Jump to content

2014 Silverado 0-60 video

stevo936

Recommended Posts

Prokopchuk_9 Senior Enthusiast

Prokopchuk_9

Posted
Posted
I have disabled stabilitrac (gmt900) and am curious as to how it isn't fully disabled. I haven't had it inhibit my driving in any way, and I've given it plenty of reasons to try.

 

Ya. You can turn it completely off with EFI Live I'm 95% sure. It's part of the traction control/stability control/torque management tables.

  • Replies 87
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Prokopchuk_9 Senior Enthusiast

Prokopchuk_9

Posted
Posted
It's a 6000 lb 4 wheel drive stock pick up. You want blistering 0-60 buy a Vette.

I want the best of both worlds.

 

Pretty sure we do have the best of both worlds :)

 

Those are pathetic numbers IMO, looks like if you want anything but a slow turd stay away from the 5.3 and go for the 13' non afm 6.2. Gm's are going to have the slowest standard equipped pickup this time. Pretty sure the ford 5.0 is quicker, tundra is quicker for sure and the hemi will walk all over the 5.3 as well. We won't talk about the ego-boost either, pretty close race for the ego/6.2 as well...GM has got to step it up!!!!!!!!!

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted
Pretty sure we do have the best of both worlds :)

 

Those are pathetic numbers IMO, looks like if you want anything but a slow turd stay away from the 5.3 and go for the 13' non afm 6.2. Gm's are going to have the slowest standard equipped pickup this time. Pretty sure the ford 5.0 is quicker, tundra is quicker for sure and the hemi will walk all over the 5.3 as well. We won't talk about the ego-boost either, pretty close race for the ego/6.2 as well...GM has got to step it up!!!!!!!!!

 

That video is crap and what will really matter is when we can see the numbers from a 3.73 equipped truck. And I bet on E85 and even 3.42s the 5.3 would walk most of those trucks.

Prokopchuk_9 Senior Enthusiast

Prokopchuk_9

Posted
Posted

I've been watching some videos now, from what I can see something is not fitting. Something isn't right about how slow they seem, it's really sad GM can get people to pay tht much money for something that competitors walk all over. Check this out. A maggy charged 14' 5.3 running high 13's!?!?!?!?? That is weaaaaak. A tuned ego-boost would beat it, even a tuned 6.2 would beat it. 3:08 or 3:73 it's still slow.

 

 

Prokopchuk_9 Senior Enthusiast

Prokopchuk_9

Posted
Posted
That video is crap and what will really matter is when we can see the numbers from a 3.73 equipped truck. And I bet on E85 and even 3.42s the 5.3 would walk most of those trucks.

 

I highly doubt it's gonna "walk" anything. Maybe I'm wrong but, I've been watchin plenty of vids now and they don't seem to be speed demon trucks that's for damn sure. I wonder what the "real world" economy is like....

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted

I highly doubt it's gonna "walk" anything. Maybe I'm wrong but, I've been watchin plenty of vids now and they don't seem to be speed demon trucks that's for damn sure. I wonder what the "real world" economy is like....

 

And I bet none of those trucks run E85, which is what I run so long as I'm not headed out of state where finding it can be a hassle now. Nevermind that most of the videos, if not all of them are crew cabs and in the case of the Lingenfelter one, I think its an LTZ to boot so you're talking the heaviest possible configuration. And regardless, if you're looking to build a truck for power, anything other than GM is a waste of time and money. The EcoBoost has lots of promise from just a tune but frankly it could run 10s and I'd still be somewhat disinterested due to the exhaust note, or lack thereof. And unless the Ram tuners are absolute magic, I've never seen their 5-speed (it isn't really a six speed) shift properly in all the different variations I've driven. The fact that these trucks share engine design with the Vette (and likely the next Camaro) means there will always be better parts/tuning available for them. And in the end, the only other brand I'd ever consider would be the Ford with the 5.0- the Tundra was ugly and it was only made worse with the 2014 design and the Ram has the 5-speed in most of the models I'd be interested in and unless their web builder is wrong, you can't get a 5.7 at all in the SLT mid line trim. The 8-speed works nice in other models but for me to consider it they need to put a real shifter in there. The wonky console shifter they have in the 300 and Charger is horrid and I can't imagine the knob in the Ram is at all acceptable. Just fixing crap that isn't broken.

