Jump to content

5.3 has more power than GM advertises?

MSPT

Recommended Posts

MSPT Enthusiast

MSPT

Posted
Posted

I was speaking with my local GM expert and he informed me that most of the 2014+ 5.3 trucks he puts on his dyno have been putting down anywhere from 305-320 to the rear wheels. With a 20% drivetrain loss that's 366-384 at the crank. Has anyone else seen this? He told me this is pretty common because GM doesn't want to hurt 6.2 sales by admitting the 5.3 is a lot closer in power than people think. He's also seeing some great numbers from bolt ons and a tune, nothing mind blowing but still nice gains from the basics.

 

I'm waiting on my RCSB to arrive and I'm already planning on some basic upgrades, it's nice to know that we are not as far behind ford and dodge as I thought. I'm a die hard GM fan but 355 vs 385 and 395 almost had me looking into other brands.

LongrangeLauber Senior Enthusiast

LongrangeLauber

Posted
Posted

My tuned 5.3 will keep with my buddies 5.7 Hemi. I think he has highway gears though and I have the 3.42's.

 

Considering this is GM's second biggest V8 in the half ton segment, you should be comparing to the 5.0 Ford (which I think you did above) and if ram has a smaller v8. If you wanna compare the 6.2, gotta do it to the 3.5 egoboost and the 5.7

Rawyzf Senior Enthusiast

Rawyzf

Posted
Posted

Those numbers seem high for baseline (at least if you're talking 4wd), are you talking about 2wd?

MSPT Enthusiast

MSPT

Posted
  • Author
Posted

All the pulls he does are in 2wd. Most of the trucks would be 4wd if that makes a difference. The closest awd dyno is over 12 hours away so I don't know of anyone locally who has had their truck on a awd dyno

Rawyzf Senior Enthusiast

Rawyzf

Posted
Posted

Yeah, I figured the numbers were taken while Dynoing in 2wd. I was just wondering if the trucks themselves were 2wd or 4wd. You will have more drivetrain loss in a 4wd truck on the dyno.

 

 

My baseline was in the 270s I believe, but that was not 100% stock. My baseline included AirRaid MIT tube and a catback. They could have cause my baseline to drop, as I was not tuned for them.

SILVER SLED Senior Enthusiast

SILVER SLED

Posted
Posted

I've heard that and wondered that even more since I wooped my brothers 5.7ltr 4.10 geared 14 Tundra with my 5.3. Even though my 5.3 is tuned. And a 5.3 on e85 is supposedly rated at 385hp.

Rawyzf Senior Enthusiast

Rawyzf

Posted
Posted

I have 323hp to the wheels after e85 and tune, so that 385 crank claim from GM on e85 seems about right.

 

If you add that 25% drivetrain loss into my 323whp, that puts me at 403 crank. So, that seems about right considering I'm tuned as well.

MSPT Enthusiast

MSPT

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Interesting stuff, I'm also looking forward to seeing what a 6.2 puts down stock. He has one coming in sometime this month for a few upgrades. Also all these pulls were done on 91 not E85. I'm going to guess his dyno is probably reading a bit high but even so 355hp stock with a 20% drivetrain loss is only 284. Even if they're putting down 300 consistently that's still more than GM advertises. Like someone said above, I think these modern drivelines probably rob closer to 25% than 20%. I'd be interested to see the difference in pulls done in 4wd vs 2wd as well.

 

 

Now if they would only sell me a 6.2 in a RCSB I'd be really happy :devil:

MSPT Enthusiast

MSPT

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Also off topic, but would having a 4wd truck in 2wd still have more drivetrain loss than a 2wd truck would? I got a 4wd because I plan on daily driving it and I've read that you're better off putting the truck in 4 hi than 2wd for drag racing anyways. Not sure how much I like the idea of launching my truck in 4wd but once I get it and the new factor wears off I guess we'll see.

bassJAM Enthusiast

bassJAM

Posted
Posted

Also off topic, but would having a 4wd truck in 2wd still have more drivetrain loss than a 2wd truck would? I got a 4wd because I plan on daily driving it and I've read that you're better off putting the truck in 4 hi than 2wd for drag racing anyways. Not sure how much I like the idea of launching my truck in 4wd but once I get it and the new factor wears off I guess we'll see.

 

A 4WD will have more drivetrain loss than a 2WD, even if the 4WD is being driven in 2-high.

 

They're 2 reasons that I can think of, the transfer case will suck up a small amount of power, and heavier all-terrain tires will as well.

 

It won't matter on a dyno, but having a front axle will add 150 or so lbs to the weight as well.

Croak Enthusiast

Croak

Posted
Posted

I don't have any dyno numbers yet, but as far as not wanting the 5.3 to cannibalize 6.2 sales because they're closer than expected... my buddy has a 2016 5.3 Sierra DCRB and I gap him all day long in my 2015 6.2. No contest. The only stock-ish trucks I've run into out there that concern me are bolt-on RCSB Hemi Rams or tuned 3.5 EcoBoost F150s.

Rawyzf Senior Enthusiast

Rawyzf

Posted
Posted

Click the e85 link in my signature. My tuner has done a 6.2 as well and should have baseline numbers.

