Guys...

Im torn between a real nice 90 Ramcharger 360/auto with 80K original miles and a sweet 86 M1009 6.2 diesel CUCV Blazer with 87K original miles, depot rebuilt 6.2 and new TH400 trans. Both vehicles are super clean and are turn-key.

The Ramcharger is $1,500 cheaper than the military Blazer.

What would be the better vehicle as far as a little bit of off roading, mostly around town/highway driving, climbing steep hills, and towing capacity.

I'm surprised the 6.2 diesel isnt very powerful making well under 200 horsepower...and the Blazer has stock 3.08 gears...wondering if its a dog off the line?

Feel free to chime in and let me know your thoughts...

I'm pretty sure the 6.2 in that year is non turbo, really gutless, I drove an 89 Ford F250 4x4 ext cab long box 7.3 non turbo and it was an absolute dog.
The 360 would kick its hiney all over the place, that said I'm sure you could get a turbo kit for it. Now you have to ask yourself why did it need a reman engine at 87K? I don't think the 6.2's were that great of an engine

My buddy had a 6.2 diesel in a 95 Chivvy dually, two engines broke crankshafts!

Its non-turbo...

As far as cranks breaking, I've heard that also...I've also seen these 6.2's with new harmonic balancers installed...that would explain cranks breaking!

I'll have to go check out the Ramcharger

As the owner of a 6.2 powered Suburban, you definitely won't want one for power or towing. It will beat the 360 hands down for fuel mileage.

IIRC the Military blazers also came with a 3.08 gear ratio. Not the best for offroading.

Not all 10 bolts are the same and I doubt any are superior to a 8.75.

Chivvy went to 12 bolts for a reason and so the owners could finally use all their fingers to count the bolts...

Some of the 6.2 diesels were quite frugal with fuel consumption. I've heard some guys claim 20+ mpg in the right circumstances. A 4x4 won't do as well as a 2 wheel drive though.

Parts for the 6.2's used to be relatively economical, by diesel standards. Unfortunately, the 6.2's will be more likely to break than some of the better engineered diesels.

The 6.2 seemed to be designed for light duty applications. I've heard that using them for towing and other heavy duty jobs will increase the odds of them giving trouble. I don't know how true this is though.

The 6.5 Diesel is an evolution of the 6.2 diesel. Some of the 6.5's had a turbo on them from the factory. I used to know a guy who was into the 6.2 / 6.5 engines. He swapped some heavier duty parts from the 6.5 onto the 6.2 to help the smaller engine live longer. I don't recall all of the details now.

The 1990 RC will be a TBI engine. Those have a reputation for being reasonably reliable, but not real powerful. If you can find a 92 or 93 magnum powered RC it will have more power.

i would love to drop a cummins 5.9 into a cucv set up--the ones i have seen around here have 1.25 ton rated axles--i have diesel emissions here so i think the swap would be doable---it would be fun to do the same to the 90 ramcharger but will not be allowed here by emissions rules...

back on the axle shaft conversation----i had 9.25 cut down to A body width with 8.75 c-clip elimination for my 50 hudson----the guy that did the work is one of the top in the rocky mtn area---he told me the stock 8.75 axle is the strongest of the group and can be cut down and resplined---he also said only the ford 31 spline can be safely reused and the 28 spline ford should be thrown away---i ask him about the chevy axles--he said if you got a chevy throw that axle shaft away and go aftermarket....

Given the choice b/t those 2, go w/ the ramcharger!
Used to have a 6.2 diesel in a 1/2 ton 2wd chevy truck. Decent fuel mileage, but that's the only good thing about it. NO power.