Prokopchuk_9 Senior Enthusiast

Prokopchuk_9

Posted
Posted

And I bet none of those trucks run E85, which is what I run so long as I'm not headed out of state where finding it can be a hassle now. Nevermind that most of the videos, if not all of them are crew cabs and in the case of the Lingenfelter one, I think its an LTZ to boot so you're talking the heaviest possible configuration. And regardless, if you're looking to build a truck for power, anything other than GM is a waste of time and money. The EcoBoost has lots of promise from just a tune but frankly it could run 10s and I'd still be somewhat disinterested due to the exhaust note, or lack thereof. And unless the Ram tuners are absolute magic, I've never seen their 5-speed (it isn't really a six speed) shift properly in all the different variations I've driven. The fact that these trucks share engine design with the Vette (and likely the next Camaro) means there will always be better parts/tuning available for them. And in the end, the only other brand I'd ever consider would be the Ford with the 5.0- the Tundra was ugly and it was only made worse with the 2014 design and the Ram has the 5-speed in most of the models I'd be interested in and unless their web builder is wrong, you can't get a 5.7 at all in the SLT mid line trim. The 8-speed works nice in other models but for me to consider it they need to put a real shifter in there. The wonky console shifter they have in the 300 and Charger is horrid and I can't imagine the knob in the Ram is at all acceptable. Just fixing crap that isn't broken.

i dont know anything about e85 bud, but i doubt its gonna magically take tenths off of a 1/4 time.

 

FWIW ive seen some guys lay down some pretty damn quick times with "hemifever" tunes, im just saying...i know its a truck dont get me wrong. but its hard to take in especially watching the other manufacturers come out with some really decent running engines and GM not really takin the bull by the horn at all in the engine depo. You are right tho mike, their is NO comparison when it comes to aftermarket world...

 

ill be sticking with my duramax for awhile :thumbs:

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted
And I bet none of those trucks run E85, which is what I run so long as I'm not headed out of state where finding it can be a hassle now. Nevermind that most of the videos, if not all of them are crew cabs and in the case of the Lingenfelter one, I think its an LTZ to boot so you're talking the heaviest possible configuration. And regardless, if you're looking to build a truck for power, anything other than GM is a waste of time and money. The EcoBoost has lots of promise from just a tune but frankly it could run 10s and I'd still be somewhat disinterested due to the exhaust note, or lack thereof. And unless the Ram tuners are absolute magic, I've never seen their 5-speed (it isn't really a six speed) shift properly in all the different variations I've driven. The fact that these trucks share engine design with the Vette (and likely the next Camaro) means there will always be better parts/tuning available for them. And in the end, the only other brand I'd ever consider would be the Ford with the 5.0- the Tundra was ugly and it was only made worse with the 2014 design and the Ram has the 5-speed in most of the models I'd be interested in and unless their web builder is wrong, you can't get a 5.7 at all in the SLT mid line trim. The 8-speed works nice in other models but for me to consider it they need to put a real shifter in there. The wonky console shifter they have in the 300 and Charger is horrid and I can't imagine the knob in the Ram is at all acceptable. Just fixing crap that isn't broken.

i dont know anything about e85 bud, but i doubt its gonna magically take tenths off of a 1/4 time.

 

FWIW ive seen some guys lay down some pretty damn quick times with "hemifever" tunes, im just saying...i know its a truck dont get me wrong. but its hard to take in especially watching the other manufacturers come out with some really decent running engines and GM not really takin the bull by the horn at all in the engine depo. You are right tho mike, their is NO comparison when it comes to aftermarket world...

 

ill be sticking with my duramax for awhile :thumbs:

 

E85 takes HP from 355 to 380 and tq to over 400 lb-ft. It should make a good difference I'd think.

Prokopchuk_9 Senior Enthusiast

Prokopchuk_9

Posted
Posted

E85 takes HP from 355 to 380 and tq to over 400 lb-ft. It should make a good difference I'd think.

LOL so maybe 15 RWHP, thats barely a tenth in the 1/4 mike.....

 

:nopity:

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted

True but it gets to a point where power numbers aren't as important as delivery. The below photo is from the test Car & Driver did. The order is 5.3 Chevy, EB Ford and 5.7 Ram. The Ram did fairly poorly. asuvasuq.jpg

Prokopchuk_9 Senior Enthusiast

Prokopchuk_9

Posted
Posted

i wonder how accurate those numbers are...i mean like what elevation, ambient temp, what models they used blah blah blah. interesting how heavy the dodge is, only about 500 pounds from my duramax. My truck is about 6600 pounnds with half a tank and me in it at the dump i go to on the scale. that ford is a heavy pig too my god.

 

is that "e85" numbers?

Prokopchuk_9 Senior Enthusiast

Prokopchuk_9

Posted
Posted

the curb weight on a new Crew cab short box 4x4 duramax 2500 is 5950 lbs. crazy that a half ton weighs the same!! no wonder they get poop for mileage.

