Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 people said I said fact then offered opinions. The only fact I was stating is there is a reason it's the base engine. People seem to think that's an opinion.

What makes its a base engine? I agree its a base engine, but not because its underpowered, because its cheaper.

You seem to think because its a base engine, that, that means it is underpowered, thats false.
Posted
20 minutes ago, kwOH said:


What makes its a base engine? I agree its a base engine, but not because its underpowered, because its cheaper.

You seem to think because its a base engine, that, that means it is underpowered, thats false.

Base engine is base engine... I dont care if it's cheaper or less powerful. But the lower tow ratings for it prove it's less powerful and underpowered.

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, YukonXL04 said:

Base engine is base engine... I dont care if it's cheaper or less powerful. But the lower tow ratings for it prove it's less powerful and underpowered.

https://my.gm.com/content/dam/gmownercenter/gmna/dynamic/manuals/2015/chevrolet/equinox/CH-CAT-10217126_MY15 US Trailering Guide_122215.pdf

 

Wrong again. Go to page #9. You will find that there are combinations for the 4.3 that out tow some combinations of 5.3. 

 

Again. Reread the name of this thread. You don't have a 4.3. Never owned a 4.3. You have no valid opinion and your facts are in fact are proving to be wrong as well. Find some other thread. 

Edited by Grumpy Bear
  • Like 3
Posted

I love my 14 RCSB 2wd 4.3. I don’t tow, but do haul pretty regularly for work, and for around the house stuff. I live and work in the city, so the RCSB helps with small areas to maneuver. I don’t really “off-road” or drive it much in the winter, so no need for 4 wheel drive. Best of all I get 20mpgs around town all day. It fits my needs to a tee. I have an awd crossover for the wife, kids, travel, and snow.

 

And to add, Im not a small person, so a Colorado was not and option.

 

Posted
10 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

https://my.gm.com/content/dam/gmownercenter/gmna/dynamic/manuals/2015/chevrolet/equinox/CH-CAT-10217126_MY15 US Trailering Guide_122215.pdf

 

Wrong again. Go to page #9. You will find that there are combinations for the 4.3 that out tow some combinations of 5.3. 

 

Again. Reread the name of this thread. You don't have a 4.3. Never owned a 4.3. You have no valid opinion and your facts are in fact are proving to be wrong as well. Find some other thread. 

Some combinations... vs some combinations... that just closes the book huh. Have you driven a 3.08 5.3? It is a dog... so I'm glad your comparing the 4.3 to that. Apples and apples, dog vs dog.

But since yall cant take a little heat, I'll leave yall alone. On with the 4.3 lovers thread!

Posted
Some combinations... vs some combinations... that just closes the book huh. Have you driven a 3.08 5.3? It is a dog... so I'm glad your comparing the 4.3 to that. Apples and apples, dog vs dog.
But since yall cant take a little heat, I'll leave yall alone. On with the 4.3 lovers thread!

A 355 HP truck is a dog that’s just too rich. Some people just like to be a$$holes. Configurations make a big difference anyone with a brain knows that. A 4.3 on E-85 single cap with a 373 gear probably would give a 6.2 a run. It’s preference vs usefulness. Nobody’s wrong, there’s just idiocy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1
Posted
18 minutes ago, KARNUT said:


A 355 HP truck is a dog that’s just too rich. Some people just like to be a$$holes. Configurations make a big difference anyone with a brain knows that. A 4.3 on E-85 single cap with a 373 gear probably would give a 6.2 a run. It’s preference vs usefulness. Nobody’s wrong, there’s just idiocy.
 

You can't reason with trolls KARNUT. 

 

This guy can't even read a thread title. This thread has nothing to do with comparisons.

  • Like 1
Posted

You can't reason with trolls KARNUT. 

 

This guy can't even read a thread title. This thread has nothing to do with comparisons.


