I have a neighbour who wants to sell me his 2000 H1 TT4 6.5TDL for roughly $36,000 it has 36000 miles on it - it needs some cosmetic attention but overall it appears to be in pretty solid shape. What do you think.

Buy it. Good price, hell, very good price, depending on the "cosmetic" issues.

If it's paint - go for it, or I'll buy it. If it's actual body damage, depends on how severe.

post a pic/ options

Can I have it?

From what I have seen it is just paint - there are a couple of insignificant dings on it - but no damage that stands out. It definately needs a new paint job though - he used it to promote a watersports business so it spent a lot of time near the ocean on a beach, it was also covered in decals that one of his guys tried to take off with a shovel by the looks of it.

It seems to run well - no obvious problems - I kind of think it is a no brainer - I will let you know the outcome - I have been Hummerless for too long now and this seems like a good oppurtunity.

Buy it!!!!

I have had dealers offer more than that for my '00 soft-top with 33,000miles

It's a good price provided there isn't any galvanic corrosion of the aluminum body.

Buy it....that's a dam good price.

I think 2000's still where in the date range for possible #8 cylinder issues so I would do a little homework on VIN ranges to verify. Other then that sounds like a good price!

True. However, it is far less likely to crack. What you need to do Andy is check the fourth character of the VIN number, if its a Z then you have a possible bad block. Even still I would not be to scared of it, for some reason I have not really seen many if any Y2K trucks where the block cracks.

Late 97 GM changed the block design by adding oil squirters to cool the bottom of the pistons but they did not reinforce the block where this was done. late 98 production saw this rectified with reinforcing. 2000 model year trucks would never have seen the bad engine blocks.affected years were 96-98 and some early production 99 MY vehicles.

I have heard from some other credible sources that the "questionable" blocks were still in inventory in the Y2K year. Though I will say I have not seen and or heard of a Y2K with a cracked block, and I do know an owner with a Y2K Z coded truck.

OK - these things are popping out of the woodwork now - the guy that owns the business next door to me has just offered me his 97.5 H1 with 50,000 miles on it for $30,000.
This one appears to be in excellent shape - he has owned it since 98 - its in Florida - it has never been offroad (according to him) and is in much better cosmetic shape than the 2000 that the other guy has. I am angling towards the older model for some reason - its not the money - its just that I trust the second guy more than the first.
What do you think - actually thats probably irrelevant to be honest because I think I will take the second one today anyway.

Believe this to be 100% pure GM propaganda!!! That is, unless you have documentation from GM that can substantiate that??? Is it possible you have 1999 confused with the year GM simply washed their hands of and walked away from ALL responsibility for their #8 cyl. engine problem and left AM General holding the entire bag for GM’s design failures???

Believe this to be 100% pure GM propaganda!!! That is, unless you have documentation from GM that can substantiate that??? Is it possible you have 1999 confused with the year GM simply washed their hands of and walked away from ALL responsibility for their #8 cyl. engine problem and left AM General holding the entire bag for GM’s design failures??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Late engine production '99 blocks received the reinforced #8 blocks, however there were a number of left over '99 engines used in 2000. The only sure way to know is to get the production casting off the right rear of the block.

Also, the 6.2/6.5 was a Detroit Diesel, not a GM Powertrain design.

Ever consider the possibility there were more than ONE fix for the #8 cylinder problems!

Consider the first fix in 1999 as a "Band-Aid" type fix to the block casting to ensure continued 6.5L manufacturing to support AMG’s Military HMMWV/HUMVEE production as well as other applications AND to produce 6 engines for GM Powertrain (3 for durability and 3 for cold/hot cycle testing) to prove or disprove that first fix.

The issue was not so much with the original engine casting as it was the application they were being asked to perform. The cracking issue came about in tight quarter applications, such as G,P, and Hummer applications where the air flow was restricted and the turbo location was centrally mounted. This locked the heat in and caused steam pockets over the #8 location.

The 6.5TD has been used extensively in the marine applications and has been a durable solution.

Well iv'e seen the changes on the engine blocks as iv'e had several of them apart for various repairs, propaganda, I think not. By the time AM general bought and took over production of the 6.5l engine plant these issues were already resolved and since then AM general also added higher nickel content to the engine block manufacturing which also added more strength and durability.

Believe this to be 100% pure GM propaganda!!! That is, unless you have documentation from GM that can substantiate that??? Is it possible you have 1999 confused with the year GM simply washed their hands of and walked away from ALL responsibility for their #8 cyl. engine problem and left AM General holding the entire bag for GM’s design failures??? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>