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted
i wonder how accurate those numbers are...i mean like what elevation, ambient temp, what models they used blah blah blah. interesting how heavy the dodge is, only about 500 pounds from my duramax. My truck is about 6600 pounnds with half a tank and me in it at the dump i go to on the scale. that ford is a heavy pig too my god.

 

is that "e85" numbers?

 

 

Those aren't E85, the only E85 testing I'm aware of is Lingenfelter. Testing was done in south Texas but I think all the magazines "correct" times to a standard condition set so a car tested at sea level on a cool dry day can be compared to one tested on a hot humid day in Colorado.

 

Rams and Fords run very heavy and even worse is Rams don't have the GVW to deal with it. I think the GVW for that truck was 6800 lbs so the payload numbers suck. All three were loaded- LTZ Chevy, Lariat Ford and Laramie Longhorn Ram.

DanMan_S Enthusiast

DanMan_S

Posted
Posted

LOL so maybe 15 RWHP, thats barely a tenth in the 1/4 mike.....

 

:nopity:

For reference, the difference in the standard tune to the e85 tune was roughly 1/2 second in the 0 - 60 run and roughly 1/2 second in the 1/4 mile as well

 

http://www.gmhightechperformance.com/tech/engines/1306_2014_silverado_solid_baseline/

 

http://gmauthority.com/blog/2013/07/lingenfelter-performance-puts-the-2014-silverado-on-the-dyno-with-video/

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Another JR
      2 speed transfer case optional now?

      By Another JR · Posted

      4 low is really nice on steep boat ramps. 
    • Chuck FB
      Gas Prices

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      Interesting, I suspect I would have fueled up in Lee Vining as the day prior I would have filled up either in Laughlin or near there and maybe again before I entered Death Valley and once out the other side late that evening as I kept on driving into the night up near Lee Vining. Next morning I most likely fueled up in LV before heading over Tioga Pass into ( as I refer to it as "Yose .... Mite" 😁 ). And again that was 19 years ago but the price then must not have jumped out at me like the 5 bill a gallon theme of nutty cult hippy country Big Sir or head so far up their rear Aspen. I'd be curious to know where the highest prices are in the lower 48, I probably would not be far off to guess somewhere in Cali forn ie. Coldfoot and Prudhoe bay may have those prices beat but that is a whole other world up there and when prices are more normal elsewhere that is about what they can be up there I believe in no mans land. Anyway interesting that the 395 corridor is hosing people and the thing is, its tourist season and its not like there are a lot of competition options when driving up that highway from what I could see. Yup, big ole Boaterhomes and various other RV's ahead and behind me at the Yosemite entrance gate and they have to get their fuel somewhere.  
    • Atlas
      Gas Prices

      By Atlas · Posted

      Those can be high, as well as the big California cities. The ones that will pop your eyes out are the 395 corridor on the Eastern side of the Sierra Nevadas. Lee Vining, $7.19 for regular and $8.89 for diesel is what the Google said right now.
    • newdude
      2020 Trailboss 6.2 replacement

      By newdude · Posted

      Correct.  2019-2021 model years are serviced by a different p/n.  19420611.  Recall 2021s use 19420611.   The recall engines 2022-2024 model years are serviced with 12740076.     The difference between 19420611 and 12740076 is GM changed injector size for 2022.  The injectors are smaller on 12740076 with smaller injector bores in the cylinder heads to match the smaller injectors.  So you can't install a 19420611 in a 2022-2024, and you can't install a 12740076 in a 2019-2021.     Both engines are the replacement engine p/ns that are in the L87 recall.  So both of these are the updated engines.     Here's a version of the L87 recall with the p/ns for all the parts needed.    RCRIT-25V274-7075.pdf   Note it shows 19420611 and 12740076 with an asterisk to a footnote "Use the VIN and the GM Electronic Parts Catalog (EPC) to determine which part to order if two or more part numbers are listed for the same part, as it may vary by vehicle options."    
    • 2017Z
      2020 Trailboss 6.2 replacement

      By 2017Z · Posted

      Looking for advice from this group. Took my flawless 2020 6.2 TB to an unnamed shop for routine rear brakes and oil change. Tech forgot to put oil back in after the full service and needles to say, destroyed my engine.  It’s all on their shop video so they are responsible.   I had my Chevy dealer do the analysis and they confirmed its compromised and said engine replacement. The manager said they only get GM reman engines from GM with full 3 yr warranty and the one they would put in is not same as what’s they are swapping out on 21-25 for recall.    I am looking for advice why that would be a different engine because obviously I had the good 6.2 year and replacing it has my concerns with that recall for 21-15   Also what’s the pros and cons of accepting the engine swap vs telling the shop that bricked the truck to pay up so I buy a new truck. I’m concerned about stigma resale eventually if I just decide to get rid of it after the swap or other issues showing up after the swap out.  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...