Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
The tires on those 20s in the picture are BFG AT2s and are a 124/127 rated tire. Same tire rating as the 3500. I’m keeping my BFGs and 20s and putting them in my 3500. Stock 20” tires are a 121 rating but the AT2s are 124 so they should work no problem on the 3500.
 
Ive read expensively on it and shouldn’t be an issue at all so long as the tire is 124 load rating
 
Note: stock tires are both “E” load range but my understanding is the number that comes after it specifies the tires actual load capacity
The only number that matters is the the load capacity in pounds...load range is just that, a range, change tire size within a load range and the load capacity (in pounds) changes.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

Posted
4 hours ago, cmysstailights said:

She struggled with the hills on 81 and 78 in pa

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
 

Just let it eat man.

Posted
She struggled with the hills on 81 and 78 in pa

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


I've towed there with mine, just as heavy. Most I did was drop a gear or two? I even have 3.73 rears...interstate driving is easy, just sucks fuel like a criminal.

I live just north of Reading, drag a camper and/or a trailer up and down i78, i81, rt322, and i80 probably once a month.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

Posted
I've towed there with mine, just as heavy. Most I did was drop a gear or two? I even have 3.73 rears...interstate driving is easy, just sucks fuel like a criminal.

I live just north of Reading, drag a camper and/or a trailer up and down i78, i81, rt322, and i80 probably once a month.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

Was a awsome trip going to and coming home from bedford. Truck was screaming at 3 to4k pedal almost to the floor. Truck nds a little more ooomph in this 6.0 if ya ask me.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Posted
I've towed there with mine, just as heavy. Most I did was drop a gear or two? I even have 3.73 rears...interstate driving is easy, just sucks fuel like a criminal.

I live just north of Reading, drag a camper and/or a trailer up and down i78, i81, rt322, and i80 probably once a month.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

...c150b28c6e923fc99ee971a6cdfd2a9f.jpg73544914afd9cc5e24c1c8ff80514593.jpg

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Posted
23 hours ago, cmysstailights said:

...c150b28c6e923fc99ee971a6cdfd2a9f.jpg73544914afd9cc5e24c1c8ff80514593.jpg

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
 

Looks low for that truck 

Posted
On 11/11/2017 at 8:01 PM, cmysstailights said:

Was a awsome trip going to and coming home from bedford. Truck was screaming at 3 to4k pedal almost to the floor. Truck nds a little more ooomph in this 6.0 if ya ask me.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
 

5,000+ rpm is screaming, peek power isn't till 4,400rpm...

 

You won't hurt the motor, let it spin and try to keep it in the power band.

  • Like 1
Posted
5,000+ rpm is screaming, peek power isn't till 4,400rpm...
 
You won't hurt the motor, let it spin and try to keep it in the power band.
Has anyone had any luck with a hand held tuner that helped a little. Looking to tune for e85 and 87oct switchable

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Posted
On 11/5/2017 at 1:40 PM, redwngr said:

And the seats (10 way vs 12 way), and the dash display.

 

Gorgeous truck.

Ya, thinking you're right on the DIC display. This beauty does have the 12 way power seats tho'!!

Posted (edited)

Interesting.

 

Order guide ('17) says 2500 SLT gets 2 way power lumbar and 2500 Denali gets 4 way power lumbar, (to get 10 vs 12) and doesn't show 12 way as optional on SLT.

 

2017 HD sierra brochure shows 12 way optional on SLT with the heated and ventilated. 

 

'17 (and '18) Guide shows the same difference between LTZ and High Country (12 way vs 10 way due to 4 way power lumbar vs 2 way)

17 HD silverado brochure breaks out seat detail differently than on sierra, and it shows 4 way lumbar only on HC.

 

 Front up/down   1, 2

 Rear up/down    3, 4

Seat back forward/back   5, 6

Seat frame ahead/back    7, 88

Lumbar firm/soft        9, 10

Lumbar up/down       11, 12

Edited by redwngr
Posted

Towing with a 6.0l !!! If you want to get up the hills and actually use the engines power range. You should be in the 4500-- to 5000 RPM Range while towing heavy up steep hills.  This is where the engine lives and will do its best work.   Its a small block Chevy. Let it eat. 

