Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Damn, you're getting better mileage than I do with my 5.3! :lol: I'm guessing my locking out 5th/6th gear in town is what kills me but it drives better that way.

 

Yup, If I lock out 5/6 gears in town it actually goes down to 11-13 mpg in town but I'm usually beating on it pretty good at the same time, as well. I live in a large city and only drive 4 miles round trip to work everyday too so I'm usually no better than 15 mpg on average.

Edited by ChevyTech77
Posted

sorry about the 1/2 commment. I had a feeling after I posted that...it was wrong. So this L9H 6.2 L guy is basically what some refer to as a heavy half.....right? This is the motor that that claims it can tow 10,500 lbs? Also, the mileage above.....what gears did you have in back. I ask because I have the 5.3L Z71 3.73 gears and I get 13.5-17.5 mpg. That 17.5 is if all the stars align with pure highway driving and no load. It's hard to achieve. A good overall number for me is 15.5.

Posted

The 6.2 L9H is offered in the NHT Max-Trailering package that is capable of towing 10,500 lbs, yes.

 

My truck is just a Z71 so I only have 3.42's.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

sorry about the 1/2 commment. I had a feeling after I posted that...it was wrong. So this L9H 6.2 L guy is basically what some refer to as a heavy half.....right? This is the motor that that claims it can tow 10,500 lbs? Also, the mileage above.....what gears did you have in back. I ask because I have the 5.3L Z71 3.73 gears and I get 13.5-17.5 mpg. That 17.5 is if all the stars align with pure highway driving and no load. It's hard to achieve. A good overall number for me is 15.5.

 

 

I have the NHT max trailer package with 3.73's and get 13-17mpg. Your 5.3L should do better than that :dunno:

Edited by Stevens11
Posted (edited)

sorry about the 1/2 commment. I had a feeling after I posted that...it was wrong. So this L9H 6.2 L guy is basically what some refer to as a heavy half.....right?

 

The NHT "max tow pkg" adds ~300 lbs to the regular 7000 lb GVWR on a 4wd 1500 (7300 lb total), a 9.5 ring gear (vs 8.6), disc brakes, and a little stiffer spring set. It's a heavier rating, but the F150 is the only model that offers what I would really call a "heavy half"... since those are available with a GVWR of 8200 lbs (usually special order). The 2500HD has much heavier running gear (9600 lb GVWR), but it drives like a tank in comparison, and the 6.0 is less efficient than the 6.2 in a 1500.

Edited by music
  • Like 1
Posted

sorry about the 1/2 commment. I had a feeling after I posted that...it was wrong. So this L9H 6.2 L guy is basically what some refer to as a heavy half.....right? This is the motor that that claims it can tow 10,500 lbs? Also, the mileage above.....what gears did you have in back. I ask because I have the 5.3L Z71 3.73 gears and I get 13.5-17.5 mpg. That 17.5 is if all the stars align with pure highway driving and no load. It's hard to achieve. A good overall number for me is 15.5.

 

 

In town i typically get 13-13.5 and on the highway i have gotten a worst of 13.8(driving 75 in the wind) and a best of 21(driving 55 mostly through flat ground and a few rolling hills) Driving around 75 I usually see 16-17.

Posted

In town i typically get 13-13.5 and on the highway i have gotten a worst of 13.8(driving 75 in the wind) and a best of 21(driving 55 mostly through flat ground and a few rolling hills) Driving around 75 I usually see 16-17.

 

 

I get about the same as becker .. I just came back from a 200 mile trip doing 70-75 and averaged 16.5 mpg...In the fall I took a highway trip babying it at about 60 and was getting 21 as well.. It all depends on how you drive it... I drive 6 miles to work each way and now in the cold weather I am getting 14.5 or so , but in the summer I was consistently getting 16.5-17... To get decent mileage out of the 6.2 requires a disiplined driver. It likes to eat... With my 2002 with 5.3L It really didnt matter too much how I drove it ,the mileage wouldnt change that much, no matter how I drove it, it would always get between 16 and 17...With the 6.2 beating on it gets me high 13's- low 14's, but with driving like grandpa, I can easily get 16's around town and 19-20 highway.

