if you go back to my last post that's exactly what i was talking about. and they used NA 6.2 & 6.5 or the turbo 6.5. the NA's are gutless even with an empty hummer. the 6.5s aren't THAT bad on the armored stuff (12 to 15k in weight w/ 205HP & 440ft/lb).

and you say the government is throwing away it's money - how might i ask is that? they're not the GREATEST engine around but they ARE simple for a 63B to repair in combat. i thought it'd be cool if they'd drop any of the current diesels in them but they're just too complicated to be practical for all situations, especially combat.

those old GM powerplants aren't the best, definitely lacking in power, but they did what they were designed to do: be long lasting and get good mileage.

YMMV

 

as far as burbs go ford never did have anything to compete with them until they came out with the excursion, and now their gone.really though for everyday heavy half tons the old 6.2 got you there without too much fuss and for minimal fuel useage

 

yeah if ford was to made the excursion or the expidition back in the 70-80's chevy suburbans wouldn't be so hot now.... imagine a 77 ford expiditon.. and not a centerion either... I have been thinking (checking on cost) of having a 4 door converted with a bronco back but unlike the centerion I would not have the frame shortend but it just add the differnce in the body and maybe make it 4 row of seating and/or make it where you could still tow a goose neck... still working on this ideal... yeah the burb is going to be the cheap go in the snow vehicle for me for work...

 

"metered fuel into a small pre-chamber in the head before it was mechanically injected into the combustion chamber"

I don't believe this is an accurate description of the 6.9 fuel injection process as wasn't the fuel simply injected into the prechamber which started the combustion process.