[trbankii]

After owning a Golf and a series of Jettas for about twenty years, my parents just got a Passat TDI wagon. Very nice car. At 6'-3", I have no problems fitting in it. The Golf and Jettas were a bit tight, though.

Took a trip with my father in the Passat about a month ago and got about 44 mpg for the trip.

[jbell]

I agree on the conversion costs being high. Been trying to justify (to myself) a 2LT for my tacoma on 32's. Here's 2 things you can do, that'll help.

First a front air dam. Just put one on my tacoma at went from 18.5 to 20.5 (running a constant 78-80mph, the most the cops in KS will let you get away with)

The other thing you can do is put a tonneau on the rear half of the pickup bed. (that's not a typo, check gm's patent) I'm doing that this week and will report back on the mpg gains.

If I can get my 17-19 (rated) taco up in the 23-24 range, the 2LT will just have to wait. If not, it's going diesel. BTW -- check ebay, there's a guy selling nissan rd28's cheap enough with tranny for a S-10. The front end would thank you, B3.9's weigh 780 lbs DRY, closer to 850 with accessories and fluids. For comparison, that's twice the weight of a 4.3l.

[NH2112]

Hank,

Here's what you need (http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=7967372779&rd=1&sspagename=STRK%3AMEWA%3AIT&rd=1). The guy also has the 5-speed from this truck available on another auction. I'd bet that a turbo from a small car, like a diesel Jetta, could be adapted relatively easily to this engine if you can TIG-weld an exhaust manifold or know someone who can.

[jbell]

A c223 is the exact engine that was in the s-10. However DON'T turbo it!!!. please. It is a 23:1 engine with known issues breaking connecting rods. A turbo will trash it in short order. Leave it in it's native 54hp tuning and it'll live. (I have one, I know.) There is a turbo version that is a lower 20:1, but it'll only live up to about 5-6psi.

However, that is exactly the size/weight/displacement of the type of engine that you do want for mpg. AND you need an aerodynamic truck. For example, I know a guy who put a cummins 4BT (B3.9) in a jeep yj. Only got 22. With the lift and big tires, the aerodynamics wouldn't allow any better mileage.

A typical 2wd s-10 extended cab with a lower front air-dam, a tonneau, and this motor should get high 30's, and on occasion, 40. but it'll be gutless.

The 'perfect' motor for mileage will be a small inline 6. Like a cummins 6at, nissan rd28, or even a 4, like a td27 or a perkins 192. If you want something cool, check the web for a powerstroke 2.8. In a ford ranger in brazil, it gets 40.

If you go foreign diesel, I would direct you to the isuzu's over the nissans, and toyota diesels -- they seem to live longer. A c240 might be a good candidate for mpg, and they don't have the conn rod issues of the c223 -- they're on ebay as well.

my 2c.

[Robyn]

Snoop around and find a 5.7 Olds diesel of the latest date you can. 85 would be nice. You can make things work here with GM parts mix and match.
I had two 79 Cutlass diesels and got 27-30 HWY without fail. The same rules apply with these little guys as it does to buying used 6.2 engines.
They can crack heads and blow gaskets. I good one of late production will have a roller cam and would make you a sweet swap. Pretty simple do me thinks
Robyn

[Andy Chesek]

Someone over at the Turbo Diesel Register put a Cummins 6bt in a 2wd S-10... big thread about it over there.

[jbell]

I agree -- 5.7's get good mileage in old's -- due mainly to them being a car.

However, car aerodynamics + diesel = good mpg.
Pickup aerodynamics + diesel = ok for a pickup mpg, but not great.

You must first choose your platform that can get good mpg with the gas motor, and then swapping in a diesel will get you even better. Just like the guy with the 4bt YJ -- 22mpg -- doesn't sound that impressive does it? An unmodified stripped down yj with the 4banger gets that.

Toyota's get anywhere from highway 19 (v6 4x4 big tires) to 28 (4cyl 2x4, weenie tires) SAME xCAB design, less than 30hp difference in motors, almost same weight. That's a 50% increase in fuel mileage WITHOUT going diesel.

I've had good success with my 6.2 burb and my toyota with small aerodynamic changes. Unless you're driving under 42mph most of the time, you can't get good mpg without good aero....

And if you've seen any of my other posts -- going slow is not an option for me......