Posted

Hey guys, I got my new sierra a week ago. The 6.2 is amazing and so is the knowledge gained in these threads. First on the list is a K&N intake and a Magnaflow exhaust. After that a custom tune from Nelson this summer, because I can't get a response from BlackBear. Still in the break-in stage and still haven't really got on the gas :nono:

  • Like 1
Posted

The Vortec Max is only the high output 6.0. The 6.2 doesn't have a special name.

Posted (edited)

That's what I thought. Wiki shows the 6.2L is labeled as a Vortec Max motor for our trucks

Edited by EX-F150 owner
Posted

Well Wikipedia is edited by anyone and everyone so it isn't exactly a surprise that it's wrong every now and then.

Posted

Past weekend went on a 200 mile trip. On the way there going about 75 was getting around 15-15.5. On the way back driving 80 i was avereging 12.5. Not much wind either way. Not great numbers, speed kills mpg's, but it's a truck, i didn't buy it for great mileage, i bought the 6.2 for the POWER!!!

Posted

^^ Yes I am finding so far is that it seems my NHT likes to run around 55mph for a better gas mileage. Really, keeping the RPM at or around 1500 is good, much above that is bad HAHA

  • Like 1
Posted

^^ Yes I am finding so far is that it seems my NHT likes to run around 55mph for a better gas mileage. Really, keeping the RPM at or around 1500 is good, much above that is bad HAHA

 

 

I have driven around 55 and i get great mileage, but driving that slow KILLS me. I can drive 65 on highways but anything below 70 on interstate just seems so SLOW.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,778
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    daveishi
    Newest Member
    daveishi
    Joined
  • Who's Online   2 Members, 0 Anonymous, 946 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Because that is IDIOTIC, much like this question. They've already been forced to do it by past administrations - why would you roll that back when it's a GOOD thing?  WHO IS ARGUING FOR LOWER MILEAGE???? 😂  NOBODY IS!!   I'm certainly not! What I want is RELIABLE vehicles again that are worth the price paid!    I don't get your logic here ...   In 2003 I paid $2,200 for our '86 Grand Marquis. It's STILL running and I've never been inside the engine, aside for the timing cover since it was leaking, so I threw a new timing set in since that makes sense. Transmission is ORIGINAL. Electric pump in the gas tank is ORIGINAL. Rear end is ORIGINAL. I'd have to hit my head REAL hard to want to pay $60k or more for a car that still can't come close to the comfort, seating and storage space, or reliability of this one. Nothing is even in the ball park! Hundreds of thousands of brands and models have been built and sent to the crusher while this one keeps on going!   https://postimg.cc/Z9XRrCSg   I've got a whole fleet of cars, motorcycles, and a truck close to this age for summer and winter. No one could pay me enough to buy anything built this century. I have zero use for any it.
    • Since I'm the one who has to fix them when they break, I'll take vehicles over 30 years old all day, EVERY day, over ANY modern crap. Have you attempted any repairs on anything built after 2006? It's a friggin nightmare, and gets worse the newer the model year.    If I had the will or desire, I can make any car of any age outside of a Model T (I don't have THAT much will ...) just as powerful, comfortable, and have all the tech the new stuff does, and get pretty close in mileage, too. I prefer SIMPLICITY. The less the vehicle has, the less to fix WHEN it breaks, not IF.   I'm glad you snot-nosed punks don't like them. More for us, plus that keeps the prices from climbing more than they already have.👍
    • Bringing this thread back on topic. I just noticed the incredible lack of bright chrome across the entire new lineup. Even the Denali has tinted the brightwork in the grille and has none elsewhere. None of them have chrome bumpers. As far as I can tell there aren't even chrome mirror caps. I'm curious if this also happens out back? Are there no chrome rear bumpers either? This is quite the departure for GMC.
    • Bringing this thread back on topic. I just noticed the incredible lack of bright chrome across the entire new lineup. Even the Denali has tinted the brightwork in the grille and has none elsewhere. None of them have chrome bumpers. As far as I can tell there aren't even chrome mirror caps. I'm curious if this also happens out back? Are there no chrome rear bumpers either? This is quite the departure for GMC.
    • Bringing this thread back on topic. I just noticed the incredible lack of bright chrome across the entire new lineup. Even the Denali has tinted the brightwork in the grille and has none elsewhere. None of them have chrome bumpers. As far as I can tell there aren't even chrome mirror caps. I'm curious if this also happens out back? Are there no chrome rear bumpers either? This is quite the departure for GMC.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...