Jump to content

How is your 4.3L EcoTec3 V6 Engine working out for ya?

The4thgearkid
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 164
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

corwest
corwest

Couldn't be more true. Most people who speak poorly of things on forums go searching for a place to speak that way. It's very rare you find people who are completely satisfied who go looking for a pla

Brian S.
Brian S.

I had the 4.3l with 4wd/3.42 gears Xcab last year, now have the 5.3l with 4wd/3.42 gears Xcab and agree with what you say.   In normal driving, the 4.3 and 5.3 drive largely the same. The difference

KARNUT
KARNUT

Unlike getting the 6.2 you can get the 5.3 across the board with very little upgrade cost. Then you factor in the added HP can go up to 380 on e-85 it's a no brainier. I have nothing against V6s I hav

Posted Images

corwest Enthusiast

corwest

Posted
Posted (edited)

Better than my gmt900 5.3 V8. Never been one for the smaller motors in full size trucks but this thing exceeds all my expectations for a V6.

Edited by corwest
  • Like 1
The4thgearkid Enthusiast

The4thgearkid

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Better than my gmt900 5.3 V8. Never been one for the smaller motors in full size trucks but this thing exceeds all my expectations for a V6.

That's good to hear. Bad thing is about the forums is you read about an issue and then you might start looking for it. I am on my third Harley and stopped reading the boards because those make all kinds of noises...lol. Just looking to see how people felt about it. I know when I got into a 2014 and drove it I was very impressed but waited a year bought a 2015. My last V8 was a 2007 f150. I am also impressed with this engine,

corwest Enthusiast

corwest

Posted
Posted (edited)

Couldn't be more true. Most people who speak poorly of things on forums go searching for a place to speak that way. It's very rare you find people who are completely satisfied who go looking for a place to tell people how happy they are. Of course this motor is not a V8 and of course it isn't as powerful as one but it is lightyears ahead of what I pictured for a V6 in a half ton and for that it gets my vote.

Edited by corwest
  • Like 3
arkenzo Enthusiast

arkenzo

Posted
Posted

I've got about 26,000 miles on my 4.3 and have been very pleased with the performance and towing so far that I have done with it.

 

I wouldn't pay much more for the 5.3, however I do regret not getting the 6.2L, that motor is BEAST

Brian S. Enthusiast

Brian S.

Posted
Posted

I had a 2014 4.3l 4WD LT Z71 Silverado with the All Star pack last year and think it's a good engine, but I did have one problem with it.

 

I tow a 2500lb boat at least weekly for half the year. The engine has enough power to easily tow that much weight, but there is no external transmission oil cooler on that model. I asked the dealer I bought it from to install one, and they refused, stating there was no part for it and that they did not recommend I add an aftermarket part.

 

I couldn't get what I wanted so I bought a 2015 5.3l LT Z71 Sierra with Value Pack with an external cooler. Probably overkill for something that likely wouldn't have been a problem, but I lost a year of miles on the truck, added a year of payments at $12/mo higher, so it wasn't a big deal.

 

Other than the transmission cooler, I liked the 4.3l a lot. It drove a lot like my three previous 5.3l Silverados, and even very close on the towing. That's amazing for a NA V6 in my opinion, I'm more impressed by this than the Ecoboost.

 

From what I can tell the 4.3l gets 1-2mpg better than the 5.3l.

  • Like 1
The4thgearkid Enthusiast

The4thgearkid

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well I test drove one right when they hit the lot in 2014, regular cab, and I couldn't believe it, I couldn't believe it was a v6. I waited a year and found a double cab, I don't haul a lot, I just have always drove trucks and dint need a 4x4. I wanted a WT, didn't want all the bells and whistles... Heck I was upset I couldn't get crank windows. But what I want and had to have was the G80 locker, two sand bags in the back and snow is no problem this truck is straight up awesome.

 

This engine is very nice, I couldn't be happier with the engines power gas mileage. I have had no remorse buying this truck...

  • Thanks 1
Imcrazy Senior Enthusiast

Imcrazy

Posted
Posted

I've got 19500 or so on mine, its a 4x4 with a 3.42 rear end and I'm very pleased with it.

  • Like 1
wing98 Enthusiast

wing98

Posted
Posted

I have 14000 on mine best 4.3 I have ever owned very pleased

  • Like 1
Perseus Enthusiast

Perseus

Posted
Posted

7000 miles on mine. Love everything. Really want to try towing with it. Just don't want to go overboard. Would like to trailer my Mustang to the track with it and maybe a travel trailer see how it does

Also if anyone has real world figures on level kit and larger tires, I'm interested in mall crawling

MD Chevy Enthusiast

MD Chevy

Posted
Posted

16000 miles on mine. Have towed between 3000-3500 and it did it very well. Worst tank of gas has been 15.3 (towing in western Maryland mountains) and my best has been 22 (running 75 going to Disney). For everyday driving not much difference between it and my brothers 14 CC 5.3. When he steps on his thats the difference. Not enough for me to worry about though...

  • Like 2
Brian S. Enthusiast

Brian S.

