Jump to content

Have a 2017 Loaner, how come so much more power than my 2011

JB Z71

Recommended Posts

JB Z71 Enthusiast

JB Z71

Posted
Posted

Right now have a 2017 crew cab 4x4 loaner with the 5.3. It will smoke my 2011 z71 5.3 crewcab, It's like a completely different truck power wise. Was there a power bump along the way i missed?

 

I have a blackbear tune on my 2011 truck. Which I did when new. It was mostly shift points, not timing advance. It greatly improved the truck but nothing like this 2017. The shifting itself on the 2017 is a little long winded and mushy feeling, but it feels like it has more torque throughout the range from idle to red line so it doesn't matter as much which gear you are in it pulls strong without downshifting.

 

I don't think my truck has lost any power. Maybe it has. 70k miles. I always thought it was a little slow, I just put it down to being a crewcab and 4x4. ? Compared with previous 2wd trucks I have owned.

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted

Yea since 2014. The 4.3, 5.3 and 6.2 were all new since 2014 on 1/2 ton pickups. 5.3 spits out 355hp and 383ft.lbs torque. Direct injection, more aggressive VVT.

djxn40 Enthusiast

djxn40

Posted
Posted

How much HP does your 2011 have. I'm just curious the difference. I bought a 16 and 15Hdriver is right on the money.

 

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

JB Z71 Enthusiast

JB Z71

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks 15HDriver makes sense.

 

I looked up mine and it says 315hp 335 torque

 

I think they did better across the whole rpm range too. The low end torque taking a corner in the 2017 will chirp the tires easily and it just flies all the way to red line. Mine always seems like it is working to move if that makes sense. The 2017 seems effortless. Arghhh. Truck envy again......

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted

Thanks 15HDriver makes sense.

 

I looked up mine and it says 315hp 335 torque

 

I think they did better across the whole rpm range too. The low end torque taking a corner in the 2017 will chirp the tires easily and it just flies all the way to red line. Mine always seems like it is working to move if that makes sense. The 2017 seems effortless. Arghhh. Truck envy again......

 

And...if you have access to E85, the new 5.3 makes 6.2 numbers on it, somewhere along 380hp and 400ft.lbs torque. The 6.2, when it launched back around 2007 made those numbers.

redwngr Senior Enthusiast

redwngr

Posted
Posted

The only thing the current 5.3 has in common with your 2011 is the displacement. It's a completely new motor.

KMGZ400 Senior Enthusiast

KMGZ400

Posted
Posted

Also the gearing may amplify the feel of power increase is well, your truck may have 3.08 and the new one may have 3.42's for example. My dad has a 13' 5.3 with 3.08's and it's miserable to drive

Donstar Senior Enthusiast

Donstar

Posted
Posted

You would also be impressed going from your current 5.3 to the new 4.3. I made this transition one year ago and I have been very happy. The amazing attribute of all three of the new engines is better performance with far better gas mileage.

JB Z71 Enthusiast

JB Z71

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Would I feel any more power putting E85 in my current truck? (If I could find it?)


I think the trucks have the same gearing. I got mine back today . I checked rpm at 30mph in 2nd gear and they were the same.

LongrangeLauber Senior Enthusiast

LongrangeLauber

Posted
Posted

Would I feel any more power putting E85 in my current truck? (If I could find it?)

 

I think the trucks have the same gearing. I got mine back today . I checked rpm at 30mph in 2nd gear and they were the same.

As long as your 5.3 is flex fuel compatible. I know most of those gmt900 trucks with the 5.3 were, but you'd wanna make sure of it first
f8l vnm Senior Enthusiast

f8l vnm

Posted
Posted

383 and 416 is what the 5.3 should be rated without E85 .

But I don't think GM wants numbers that close to the 6.2

15 Z71 Senior Enthusiast

15 Z71

Posted
Posted

Yeah it is a big difference in power for sure. My 15 5.3 would flat smoke my 06 5.3. I have had my 15 a little over a year now and am still amazed how good it runs. So no its not just you. Lol

azsundevil Enthusiast

azsundevil

Posted
Posted

You would also be impressed going from your current 5.3 to the new 4.3. I made this transition one year ago and I have been very happy. The amazing attribute of all three of the new engines is better performance with far better gas mileage.

 

Yep.

 

My last truck was a 1995 K2500, before they were called "Silverados" or "Sierras". It had the legendary 454ci V8. That's 7.4L displacement.

 

My new 2016 Sierra 1500 with the 4.3L V6 has the same "seat of the pants" feeling on E85 that the old K2500 did... With half the engine size and double the fuel economy.

 

It's mostly that engine technology has come a long way in the past few years, but the transmission also plays a part in this. Your 2011 (and my '95) had clunky old 4-speeds. The current gen trucks have 6-speed or 8-speed transmissions depending on which model you buy, which allows the engine to more efficiently deliver power across a wider range of situations.

LongrangeLauber Senior Enthusiast

LongrangeLauber

Posted
Posted

 

Yep.

 

My last truck was a 1995 K2500, before they were called "Silverados" or "Sierras". It had the legendary 454ci V8. That's 7.4L displacement.

 

My new 2016 Sierra 1500 with the 4.3L V6 has the same "seat of the pants" feeling on E85 that the old K2500 did... With half the engine size and double the fuel economy.

 

It's mostly that engine technology has come a long way in the past few years, but the transmission also plays a part in this. Your 2011 (and my '95) had clunky old 4-speeds. The current gen trucks have 6-speed or 8-speed transmissions depending on which model you buy, which allows the engine to more efficiently deliver power across a wider range of situations.

Starting in 09 the 5.3 got the same 6 speed that exists in these trucks to this day

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • 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

    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      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. 😄
    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      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
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      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.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      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.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      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...