3000 to 4000 rpm you are right on the limit of fuel knock if you have bad gas and are unaware of it.  Just my 2 cs

 

  • Like 3
Posted
10 hours ago, 2016HD said:

This is where the engine lives and will do its best work.   Its a small block Chevy. Let it eat. 

I agree 100%. Too many people try to lug them like a big block or a diesel. It's an LS based motor...let that sucker scream! 

  • Like 2

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • I had an 88 K1500 with a 5.7 that had those symptoms, I know totally different, it ended up being the ECM. Once you get the fuel system fixed if it still runs lousy you may want to investigate that. it didn't set any codes, stalled ,ran rough at times etc
    • Congratulations Isttype, on your gmc. Really like my 2024 2500hd sle doublecab now with 85,500 miles.  I checked the oil today at 4800 miles since last oil change and barely reading on the stick.  I don't care if GM says it's Acceptable adding a quart every 2000 miles because that is 100% BS, It is not a 1966 Harley Shovelhead! Sounds like it's setting up a future failure like I had with my 1500 6.2l. Other than oil consumption problems, I really like the 6.6l gas and 10 speed is really nice.  Towed a light 4000 pound trailer last week and averaged 14 mpg.  I was pretty impressive that a 7300 pound gas truck did 14mpg towing, Later-
    • Long Term Cold Cycle Limited Testing   Back to the 1990's and XOM's million mile test. Since then there have been others and there will be more. Schaeffer's, AMSOIL to name two. Of these Schaeffer's is the stand alone which I will explain in a bit later.    http://papers.sae.org/600190/:   http://papers.sae.org/850215/:   Up to 75% of  engine wear occurs on cold starts. These two links (above) provide the technical reasons for engine wear. In a nut shell, and by a large margin, cylinder wear is what takes out most motors and even with a pre-oiling system that part of the engine is dry enough on cold starts and cold warm up to pierce Stribeck.   So when you put a motor, or a car, on a dyno for a million miles stopping only for oil changes, (yes fuel is uninterrupted) or break down maintenance, you are depriving the test of the most important part of it's wear cycle. Yes a million is then a pretty easy walk even for a mineral oil under those conditions.    How about cleanliness during the long test cycles? Same thing. Varnishes that stick rings and insulate parts are laid down by repetitive 'heat cycles'. It's the cool down the precipitates the varnishes. These long runs also hinder acidic attack caused by cold start richness and less than optimal cold start ring sealing. They hinder water formation and enhance breathing of the crankcase; the petri dish of acid formation, the first step in sludge formation, amalgamation and precipitation. These motors are also monitored and controlled for water and oil temperatures to within the "normal operating range".      https://www.swri.org/sites/default/files/sequence-iiih-test.pdf Note the test sequence in some boutique oils literature for testing, API IIIH, is not the standard used for the ILSAC G7 testing. Does that mean it is irrelevant? No, not as used. As used as a 'visual guide' it makes it's point. The G7 weighted piston deposit minimum is lower.      Back to Schaeffer's. That was a cyclical test of an engine in fleet service and not a dyno mule and if you saw the video it was not mirror clean but wear was low.    There are oils like BioSyn and other 'Renewable" source oils that taught cleanliness and have proven themselves in fleet testing. Havoline an other example.    The newest ILSAC G-7 test prioritize cleanliness, LSPI mitigation and fuel economy OVER WEAR. In comparison Porsche C30 Specification Verses ILSAC G-7 Specification below:      Some will balk that this graph isn't apples to apples and I will challenge that in that this graph represent the SPECIFICATION and not the any One Oil Performance.   It is absolutely possible to minimize wear, maximize cleanliness and mitigate LSPI etc., It just isn't cheap and currently I see none that are not walking toward profit over performance.     
    • I don't think you will need a split, separate product, etc., the OBD port should be able to deliver everything you need. Since your device would be plugged into it all the time, it wouldn't miss anything.    Hardware in this case will be the easiest part of your project - ELM 327 devices will already deliver all the data you need. Reporting/software is where your advantage/marketability is.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...