Jump to content

5.3L SC vs 6.2L SC

BlackOps

By BlackOps
in Modifications & Accessories

Recommended Posts

BlackOps Enthusiast

BlackOps

Posted
Posted

I've been beating myself up with choosing the 5.3L for fuel economy and wish I had gone with the 6.2L. My previous truck was a 2006 Duramax that I put full exhaust, modified intake, boost controller, programmer, etc. and the truck had ridiculous power. I told myself I would never go back to a gasoline truck, but after not having a truck for several years, my perspective changed. I guess I was just desperate to get a truck. I miss the power that my diesel put out and I know that it could be duplicated with a gasoline engine, but would require a lot more modifications and money.

 

Anyhow, I'm debating on selling/trading the truck in for a 6.2L, but I wanted to get some feedback. If I had future intentions on installing a supercharger on my truck and nothing more than headers, y-pipe, exhaust and a tune, how would each platform compare to each other? I know they say there's no replacement for displacement, but when you get into different compression, combustion chambers, cams, stroke, etc., I'm sure each motor would net different results.

 

Basically what I'm asking is, I know stock for stock the 6.2L has more power and will still be ahead given if each got a full exhaust, but what would be the end result if both got the same exact supercharger? Would it be close in power/performance? I can't decide if I should continue modding what I have or start over with a new truck that has a 6.2L.

theduke Enthusiast

theduke

Posted
Posted

You could add a blower to the 5.3L, but in order to compete with the power of a 6.2L with a blower, it would be recommended to add methanol due to the increase in boost. I'm bias, but I like the idea of starting with the highest hp option, the 6.2L, and boosting it. I've got reliable 600hp (540hp to the ground) and get 13-15 mpg around town and 18-20 mph highway. Not to mention the smile it puts on my face every morning when I start the truck and am greeted with the cam lope.

Willshire Enthusiast

Willshire

Posted
Posted

Are you guys pulling stumps out of the ground? LOL. Twin turbos anyone? truck trend did this to an original 5.3 and got 1300hp. Just sayin. Armageddon Turbo Systems - 200HP out of the box. Up to 500HP with boost controller. Too rich for my Canadian blood but it's out there. well stocked kit. $9k installed

Txjose Senior Enthusiast

Txjose

Posted
Posted

Are you guys pulling stumps out of the ground? LOL. Twin turbos anyone? truck trend did this to an original 5.3 and got 1300hp. Just sayin. Armageddon Turbo Systems - 200HP out of the box. Up to 500HP with boost controller. Too rich for my Canadian blood but it's out there. well stocked kit. $9k installed

Because....... That's why lol

Willshire Enthusiast

Willshire

Posted
Posted

Because....... That's why lol

True. I'd likely bump power to the rig too. BB Tune and an MIT is about all i can muster right now. I'm rebuilding a classic so it gets dibs on the cash the old lady doesn't take LOL

Txjose Senior Enthusiast

Txjose

Posted
Posted

True. I'd likely bump power to the rig too. BB Tune and an MIT is about all i can muster right now. I'm rebuilding a classic so it gets dibs on the cash the old lady doesn't take LOL

Tell me about it.... Having 2 trucks is hard enough i can imagine a classic!!

 

I want it to scare some mustang /camaro owners when they decide to get froggy :D

Txjose Senior Enthusiast

Txjose

Posted
Posted

The whistle of a twin turbo setup will blow their hair back!

Im not doing anything turbo.... This truck is getting a whipple...

 

 

My colorado is getting a 370ci forged 6.0 with a 74/75 precision :D

BlackOps Enthusiast

BlackOps

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Performance/speed/power is in my blood. I've had 700rwhp street cars and low 9 second race cars. I want to have a powerful truck. I was happy with my modded diesel. If I had to guess it was probably a low to mid 13 second truck. That's not bad for a 7000+ lb. truck with a 4.5" lift and 35" tall tires.

 

Anyway, I just want to be able to nail the throttle and it be satisfying. Haha But seriously sometimes I just like that extra little "umph" when I get on the gas. Besides a supercharged daily driver would be totally cool. I'm not looking to be a dyno queen, weekend racer, etc., just looking for a significant gain in power.

My main question and I think some of you have gotten off the subject is, 5.3 vs. 6.2, both with headers, y-pipe, exhaust, supercharger, and a tune. What would be the difference in numbers?

