Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: 82 "red" block.

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Valley Cottage, New York
    Posts
    73

    Default 82 "red" block.

    I took a ride up to my home town of Brewster NY where there is an old school junkyard to pick up a power steerig pump bracket. The engine the bracket came off of is a 1982 "red" block 660. No date code, but a date stamped 3-2-81. The owner of the yard told me it has 75K on a rebuild and came out of a total loss wreck.I take that as the truth as I have known the family just about all my life and attended school with his son and daughter since grade school. It's complete with the engine wiring harness and no signs of any missing parts and it turns freely so I bought it for $500. I have little knowlage on these engines as i am more geared towards the CUCV J code engines. I did some research on this engine and what little info I could find is that they are less prone to cracking and crank failure. Is this true? I found it odd that this engine was painted red untill I researched it. Was this a good find for 500 bucks? Could I turbo this motor without any major modifications? Should I just put a J code intake and exhast on it and be happy with a decent find? Thanks, Wayne.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Newberg Oregon
    Posts
    12,274

    Default

    Hi

    The 82 Red Blocks were the first ones onto the market place, introduced in 1982 model year

    They were available in both light duty and heavy duty configuration.

    As far as the Blocks and cranks being any better ?????
    The "Urban Legend" has it that the Red blocks had better metalurgy than the later blocks.

    I have seen Red blocks that were cracked all to rat $hit just like the later ones did.

    Its certainly not a bad find at the price you paid for it.

    Puting a "J" code intake on it is fine. You can use a J code injector pump too if you like.

    The early C engines were real fuel mizers in their factory settings.

    The basics are identical to the CUCV stuff you are used to.
    The Block has a slightly different water passage in the deck area ??? but this is no biggy.

    Alll parts pretty much are identical right on through about the 90 model year. The one piece rear main came into being IIRC in the 91 models when the 6.5 was being readied for release.
    The 599 blocks were bored to either 6.2 or 6.5 size up through 93 models


    Overall, sounds like a great find.

    Any more ???? just ask

    Missy
    (1) 1995 Suburban 2500 4x4
    (1) 1997 Astro
    (1) 2005 Suburban (Papa Smurf)
    THIS IS BOW TIE COUNTRY

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Valley Cottage, New York
    Posts
    73

    Default 82 "red" block

    Hea missy, Thanks for the feedback. I figured for $500 what the heck I can keep it as a spare or throw it in a project truck CUCV or not.I was thinking of puting togeather a turbo setup with 6.5 parts found on the aucton sites. I don't want to hot rod it, just a little more power since it is a low HP c code. Will 6.5 turbo exhast manifolds work on this motor? I understand there might be clearance issues with the injectors. I am really not into swaping heads arround and making a major project out of it or spending $2000+ for a banks setup on a 30 yr old motor. As you know, these turbo parts can be had on the cheap.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Newberg Oregon
    Posts
    12,274

    Default

    Yup
    I have had a couple Banks setups off ebay for right prices
    (1) 1995 Suburban 2500 4x4
    (1) 1997 Astro
    (1) 2005 Suburban (Papa Smurf)
    THIS IS BOW TIE COUNTRY

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    363

    Default

    This is the engine that I've got in my 82 Suburban. These engines are excellent for getting good fuel economy but a little low on power stock form. They were rated for 130 hp (97 kW) @ 3,600 rpm / 240 lb·ft (325 N·m) @ 2,000 rpm. If fuel economy is your priority, put a J code intake and exhaust on it like you mentioned.
    1990 ¾ ton 4x4 Chevy Suburban
    -Cummins Diesel - 12 valve - factory rebuilt
    -6 speed bullet proof manual transmission - NV5600
    -Gear Vendors Overdrive
    -Upgraded Holset HX-35 turbo
    -NP205 iron transfer case
    -3.73 gears

    1982 ½ ton Chevy Suburban
    -6.2L diesel - high nickle crack free 1982 block
    -Stans headers
    -Ported heads
    -Timing gear
    -4 speed automatic
    -3.08 gears
    -30 mpg on freeway

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Valley Cottage, New York
    Posts
    73

    Default 82 "red" block

    Hea Edahall, I got all exited when I researched the "Red" block thinking I actually had a better engine than my J code. I love my turbo J code mind you, but I don't trust it. The previous owner got this truck off Gov Liquadations with 20K? on it, I got it with 37K and I assume he just slapped the banks on it witthout lowering the compression ratio so I try to keep my foot out of it. I just hope the 75K on the "Red" block rebuild were easy ones. I have yet to get it home, but when I do i'll pull the pan and take a look at it. Thanks, Wayne.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    22

    Default

    So what's the consensus on the red block? No better, no worse? I have one I am considering a swap with that seemed to run fine last time it was fired (about two years ago).
    James Collier

    1998 GMC Safari (Dead and awaiting resurrection with a 6.2 diesel swap)
    1984 Buick Regal (On the back burner)

    "Don't worry what others think... they don't do it that often!"

    Check out my original music recordings on FB, YT and MS

    "Allergic To Air Music"

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    11,375

    Default

    I had a red block 1982 model year 6.2L diesel engine rebuilt in 1995. The block was uncracked. My experience doesn't mean much with just one example, when trying to guess whether the red blocks are better or not. I've certainly never read any official documention that indicated any real difference.

    That said.... I tend to trust the introductory model stuff, whether we're talking about the 6.2 or 6.5 or the Duramax. My sense is that the engineering was sound going into a brand new model introduction. Can't say this for everything, but at least the 6.2 was designed by Detroit Diesel and I think they did it right, considering the cost/production constraints GM probably put on them. MP

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •