2016 Sierra 5.3L vs 6.2L

[BSME1115]

 

Um no it doesn't...

 

Also of course it will have a higher resale, you spent more. That is the same argument people use for 4wd that never use it, the resale is higher. Well it should because it cost more upfront and the associated costs are more as well (mainly mpg but also financing, insurance, ect) that add up to it no where near being a wash.

 

OP, only you can determine if it is worth it. To me it isn't, it is a truck, even the fastest 6.2 is slower than many family sedans. So if speed is what you are after this isn't it. If you just love the feel of the power or need the added power to tow heavier loads in the mountains or something then go for it. If I started pushing the limits I would just bump to a 2500.

 

Why people ask a bunch of random people on the internet what they should do when they are scattered all across the country in different situations is beyond me, you will make your own decision anyways...

 

Tyler

Because people across the country can say "I was in the same debate and I regret or don't regret because..". I could test drive both and make a decision and then a year later have a different thought, the same as someone else had.

 

Varying perspective drives a better decision rather than an impulsive one. That's why people ask.

 

But thank you for the input

[KARNUT]

If you are buying the up model where the 6.2 is only 2500$ more than its hard to pass up. What I like about the 5.3 is if you get the e85 option your real close to the HP an TQ of the 6.2 and can run any gas. Where I live E85 was real cheap at a local grocery store. When l traveled I burned reg gas amounted to a pretty good savings.

[camcamaro1991]

You only live once, buy the 6.2. Yes its worth it no question about it, don't worry about MPG & 91 octane, its a blast to drive again, feels like being a teenager with his first car/truck.

 

Additionally with the 6.2 you get Bose SCT (Sound Cancelling Technology), & 9.76 larger rear end.

 

if they offered a LT4 in my Denali, no question I would have ordered it.

[Silverado Steve]

When you factor running the 6.2 on premium, the real worl mpg difference is vastly different. Yes you can run 87 in the 6.2, but you will sacrifice even more mpgs vs the 5.3. Where i live 91 is over .70 more a gallon over regular, thats $14.00 on a 20 gallon fillup, now that 1 mpg difference adds up. It's a faulty argument the 6.2 crowd always makes.

 

The mileage is only 1 MPG different and to your last sentence... isn't that kind of the idea of forums... to get opinions to help make an informed decision?

[Havvkeye]

Yeah I would. If the cost is not an issue and you don't mind using premium fuel I don't know why you wouldn't. I think the 5.3 has a longer track record than the 6.2L but as far as I know they are both solid engines!

 

Only reason I didn't is because I couldn't find a 6.2L with all of the options I wanted in stock around me.

[Badass69]

The 5.3 and 6.2 are the same engine as they were with the previous gen iv's. In fact really the 6.2 was the better choice as a gen iv being it came void of that afm stuff unless it was an L94 in an suv. These are not LS gen 3's nor are they related. They are direct injected LT'S that share nothing but relative displacement. Track record is completely irrelevant as of 2014 when they both were released thus making it the same.

 

These threads just lead to arguments and realistically should just be locked.

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[Havvkeye]

When you factor running the 6.2 on premium, the real worl mpg difference is vastly different. Yes you can run 87 in the 6.2, but you will sacrifice even more mpgs vs the 5.3. Where i live 91 is over .70 more a gallon over regular, thats $14.00 on a 20 gallon fillup, now that 1 mpg difference adds up. It's a faulty argument the 6.2 crowd always makes.

 

Yeah I made this argument in another thread and had some wanna-be gearhead get all butt hurt and talk about pinging engines and how the 5.3 is a horrible engine.

[Icecreman]

When you factor running the 6.2 on premium, the real worl mpg difference is vastly different. Yes you can run 87 in the 6.2, but you will sacrifice even more mpgs vs the 5.3. Where i live 91 is over .70 more a gallon over regular, thats $14.00 on a 20 gallon fillup, now that 1 mpg difference adds up. It's a faulty argument the 6.2 crowd always makes.

 

 

Good point. Around here it's about $0.40 more per gallon and I do run premium. I guess it boils down to the old pay to play adage. Fortunately for me my wife only saw a 1 mpg difference on the sticker.

 

Also, I'm coming from a DMax that got terrible mileage and used expensive diesel fuel so the premium gas doesn't sting as much.

[Silverado Steve]

I remember that, and yes i got into i with him too. Have yet to see his proof on 5.3 needing 91 too or pinging will result.

 

Yeah I made this argument in another thread and had some wanna-be gearhead get all butt hurt and talk about pinging engines and how the 5.3 is a horrible engine.

For some that can be a huge factor, but the OP did say money was not a factor, so the 6.2 should be his mission.

 

Good point. Around here it's about $0.40 more per gallon and I do run premium. I guess it boils down to the old pay to play adage. Fortunately for me my wife only saw a 1 mpg difference on the sticker.

 

Also, I'm coming from a DMax that got terrible mileage and used expensive diesel fuel so the premium gas doesn't sting as much.

[Badass69]

I have a 5.3 truck at my disposal that runs strictly 87 octane fuel... I can easily datalog and post results one way or another.

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[bboyce536]

Owned both 14 5.3 and a 15 6.2. The 6.2 actually did get better mpg overall then my 5.3 did. Ratings show the 5.3 is better but epa tests the most fuel efficient 5.3 model. Look how the 8 speed 5.3 is rated same as the 6.2. GMs reason was because that combo is in a loaded up, heavier crew cab.

 

The real question is if yoy can stomach the ridiculous price spread from 87-93. There were times when I shook my head and threw 87 in my 6.2 (god forbid..) because a station wanted over $1 more for premium. In all honesty I never noticed amy decreased mpg running 87 either, but any time I did, I made sure not to romp on the truck.

 

The 6.2 can be converted to run e85 easily and had I kept my truck I would have done that. It makes more sense running e85 vs premium and saving 50% vs running e85 over the 5.3s 87.

[CptMcSaug]

Owned both 14 5.3 and a 15 6.2. The 6.2 actually did get better mpg overall then my 5.3 did. Ratings show the 5.3 is better but epa tests the most fuel efficient 5.3 model. Look how the 8 speed 5.3 is rated same as the 6.2. GMs reason was because that combo is in a loaded up, heavier crew cab.

 

The real question is if yoy can stomach the ridiculous price spread from 87-93. There were times when I shook my head and threw 87 in my 6.2 (god forbid..) because a station wanted over $1 more for premium. In all honesty I never noticed amy decreased mpg running 87 either, but any time I did, I made sure not to romp on the truck.

 

The 6.2 can be converted to run e85 easily and had I kept my truck I would have done that. It makes more sense running e85 vs premium and saving 50% vs running e85 over the 5.3s 87.

 

Same for me. My 6.2 gets better MPG than my friends 5.3 and my father in laws 5.3 all are 4WD and mine has more options than both. Plus I have bigger tires. The EPA sheets don't mean shit lol

 

And 14.00 more a fill up is just 2 less Whoppers a week. All I know is that I have no regret in getting a 6.2 now I have driven a few 5.3 trucks and I would have a hard time going down.

[Havvkeye]

 

Same for me. My 6.2 gets better MPG than my friends 5.3 and my father in laws 5.3 all are 4WD and mine has more options than both. Plus I have bigger tires. The EPA sheets don't mean shit lol

 

And 14.00 more a fill up is just 2 less Whoppers a week. All I know is that I have no regret in getting a 6.2 now I have driven a few 5.3 trucks and I would have a hard time going down.

 

I am sorry but if your leveled, loaded, larger tire 6.2L is getting better MPG than both of the 5.3 there is something you are leaving out. I don't drive slow and I get 20+ on my loaded 5.3L.

[camcamaro1991]

To the OP I apologize in advance.

 

Yeah I made this argument in another thread and had some wanna-be gearhead get all butt hurt and talk about pinging engines and how the 5.3 is a horrible engine.

 

Never said the 5.3 is a horrible engine, that's twice you mis-quoted me nor can you comprehend a sentence. I will forget more than you will ever know about automotive anything.

 

I remember that, and yes i got into i with him too. Have yet to see his proof on 5.3 needing 91 too or pinging will result.


For some that can be a huge factor, but the OP did say money was not a factor, so the 6.2 should be his mission.

 

I said the 5.3 can ping on 87 octane, and it did for me. again another mis-quote.

 

2nd, I told you I need a 5.3 engine to data log, I will trust my data log info.. via HP Tuners over hot air. Once I do find someone with a 5.3 and they allow me to data log a few pulls I will share them. Until then I will there's no point, you'll quote owners manual about the 6.2 fuel requirements when were are discussing 5.3L, octane and ping. I told you my dealer put 87 octane in my truck when new, as most dealers fuel the truck for the customer purchase, and I ran out the tank on 87 octane, it was awful.

 

Can you even view HP Tuners bin/log files?

[CptMcSaug]

 

I am sorry but if your leveled, loaded, larger tire 6.2L is getting better MPG than both of the 5.3 there is something you are leaving out. I don't drive slow and I get 20+ on my loaded 5.3L.

 

I believe you but neither of these 5.3s get over 15 average one is leveled with 33s other is stock. I can get 16 if I'm not pulling my boat. IDK if they drive like they stole it or what. I will say I'm a conservative driver 80% of the time.

 

You can also go to the MPG thread many people are claiming good numbers, better than 5.3s.

 

But it sounds to me the OP would be more than happy with a 6.2 but if he is questioning it he will always wonder if he gets a 5.3.