Posted
Posted

16000 miles on mine. Have towed between 3000-3500 and it did it very well. Worst tank of gas has been 15.3 (towing in western Maryland mountains) and my best has been 22 (running 75 going to Disney). For everyday driving not much difference between it and my brothers 14 CC 5.3. When he steps on his thats the difference. Not enough for me to worry about though...

I had the 4.3l with 4wd/3.42 gears Xcab last year, now have the 5.3l with 4wd/3.42 gears Xcab and agree with what you say.

 

In normal driving, the 4.3 and 5.3 drive largely the same. The difference is when you put the pedal on the floor because that's when you tap into the extra horsepower and torque.

 

The 4.3l with 3.42 gears is only 1/2 second slower 0-60mph than the 5.3l with the standard 3.08 gears, the 4.3l moves the truck around very well.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Perseus Enthusiast

Perseus

Posted
Posted

16000 miles on mine. Have towed between 3000-3500 and it did it very well. Worst tank of gas has been 15.3 (towing in western Maryland mountains) and my best has been 22 (running 75 going to Disney). For everyday driving not much difference between it and my brothers 14 CC 5.3. When he steps on his thats the difference. Not enough for me to worry about though...

My car weighs about 3400 lbs I figure 1,000 for the trailer. And I'm looking at 20 ft pull behinds. Roughly 3500-4200 dry weight I wonder if I'm expecting to much or not
MD Chevy Enthusiast

MD Chevy

Posted
Posted

My car weighs about 3400 lbs I figure 1,000 for the trailer. And I'm looking at 20 ft pull behinds. Roughly 3500-4200 dry weight I wonder if I'm expecting to much or not

I know my truck 4x4 double cab 3:42's had no problem pulling what I put behind it. I was able to maintain 67 mph going up mountains right at 3800 rpm. I could've gained speed if I wanted to. Truthfully I would have zero problems pulling 6000 pounds. I would take it slower so I could stop easier. This new 4.3, while not a V8, is a very solid performer. You will be just fine with that weight!

  • Like 1

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Matt Parker
      Clunk when putting truck into drive and reverse.

      By Matt Parker · Posted

      I have a 2000 Silverado 1500 LS, whenever I put it into reverse and also in drive it clunks, the truck also feels sluggish when driving. Any advice/ideas ?
    • richard wysong
      Needing this part.

      By richard wysong · Posted

      Looks like it's riveted to me. What is wrong with that 1? Welcome to the Forum!
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Missing pieces of the Assembly   Detergency vs Solvency   Not the same thing. Detergency is the mechanism that surrounds solid particulates preventing amalgamation. Usually accompanied by a Dispersant whose job it is to keep those encapsulated particles in Suspension. Solvency keeps things that can be dissolved in solution.    Salt is a solid that can be dissolved. Pepper is a solid that cannot be dissolved. A detergent/dispersant is effective on pepper but a solvent is more effective on salt. As long as the solids remain in either state, dissolved or dispersed then they can be be removed with the oil upon change.    How many wranglers does it take to herd cats? Depends on how many cats your herding. How much sponge does it take to soak up water? How much water is there to soak up? Point is most oil blends start with some herding ability and next to zero sponge and recently even fewer wranglers are being sent to do the same job.    So you start with a dozen cowboys and zero cows but at the drive progresses you pick up cows along the way, but not cowboys. At some point you have more cows that the wranglers can handle and some leave the herd. Deposits. And the API has an acceptable number of cows they are willing to let loose. In the ideal world zero is the right number for he rancher but to the butcher....a few lost is fine. This cow is beat to death. Let's move on....   Solvency isn't something oils on the Walmart shelf care about AT ALL. Problem is, you motor does. Fuels driven varnish sticks rings and only a solvent can keep them in check. The bet is that the solids driven portion that plug the expander rings and the oil drain backs and VVT screens and AFM screens will be an issue long before varnish is. Not that it wont be but if they market well enough the consumer can be kept ignorant enough to either believe it is "normal" (A quart in 1 or 2K is normal) OR is kept at bay longer than the first owner is likely to hang on to the unit. Solvency cost money.    Now the OEM's have John Q. Public buffaloed into the belief that the number cows accumulated along the trail is a known and predictable CONSTANT. It isn't. Nor is the rate at which they crossed paths with them. Only the number of wrangles is constant. Or was. Each new generation of oil sees fewer and fewer of them.    So what happens when the number of cowboys is lower (lower TBN) with each seasons trail but the trial is longer (OCI) and the number of cows along that trail continues increase? (Conditions that promote deposits).    For awhile the blenders were on to something. Better bases are harder to degrade (fewer cows) but that was overtaken by a longer trail (OCI) and improved breeding (More cows) while continuing to reduce the cowboy staffing levels (TBN/Aniline #).    Marketing has been successful. We've fired most of the staff, cows breed line bunnies, the trail is ten times longer and we've convinced the boss his ranch is in better shape that it ever was.    That kids is just the cleaning side. The side few pay attention to.     
    • davester
      Needing this part.

      By davester · Posted

      hit a junkyard.
    • Z45
      PF63 Oil Filters Going Away?

      By Z45 · Posted

      Mann+Hummel since 1941 per their web site 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...