Diesel Brad said:I think the earlier 8.2s had more headgasket troubles then the later ones; I think they added larger headbolts or changed the design. Anyone confirm this ?
I machined a few years back. I remember one was in a SNAP ON truck, owner said it got pretty good fuel economy for a huge loaded box truck, but he had head issues and last I remember ( I suffer from C.R.S.) he was looking into a Turbo 8.2 ; something like 190 hp vs 150 hp ?french277 said:Yes they did change the Headbolt they went from 13MM bolts to 15 MM bolts and also add a wishbone in the cylinder head they did change that in latter part of the 8.2 engine line but the governer IMO it still stink no diffrent than the ole two strokers are.
Merci, Marc
Yes, the 366s and 427 tall decks are stout; 4 ring pistons also (think the deck is .400 taller) I agree. The problem with them, is of course, they are fuel pigs which wasnt a problem until recently.navistar45 said:hell, i guess i'am the only one on here who has had fair service with a 8.2 . all three of mine held up well, and were great on fuel. i was lucky and never had to work on mine however, i know they were a bear. i finally lost a engine in one after 200k of pretty rough service, went from a 170 n/a to a 250hp turbo, salvage yard engine. the 250 hp trk would slap eat my 466 powered ih's up, empty or loaded. i like the comment about the 427 gasser, some folks just dont realize how stout those engines were in two ton trucks. i have had 6 of them in single axle dumps, all would tote the mail. still got one that i seldom use, but i wont sell it just because.
Great running for me I have 1987 gmc 7000.mmmmm.....is there anything positive about the 8.2 engine?
