5.3 versus 6.2

[KARNUT]

I never said better, just bang for the buck better and more choice. I'm enjoying this too. Especially since I have 20 k in savings I can spend on my truck. If I want .

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ventilator]

We were all young and dumb once, thankfully it does wear off with time.

 

Race truck = Hilarious!

[Capridec30]

I think your a bit off on supercharger numbers. Mine for the SS was about $7k and yes I even paid them $500 to install it at SLP in NJ. I'm sure it's around the same price for a truck.

 

My High Country is around $52-54k right now. I have had the fast toys in the past but I will tell you this. I much prefer the comfort nowadays and quiet. Now, I have upgraded to the 6.2l and I'm sure I will enjoy it and you guys have been very helpful with fuel numbers, thanks. It's still def not needed and yes These days a smart person can care about fuel mileage in a truck because there are options.

[nomadicdogg]

I think your a bit off on supercharger numbers. Mine for the SS was about $7k and yes I even paid them $500 to install it at SLP in NJ. I'm sure it's around the same price for a truck.

 

My High Country is around $52-54k right now. I have had the fast toys in the past but I will tell you this. I much prefer the comfort nowadays and quiet. Now, I have upgraded to the 6.2l and I'm sure I will enjoy it and you guys have been very helpful with fuel numbers, thanks. It's still def not needed and yes These days a smart person can care about fuel mileage in a truck because there are options.

Ive never done one, but my performance shop was doing magnuson "sp" for 2000-2500 "I think" but I very well could be off on that.

as for sound... these trucks are silent inside. even at wot it was hard to hear the engine in mine. I added a mild exhaust similar to what my camaro was.. I dont want to hear it 24-7 but when Im on it, I want to know

 

[Capridec30]

Yeah my borla atak exhaust was very mild at idle and cruising. Only heard it at WOT. Chevy makes a damn good cabin. Nice and quiet. Inside Camaro was very quiet. My specific super charger was a TVS2300 roots type charger.

[Aaron1085]

Would love a "stock" rumble, but always a hit hesitant to change up my quiet and smooth $50k truck.....

[nomadicdogg]

Would love a "stock" rumble, but always a hit hesitant to change up my quiet and smooth $50k truck.....

Aaron,

I was afraid to do mine for the same reason.. but I found a very mild set up. cant hear it at hwy cruising.. only when your on it... no drone. wind from a window down is louder.. but has a nice deep rich sound

they are out there... just choose wisely

I went ignorant on my 2007 suburban.. it was LOUD.. I liked it, until I towed my trailer..... that was bad.

Did a nice set up on my camaro, same as the truck now. very happy

[bass mechanic]

i just have a flow master 1 in 2 out, and i love the sound, can't hardly hear it at all on the highway, no drone at all, but lets you know you got something mean under the hood when you lay on it.

also i noticed at my elevation of 6500 feet its not as loud as it is at sea level. but even so its not annoying.

[jcchevy]

I'm not going to discount the E 85 which makes it 40.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Ok (not arguing just intriguing the logic of E85 as you insist), then you will have to account for the negative fuel milage being suffered which =$more money per MPG which should be compared just as well. You may be only 40 away from the big 6.2L but while you get 12-15mpg we( those with 6.2L) will get our 17-21mpg with 40 more HP and still be cheaper using the "recommended, but not required" 91 octane. But you are also saving the planet so that is a plus for the 5.3L as well which I am all for.

 

For others thinking about getting the 5.3 and use E85, here is an excellent write up with hard facts about E85 vs gasoline comparison by trusted company (edmunds). Gas netted 18.3mpg average while E85 netted 13.5mpg.

 

http://www.edmunds.com/fuel-economy/e85-vs-gasoline-comparison-test.html

[KARNUT]

Ok (not arguing just intriguing the logic of E85 as you insist), then you will have to account for the negative fuel milage being suffered which =$more money per MPG which should be compared just as well. You may be only 40 away from the big 6.2L but while you get 12-15mpg we( those with 6.2L) will get our 17-21mpg with 40 more HP and still be cheaper using the "recommended, but not required" 91 octane. But you are also saving the planet so that is a plus for the 5.3L as well which I am all for.

 

For others thinking about getting the 5.3 and use E85, here is an excellent write up with hard facts about E85 vs gasoline comparison by trusted company (edmunds). Gas netted 18.3mpg average while E85 netted 13.5mpg.

 

http://www.edmunds.com/fuel-economy/e85-vs-gasoline-comparison-test.html

Some respected tuners on here have noted that there is quite a bit of KR on reg. gas, I felt improvement on 93 gas. I was slow to try E85 till I felt the improvement with 93. So with the much cheaper price of E85 over 93 and more octane its all good. I went from 16 to 14 MPG in town 20 to 19 at 70 MPH on HWY, 17 MPH at 79 MPH. At the same time the truck is breaking in to so this thing runs good. I came out of and still have a real clean 600hp 92 Chevy truck as a daily driver I only drive 24 miles a day now, so I was able to drive my toys more. So the 14 GMC doesn't disappoint. The only thing I think about now is turbo, Supercharger, gear with Gear Vender or just leave it alone. That's an old article, different ball game with the 14s.

[RobZ71LM7]

I would've loved the 6.2, but it's a huge premium over my 5.3 equipped LT. It's a shame GM wants to make the people that use their trucks hard pay for luxury upgrades. If you're already getting an LTZ it's a no brainer-buy the 6.2.

 

I'm planning to throw a Magnuson on my 5.3 in 3 years when the warranty runs out.

[patriot]

I would've loved the 6.2, but it's a huge premium over my 5.3 equipped LT. It's a shame GM wants to make the people that use their trucks hard pay for luxury upgrades. If you're already getting an LTZ it's a no brainer-buy the 6.2.

 

I'm planning to throw a Magnuson on my 5.3 in 3 years when the warranty runs out.

Do it now. The better manufacturers offer a warranty.

[KARNUT]

I would've loved the 6.2, but it's a huge premium over my 5.3 equipped LT. It's a shame GM wants to make the people that use their trucks hard pay for luxury upgrades. If you're already getting an LTZ it's a no brainer-buy the 6.2.

 

I'm planning to throw a Magnuson on my 5.3 in 3 years when the warranty runs out.

I really don't want to start another 5.3 verses 6.2 debate but im noticing only a 57 hp differents in blown engines on some tuner sites and they offer warranty. That would be Hennessey for one, and at the crank. 500 for the 5.3, 557 for the 6.2.

[Roidz]

Not sure where else to put this question and is probably been answered somewhere but I haven't seen it.

 

I went and test drove a Sierra slt on Saturday and salesman said you can only get the 6.2 in the Denali. Is that right? I know you can only get it in the higher models, but I didn't know it was only the Denali.

[Newm]

Not sure where else to put this question and is probably been answered somewhere but I haven't seen it.

 

I went and test drove a Sierra slt on Saturday and salesman said you can only get the 6.2 in the Denali. Is that right? I know you can only get it in the higher models, but I didn't know it was only the Denali.

 

You can get it in the SLT as well not just the Denali. Sounds like the salesman was trying to put you in a Denali.