Pirate 4x4 banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,917 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
While I was looking for a 89 - 91 Blazer I found this:


<IMG SRC="smilies/eek.gif" border="0"> <IMG SRC="smilies/eek.gif" border="0"> <IMG SRC="smilies/eek.gif" border="0">

WOW! - and he didn't even have to trim the fenders!

Anyways, anyone know where to look for a 89 - 91 blazer with 6.2 in it??

[ 10-10-2001: Message edited by: Moab Austin ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,586 Posts
Not to sound bad, I understand your looking for some economy but the 6.2 deisel is not a very good engine. I do not think it was available as late as your looking. That engine ran 82-86 in the K5 I think and was not available the last few years of the K5 run. I think you could get it in Subs and 1 ton trucks but don't think your going to find a K5 after 86 with one.
If your looking for a GOOD K5 to wheel with find a 80. It will have 12 bolt rear as opposed to the crappy 10 bolt rear. They all came with 205. Probably the best out of the box combo. If your looking for economy then get a 87-91 Fuel injected version but plan on replacing the rear end if you wheel. In stock form they will get about 18hwy.
The year cuts are as follows.
69-80 had 12 bolt rears.
69-77 had D44 fronts after that they all go to 10 bolt fronts. 10 front is same strength as the D44 front so not really a concern.
81-86 I would avoide. That's the first few years of the 700R4 and they had lots of trouble. Also first few years of the 208 case. They aslo had a Pain in the butt Mixtrue control Quad most of those years that are very troublesome.
86 had a transisitonal motor unique to that year.
So I would stay pre 81 or post 86. Any of the pre 81's will take more of a beating and better suited to wheeling. the 87 up the 700 tranny problems are solved, Fuel injection offsets that crappy 10 bolt rear and they also have the Galvinized bodies that stopped a lot of the rust out problems.

[ 10-11-2001: Message edited by: Grim Reaper ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,917 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
[ 10-11-2001: Message edited by: Grim Reaper ][/QB][/QUOTE]


Yeah grim I know...
BUT I want a 6.2 simply because I already got a kit for it, and my 82 with the banks got 430k on it. I sold it and it still ran strong (ate trannies though) this Blazer will be for my daly driver, and occasional towing of my jeep (I built a jeep to wheel)

BTW I did have an 80 blazer, 12 bolt - 205 - and 4blt main and ROUND HEADLIGHTS. It was awesome, and I miss it! beat it to hell for about 200k after I bought it with 125,000 on it. also still ran when I sold it
<IMG SRC="smilies/frown.gif" border="0">

Anyways I found a guy who says he has a 89 with the 6.2, and that it was really rare....Thats kinda why I was asking on here..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
No way, Grim. The 6.2 was available for all years of the K5. I own an '89. What do you base your opinion on as "they suck"? No, not a power house but I can torque my way up most anything. I get 20+ mpg with 35" BFGs and 4.56 gears, better if I slow down. At idle (or slow RPMs) a diesel burn far less than a spark ignition engine. Ignition problems, whats that? Fuel starved on a slope? never had that problem. Hey the rest of the world 'wheels with diesels. Not that either of us has "biased" o-pin-yon <IMG SRC="smilies/tongue.gif" border="0">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
167 Posts
Moab, were did you find the Blazer?? How much did they want for it? There is a Suburban in town for sale with 44's. Has best offer on it, Doesnt look all rigged. Looks alright.

Lance
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top