05-30-2013, 02:36 AM | #1 |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Temple City
Posts: 3,610
|
M1009 cucv
My friend got a ex military trailer a few months ago from a guy in the desert who sells military surplus, and he had a few of the M1008/9's around. Ever since then I have been wanting one.
I know stock the 6.2 can get up to 20 mpg cruising with 4.56 gears. How well do you think it can it do if it were 2wd, a 3.42 rear end, and backed by a 4L80? Maybe a banks kit to bring up the power for DD. Some people claim over 25 which would be amazing to me or did they tune the engine to the utmost? Lets be honest I don't go wheeling, and I just need a decent ride height to go fishing. The M1009 will be lowered for easier access for me. Or about 2 inches lower then my C20. Hopefully I am on the verge of a better job again, and would like to get one when things clear up around my house. Namely my projects that I have to restart. |
05-30-2013, 03:13 AM | #2 |
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Beaverton, OR from WA State
Posts: 1,515
|
Re: M1009 cucv
Just to verify... M1009 is the Blazer and it will have 3.08 gears F/R. The M1008, M1028, and Ambulance/Maintenance trucks on the K30 chassis have the 4.56 gears F/R.
The M1009 with it's 3.08s should put down some pretty nice economy in stock form. Yes, a turbo kit wakes them up nicely as well.
__________________
Devin 1983 GMC High Sierra 2500, 4x4, RC/LB, 400 S.B., SM-465, NP-208, Corporate 10 bolt & 9.5" 14 bolt 1996 GMC Sierra SLE 3500 DRW, 4x4, EC/LB, Vortec 454, NV-4500, BW-4401, AAM 925 & AAM 1050 1997 GMC Sierra SLT 1500 4x4, Z71/F44, EC/SB, Vortec 350 My Introduction with my '83s History New Daily, the '96 |
05-30-2013, 06:20 AM | #3 |
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Memphis MI
Posts: 1,851
|
Re: M1009 cucv
My 87 R10 truck 6.2 700R4 3.08 gets 23mpg if driven nicely. Probably gets 26mpg at 55mph. Don't waste a 4L80E on a 6.2, to get an idea of the power think of them as a bad smelling 305. 700R4/4L60E is plenty stout - mine has 215,000 miles on it. Turbo is fun but cuts mileage and stresses a weak block.
__________________
1987 2 ton 1982 250/TH350 beater in progress Dad's 1981 3/4 L6 3 on tree posi and no options, awaiting restoration or scrapping Plus a mess o' tractors |
05-30-2013, 07:08 AM | #4 |
I know the pieces fit
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: MONTGOMERY, AL
Posts: 5,523
|
Re: M1009 cucv
Those upgrades will likely more than double your initial purchase price and won't necessarily increase mpg. If you buy one, just clean it up and enjoy it. I drive mine most every weekend and only fill it up a couple of times a year.
|
05-30-2013, 09:16 AM | #5 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Posts: 1,028
|
Re: M1009 cucv
Quote:
Also have a '93 military one ton van with the 6.2 and 4L80. The van has much lower axle ratio than the M1009's 3.08's. I would say they are both in the same RPM range at 65MPH (van's overdrive vs. M1009's 3.08's and 33" tires). Last edited by Willowrun; 05-30-2013 at 10:17 AM. |
|
05-30-2013, 09:28 AM | #6 | |
I know the pieces fit
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: MONTGOMERY, AL
Posts: 5,523
|
Re: M1009 cucv
Quote:
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|