 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Rawyzf Senior Enthusiast

Rawyzf

Posted
Posted

I don't have any dyno numbers yet, but as far as not wanting the 5.3 to cannibalize 6.2 sales because they're closer than expected... my buddy has a 2016 5.3 Sierra DCRB and I gap him all day long in my 2015 6.2. No contest. The only stock-ish trucks I've run into out there that concern me are bolt-on RCSB Hemi Rams or tuned 3.5 EcoBoost F150s.

I agree that, GM wouldn't post lower than actual numbers on the 5.3 to help 6.2 sales. The 5.3 is their best seller and they want those numbers looking as good as possible vs the competition.

 

I would say if anything, GM 6.2 numbers seem a tad low based on how those beasts run and dyno.

 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

KnappAttack Enthusiast

KnappAttack

Posted
Posted

My tuned 5.3 will keep with my buddies 5.7 Hemi. I think he has highway gears though and I have the 3.42's.

 

Considering this is GM's second biggest V8 in the half ton segment, you should be comparing to the 5.0 Ford (which I think you did above) and if ram has a smaller v8. If you wanna compare the 6.2, gotta do it to the 3.5 egoboost and the 5.7

 

My stock 14 using E85 will also outrun my buds 5.7 Hemi, when warm in the summer, it flat out annihilates it!

 

 

Also off topic, but would having a 4wd truck in 2wd still have more drivetrain loss than a 2wd truck would? I got a 4wd because I plan on daily driving it and I've read that you're better off putting the truck in 4 hi than 2wd for drag racing anyways. Not sure how much I like the idea of launching my truck in 4wd but once I get it and the new factor wears off I guess we'll see.

 

 

I have to use 4-HI for drag racing or it just blows the rear tires away. Forget about trying to run in 2 WD. I also shift the six speed manually turning off traction control.

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

    342,863
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Bulldogger
    Newest Member
    Bulldogger
    Joined

  • Who's Online   5 Members, 0 Anonymous, 828 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • TrueBlue
      Transmission Temperature Hitting 220s

      By TrueBlue · Posted

      Thanks, so being a different beast altogether, anyone know what the "optimal" temp is for the 10L80/90 for proper shifting?
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      How many years have I pointed out every point in that link to the folks here and been avalanched with criticisms and outright hostilities at times? I ran counter to even the great CUSTOMBOSS and Lake Speed Jr and the half dozen experts on YouTube and in the final.....GM, Physics (Stribeck) backs that Grumpy old Bear.    Honestly, I never said a thing engineering hadn't studied silly and laid in concrete during WWII. But I'm old, the information is old and yet, the Laws of Physics are eternal.    Okay there is one exception. I vehemently disagree with their use of the word 'tolerances' when what it meant is "clearance".   The clearance is the distance between two objects. The tolerance is the degree of acceptable variation permitted in that clearance. I.E., piston to bore clearance is 0.004" with a tolerance of +/- .0002" so the clearance is in specification if it lies between 0.0038" and 0.0042". Cutting that 'tolerance in half has ZERO impact on lubrication requirements. Makes for more difficulty in manufacturing.  But a tighter clearance 'MAY'. Depends on finish. Anyway....   It's one of those statements made by people to make themselves look smarter than they are to convince people who are as un-enlighten as they seem to manipulate their behaviors. But hey, the blind leading the blind puts them both in the pit. 
    • Grumpy Bear
      Gas Prices

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Out and about yesterday on a long Saturday drive I passed a lot of Shell stations. My preferred, so I pay attention. Lot's of small town Illinois so not six stations in three blocks like the city.    Everyone of them over a radius of say 100 miles had regular at $4.19 but one which was the one closest to home at $4.15. However Premium pricing varied greatly between 85 cents over regular to $1.50 over. I'm not counting the price of the station with the lowest regular so the reference is the same for the remainder and all within the same brand. However the spread discrepancy holds across all brands.     @txab, any thoughts on that? 
    • revrnd
      Future GMC Jimmy

      By revrnd · Posted

      What are your thoughts? The Chevy Blazer relaunch was an epic case of 'lunchbag letdown'. Jeep Wranglers and Ford Broncos stick out like a sore thumb.    The AI photos do not look like a 'retro version', but shrunken Tahoes. Get away from the 'futuristic look'. I've seen two concepts. One had rectangular headlight like a Rivian and the other way too big headlights (similar to a previous non-Wrangler SUV) should include dual round headlights like the early version.   If not this would look OK   At least it has GM styling (albeit the K2XX) A lot of the images floating around look like Bronco IIs or the current Bronco. Looking at the Broncos in my area (central Ontario, it seems to be a mix of 2 doors and 4 doors, 'mall rated' to ones that could go offroad.    I'm sure a AT4 and AT4X RPOs could be outfitted similar to a Rubicon if the braintrust understood the whole offroad scene. Crossing my fingers that if it does see the light that the front air dam/bumper doesn't extend below the center line of the tire...      
    • revrnd
      Silverado 4500-5500-6500 are they still being produced? Would have sold better as GMCs as well

      By revrnd · Posted

      I saw this news earlier this year:   https://theautowire.com/2026/06/12/gm-kills-off-chevys-biggest-silverado-trucks-as-sales-collapse-and-factory-fallout-spreads/

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...