Sometimes my panties get in a wad. The only reason I bought V-8s mostly was sound with exhaust. Once I went quite I didn’t care what’s under the hood. They all can accelerate and pass with ease, stock. After all we spend most our time with the CC at speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Posted
3 hours ago, KARNUT said:


A 355 HP truck is a dog that’s just too rich. Some people just like to be a$$holes. Configurations make a big difference anyone with a brain knows that. A 4.3 on E-85 single cap with a 373 gear probably would give a 6.2 a run. It’s preference vs usefulness. Nobody’s wrong, there’s just idiocy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's right it's all in the configuration. And I'm telling you a 5.3 with a 3.08 is a freaking dog. It can have all the power it wants, but without the right gearing it feels gutless.

 

I love how your comparison is a 3.73 single cab on e85. According to the chart provided by grumpy they dont make a 3.73 4.3. And your opting for the most powerful version of a 4.3 being on e85... so your saying on regular gas it's not good enough. Everyone's comparison of 4.3 power is saying on e85... that's got to say something right there.

 

I tried to leave. Yall keep quoting and attacking me personally. My only attack is with the 4.3. 

Posted
That's right it's all in the configuration. And I'm telling you a 5.3 with a 3.08 is a freaking dog. It can have all the power it wants, but without the right gearing it feels gutless.

 

I love how your comparison is a 3.73 single cab on e85. According to the chart provided by grumpy they dont make a 3.73 4.3. And your opting for the most powerful version of a 4.3 being on e85... so your saying on regular gas it's not good enough. Everyone's comparison of 4.3 power is saying on e85... that's got to say something right there.

 

I tried to leave. Yall keep quoting and attacking me personally. My only attack is with the 4.3. 

Gee, I wonder how a 4.3 would stack up against an 04 YukonXL? By,By.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, YukonXL04 said:

That's right it's all in the configuration. And I'm telling you a 5.3 with a 3.08 is a freaking dog. It can have all the power it wants, but without the right gearing it feels gutless.

 

I love how your comparison is a 3.73 single cab on e85. According to the chart provided by grumpy they dont make a 3.73 4.3. And your opting for the most powerful version of a 4.3 being on e85... so your saying on regular gas it's not good enough. Everyone's comparison of 4.3 power is saying on e85... that's got to say something right there.

 

I tried to leave. Yall keep quoting and attacking me personally. My only attack is with the 4.3. 

One more time: 

 

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

 

See that in red? YOUR 4.3? Do you speak and understand English? It's NOT asking you about your opinion. It's asking you about your experience with it and you have none

:wtf:

  • Like 3
Posted

Lol, I'm sure he does this on 5.3 threads as well. Some people just have a need to justify their own choices by putting down others. A bigger is better kind of mentality.

 

On another note, I'd like to reiterate how much I love my 4.3 as it was the best choice for ME and my lifestyle. I drive a 2018 5.3 for work and I honestly wouldn't trade if I had the choice. The difference is minimal to me in day to day driving.

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)

I like my 4.3 but neither it nor the 5.3 on E85 even in a regular cab would touch a stock crew cab 6.2.I dont say this to start a debate but rather because I know the numbers and its not even close.The biggest downside with the V6 is mainly related to configuration because it is the base motor and you cant get them with the 8speed max tow packages.Those packages offer better engine ratios that really wake up these trucks alot.Also if your a tinkerer like myself it doesnt really matter if you have a 1000 hp big block or weedeater for a powertrain because you will always want to do mods and make things your own.Things like the built in throttle delay, sluggish shift pattern, flapper valve exhaust, chevy shake, oil consumption, and annoying cylinder deactivation plagued all the Silverados.Once you remedy most of those niggles they are all different vehicles to drive.

Edited by WHITESSTOWPIG
Posted
1 hour ago, WHITESSTOWPIG said:

I like my 4.3 but neither it nor the 5.3 on E85 even in a regular cab would touch a stock crew cab 6.2.I dont say this to start a debate but rather because I know the numbers and its not even close.The biggest downside with the V6 is mainly related to configuration because it is the base motor and you cant get them with the 8speed max tow packages.Those packages offer better engine ratios that really wake up these trucks alot.Also if your a tinkerer like myself it doesnt really matter if you have a 1000 hp big block or weedeater for a powertrain because you will always want to do mods and make things your own.Things like the built in throttle delay, sluggish shift pattern, flapper valve exhaust, chevy shake, oil consumption, and annoying cylinder deactivation plagued all the Silverados.Once you remedy most of those niggles they are all different vehicles to drive.

