Jump to content
  • Sign up for FREE! Become a GM-Trucks.com Member Today!

    In 20 seconds you can become part of the worlds largest and oldest community discussing General Motors, Chevrolet and GMC branded pickups, crossovers, and SUVs. From buying research to owner support, join 1.5 MILLION GM Truck Enthusiasts every month who use GM-Trucks.com as a daily part of their ownership experience. 

Sign in to follow this  
Jon A

6.2 Dyno with Common Bolt-ons

Recommended Posts

That is a pretty significant increase with just bolt on's, impressive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish there was someone near St. Louis that did dyno tuning like this. I'd love to tune my truck but don't want it done remotely based off of what my parameters "should" be running at.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What made you decide to go with 1 3/4 vs 1 7/8 headers. Thanks for posting the dyno numbers, wish I could see a comparison to a set of 1 7/8 I'm trying to decide what to go with for my other wise stock 2011 6.2 I am running a black bear tune

Edited by Crobinson16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish there was someone near St. Louis that did dyno tuning like this. I'd love to tune my truck but don't want it done remotely based off of what my parameters "should" be running at.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I know you posted this a while back....If you would like to pm me I should be able to get you a couple names of people locally that can potentially help you if your still interested.

 

What made you decide to go with 1 3/4 vs 1 7/8 headers. Thanks for posting the dyno numbers, wish I could see a comparison to a set of 1 7/8 I'm trying to decide what to go with for my other wise stock 2011 6.2 I am running a black bear tune

 

There isn't much difference with the two, the 1 3/4 will give a little bit more low/mid range which is what I would consider more usable with this application (truck).....if this were a car with an LS powered 6.2 like a corvette or camaro it would be 1 7/8 every time as there isn't enough of a difference not to take advantage of the few extra hp/tq in the mid/upper rpm's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I know you posted this a while back....If you would like to pm me I should be able to get you a couple names of people locally that can potentially help you if your still interested.

As long as you don't tell me Shane Hinds or PBJ I'm all ears.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as you don't tell me Shane Hinds or PBJ I'm all ears.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I hear ya there!!

 

Dave Steck did all my tuning in the past, I'm sure your aware that he moved to TX but I know he offers remote tuning as long as the person has access to HP Tuners or knows someone that does.

 

There is a local guy named Jake Batz that is a bit of an unknown, he is good with NA applications but I'm not sure if he has the experience with tuning transmissions?

 

I will reach out to him to see what he says and let you know.

 

Have a great 4th!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I hear ya there!!

 

Dave Steck did all my tuning in the past, I'm sure your aware that he moved to TX but I know he offers remote tuning as long as the person has access to HP Tuners or knows someone that does.

 

There is a local guy named Jake Batz that is a bit of an unknown, he is good with NA applications but I'm not sure if he has the experience with tuning transmissions?

 

I will reach out to him to see what he says and let you know.

 

Have a great 4th!

I had Dave tune my last couple trucks, and he's tuned umpteen of my friends' drag cars. What a bummer when he moved, but man was I glad to hear that he's starting tuning for us peasants again. Dude is like a wizard. I've actually heard a little about Jake. Shoot me a pm when you hear back from him. Thanks!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

300whp and 330lb-ft at 1750rpm with a naturally aspirated small block on 34's is kind of funny to say the least, those are above peak numbers on the early Gen III-IV LS family 5.3L. Congrats man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will you be doing anything else to the truck or just basic bolt on's and tune?


 

Edited by L86 All Terrain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Better results than I expected, congrats! I'll be doing the same to mine hopefully this winter.

 

- Stock wheels / tires: On a 2WD street truck changing from 20's to 24's I saw a friends truck drop 30whp on back to back pulls last November, however that was on a 5.3 with same mods as yours w/E85. I'd think your 20x10's & 34's are likely costing you 15-20whp.

 

- Regarding a post above referencing E85, the 6.2's don't have as high a CR as the 5.3's so the gains won't be as much which explains why GM doesn't have an E85 tune loaded. With a belt driven intake manifold, E85 would deliver the goods !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hmmmm I’m wondering what I’m put down then, afe momentum gt intake, ported throttle body, and blackbear e85 tune

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/30/2017 at 2:30 PM, NemesisC5 said:

 

 

- Regarding a post above referencing E85, the 6.2's don't have as high a CR as the 5.3's 

False, the 6.2 has a higher compression ratio for sure

 

its either half a point or a full point higher

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, truckguy82 said:

False, the 6.2 has a higher compression ratio for sure

 

its either half a point or a full point higher

You are correct, since I posted that July last year I learned the 6.2 is a half point higher at 11.5:1. 

I'm curious as to why the 5.3 is rated from GM to produce more power with E85 and the 6.2 is not (especially with the higher CR).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, NemesisC5 said:

You are correct, since I posted that July last year I learned the 6.2 is a half point higher at 11.5:1. 

I'm curious as to why the 5.3 is rated from GM to produce more power with E85 and the 6.2 is not (especially with the higher CR).

The 6.2 is not e85 compatible from the factory. That’s probably why it’s not rated higher with e85.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.