07Softail Senior Enthusiast

07Softail

Posted
Posted

You will be way ahead with the 6.2 maybe 100 hp 100 ft lb torque give or take and not much difference in fuel consumption providing it is tuned well and all parts being equal.

 

RT

Jerry's Denali Enthusiast

Jerry's Denali

Posted
Posted

You will be way ahead with the 6.2 maybe 100 hp 100 ft lb torque give or take and not much difference in fuel consumption providing it is tuned well and all parts being equal.

 

RT

You are 100% correct!

TenofMe Enthusiast

TenofMe

Posted
Posted

Looks like the SC adds about 100hp to each motor. The 5.3 would be making ~500 HP at the crank with the canned tune they give you. I'm sure you could run a little more boost with a more aggressive tune.

 

You're still about 100 hp less than the 6.2 with the same mods though.

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Gkistler
      2015 Sierra Denali L86 cyl 5 misfire at idle

      By Gkistler · Posted

      Hi friends - first time poster. I have a 2015 sierra Denali with 150k miles, I’m the second owner and she’s given me 75k of great service. I run a pulse AFM disable device. Starting Thursday when I exited the freeway after a short local ride it started idling rough, with an obvious misfire shake and was down on low end power.  I got it home and hooked it up to my scannner and found no codes but in live data a pretty bad misfire on cylinder 5. I replaced the coil, plug and wire with all new OE replacements (Delphi gn10165 coil, acdelco wire and 41-168 plug). It’s still behaving the same way after firing the parts cannon at it.   I know cyl 5 is a non AFM cylinder so I am not thinking this is AFM related but I’m kinda at a loss. injector? Bent pushrod? It’s running too well over 1k rpm to suggest those IMO. Has anyone chase this issue before and what was it? Any suggestions? 
    • zibzer2
      Pulsating Noise 4Cyl Mode

      By zibzer2 · Posted

      2017 Silverado L83 5.3l 6speed transmission Hello, not a new member but havent posted in a while and my old signup info isnt working so had to create a new account. anyways, I have an issue with my truck and hope someone can spread some light on whats happening: -when it goes to 4cyl mode it makes a clunk sound (but not when coasting or going downhill) -when in 4 cyl mode and under load it makes a load pulsating sound (not a tick). -goes away completely when in M5 gear or when plugging in an AFM delete. Im guessing it is one of 2 things but im not convinced of either to be honest. 1. lifter stuck in v8 mode 2. torque converter shudder realistically it doesn't seem like the TC as there is no physical vibration , and it never happens in v8 mode. but maybe? and wouldnt a lifter make a sound whether with load or not? any ideas let me know please. thank you!  
    • Chuck FB
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      Which has made me wonder with the various engine failures of a few brands in the last few years, is it sub par materials such as lifters etc causing failures, or bearing clearances on the crank etc or perhaps bad designing of an engine physically or causing too much load on the components due to the hp/torque they can push out of them. Or is the oil viscosity and additive package of current oils or a lack of oil flow by an oil pump not able to supply sufficient oil at idle or under high load at low rpm. Or is it every item I listed that combined together has pushed the limits so far to the left that there is hardly a margin of safety left and add in some fuel dilution and too long of an OCI and premature engine failure is the result ?. 
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      He is not saying that an SAE *W20 will have more viscosity than a *W40 due to MORE VII polymers. He is saying that although multiple *W40 may post in the PDS the same or similar 100 C and 150 C viscosities that the blenders choice of modifier TYPE and AMOUNT to get his chosen base to grade will not give identical real world viscosities in shear and at temperature. All will pass the SII test but not all will pass the 100 C HTHS (unpublished value) testing the blender does and relies on to get the required by law "percentage improvement' referenced to his last great work.    Tis the problem with the lie. Once told others are required to support it. 
    • PunchT37
      Parking Brake - Automatic Engagement Questions

      By PunchT37 · Posted

      I have a `25, 1500 that auto sets on incline. Never knew that at first. I have the electronic shifter. Just think if it didn`t do that? Unlike a mechanical shift that you can muscle out of park, how would you get this thing out? That would be a problem.   What I found out later is, I don`t have to push the button to release. Just put it in gear.   Setting parameters? Don`t know if it`s possible.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...