You bring up a good point about powertrain configurations.   It was mentioned earlier where in some situations the 4.3 is rated to pull (and carry) more than certain configurations with a 5.3.  I was kicking tires yesterday and came across a 2020 SLE with a 5.3 - 10 speed -3.42 gears.  It was a max tow, of course, and had the tow mirrors.  (Very nice truck!)   GM changed the gear ratio of the max tow when they changed the transmission.  I already have the 3.42 but wonder what my six's tow rating would be with a 10 spd? or 3.73 gears?   GM offers a variety of combinations that will maximize sales while still meeting efficiency targets.  A lot of talk about engine size is really about powertrain. I chuckle when I think of my '85 SuperCab with a longer wheelbase than my current crewcab.  It was a lighter truck but it had 122 hp L6 mated to a 4spd manual with 3.08 gears.  That truck was great on the job or on the highway!  The belief that bigger is better has manufacturers competing to a achieve the higher numbers. . Comments on this thread often reflect a person buying into this type marketing.  We sometimes like to muddy the waters by justifying a want as a need.

  • Thanks 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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,759
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    DM22
    Newest Member
    DM22
    Joined
  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,640 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.
    • That makes sense, and I agree with most of that.   I think the product would need both: 1. a default powertrain template, so it is useful out of the box; 2. user-selected priority parameters, so the owner or shop can choose what they want to see first.   Different users are going to care about different things. One owner may care about oil pressure and voltage. Another may care about misfire trend, AFM/DFM behavior, or U-codes. A shop may want communication events and repeatability first. Your baseline point is probably the most important one. Raw data is not very useful unless the report can show what normal looked like for that vehicle under similar conditions.   The way I would think about it is: - start with a basic known-good baseline - learn normal behavior for that specific vehicle over time - allow the event to be overlaid against baseline - show whether the event was a one-time spike or a repeatable pattern - provide a simple severity level, but with clear limits on what that severity means   For example, early severity could be something like: - Info: event captured, no obvious abnormal pattern - Watch: value moved outside baseline, but not repeated - Warning: repeatable abnormal pattern under similar conditions - Critical: communication loss, voltage drop, bus-off, reset, or severe repeated event   I would not want the first version to say “replace this part.” That would be overclaiming unless there is repair-confirmed data behind it. It would be more honest to say “this pattern deserves inspection.”   On the OBD port question, I think OBD absolutely has a role. OBD is probably the right place for: - DTCs - freeze frame - VIN - calibration information - normal scan-tool parameters - Mode 6 / enhanced diagnostic data if available The reason I am still looking at an ECM-side recorder is that the failure may happen before anyone connects a scan tool. If the owner plugs in a scanner after the event, the pre-event evidence may already be gone unless the ECU happened to save it. So I do not see this as “OBD versus ECM-side.” I see it more like: - ECM-side recorder: always armed, rolling buffer, event evidence - OBD/DLC companion: DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration, normal scan data - phone/cloud: status, notes, upload, report generation, notifications   I agree that phone connection and push notifications would be useful. I just would not want the phone or cloud connection to be required for capture. The recorder should save the event locally even if the phone is not connected. The phone should help with event marking, download, notes, upload, alerts, and report viewing.   For a default GM V8 event report, would this list make sense? - RPM - calculated load / MAP - throttle position - vehicle speed - gear / torque converter state if available - coolant temperature - oil pressure - oil temperature if available - battery voltage - commanded AFM/DFM state if available - actual AFM/DFM state if available - misfire counters / roughness by cylinder if available - fuel trims - relevant U-codes / communication events - bus-off / lost periodic message / module reset / voltage drop events Which of those would you remove, and what would you add?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...