Jump to content

4.3 vs 5.3

Manny254

By Manny254
in Engines & Drivetrain

 Share

Recommended Posts

Brian S. Enthusiast

Brian S.

Posted
Posted

 

The stigma of driving a gas 6 cylinder in a 'man' truck is enough to put many off.

 

What a girly-boy motor. (Said in my best Arnold)

You could be right.

 

When I had that 4.3 I made sure to be wearing my Levis Button Fly jeans, roll up my sleeves on my Duck Dynasty t-shirt, put a pack of Camel straights in the breast pocket, and wear a DeWalt cap.

 

I wore some Dockers and a Polo once and got ambushed in the parking lot at Gander Mountain. As they were kicking me on the ground, I heard one of my assailants mutter, "This truck aint right! Don't sound like no truck! Its a dang UFO and this here's a ALIEN!"

 

:ughdance:

  • Like 3
  • Replies 125
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Colossus
Colossus

Eh. People were towing boats like that with the old 255 HP or less 5.7L trucks of yesteryears. And now a V-6 does it even better. No big deal.

Grumpy Bear
Grumpy Bear

We do realize that the ICE is a demand device…right? Motor only makes the power it needs to overcome the load running against it.   That said, with nearly 300 Hp on tap out of the 4.3 Ecotec3 those

Brian S.
Brian S.

I agree that we live in a "golden era" of car performance compared to the 60s and 70s.   What I'm saying is all this "5.3l performance is the stuff! Makes the 4.3l look like a slug!" is kind of a mo

KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted

You could be right.

 

When I had that 4.3 I made sure to be wearing my Levis Button Fly jeans, roll up my sleeves on my Duck Dynasty t-shirt, put a pack of Camel straights in the breast pocket, and wear a DeWalt cap.

 

I wore some Dockers and a Polo once and got ambushed in the parking lot at Gander Mountain. As they were kicking me on the ground, I heard one of my assailants mutter, "This truck aint right! Don't sound like no truck! Its a dang UFO and this here's a ALIEN!"

 

:ughdance:

You forgot the pit bull.[emoji106]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Brian S. Enthusiast

Brian S.

Posted
Posted

You forgot the pit bull.[emoji106]

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

:thumbs:

 

Heh, I have a cabin on a slough and spend a lot of time in swamps fishin' and huntin', so I'm not exactly genteel myself.

 

I do think there's something to the "manly men" don't drive 6 cylinder trucks perception, I grew up in the 70s and got a dose myself. Was a stretch for me to buy the 4.3l but it proved itself to me.

 

 

KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted

:thumbs:

 

Heh, I have a cabin on a slough and spend a lot of time in swamps fishin' and huntin', so I'm not exactly genteel myself.

 

I do think there's something to the "manly men" don't drive 6 cylinder trucks perception, I grew up in the 70s and got a dose myself. Was a stretch for me to buy the 4.3l but it proved itself to me.

 

 

My first truck was a Toyota Hylux p/u, my second was a 70 Ford 240 six three on the tree, I later put in a 289, sounded better no increase in power. My dad had a large construction co. in NJ, you can imagine how I got teased over those. The wife got to drive the hot rods, of course I got it for that too.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Knightfall Enthusiast

Knightfall

Posted
Posted

 

The stigma of driving a gas 6 cylinder in a 'man' truck is enough to put many off.

 

What a girly-boy motor. (Said in my best Arnold)

This may be true, but if anyone REALLY drives out to the sticks, I'm talking hours from an interstate or mall, where anyone who acts like some big country bo because it's what's in now since Duck Dynasty and modern commercial country music and all those other contributors to posing have come about, and you pull into a gas station with a sign from 1978 and nothing for sale but fatback, mountain dew, the cheapest brands of smokeless tobacco and Busch is in the premium beer section, and you look who pulls in, I gurantee that the majority of the trucks gassing up will be two wheel drive V6's or I6's with mud grips on the rear wheels only, complete with straight pipes from when the exhaust fell off in 1997 and a dog who never leaves the shotgun seat. Growing up I saw more 4.3 Chevy's, 4.2 and 4.9 Ford's and 3.9 Dodges than any other kind of truck, and countless 4 cylinder quarter-tons. It was all we needed and they lasted plenty long. The image of what a truck is and what it supposedly has to have for "real work" or someones ego is alot different, contrary to popular belief, in suburban USA than in the hills and hollers that everyone is trying to claim their from.

 

I'm not downplaying how cool modern engine technology is, I'm simply making a statement that "real rednecks", whatever that is, usually don't half-live out of a Denali for 20 years. A truck is something to depend on, not much else.

  • Like 1
KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted

In the 70s it's was 302s and 350s mostly a few 6s. end of 70s - 80s a few 4cylinders for gas mileage. I had a 460 for one month 8 miles per gallon wouldn't cut it. Traded it for a Mazda pickup. The few red necks I new in NJ in the 70s were pretty handy, they all seemed to have junk yards. Mostly drove old fords with big caddy engines in them.

Brian S. Enthusiast

Brian S.

Posted
Posted

This may be true, but if anyone REALLY drives out to the sticks, I'm talking hours from an interstate or mall, where anyone who acts like some big country bo because it's what's in now since Duck Dynasty and modern commercial country music and all those other contributors to posing have come about, and you pull into a gas station with a sign from 1978 and nothing for sale but fatback, mountain dew, the cheapest brands of smokeless tobacco and Busch is in the premium beer section, and you look who pulls in, I gurantee that the majority of the trucks gassing up will be two wheel drive V6's or I6's with mud grips on the rear wheels only, complete with straight pipes from when the exhaust fell off in 1997 and a dog who never leaves the shotgun seat. Growing up I saw more 4.3 Chevy's, 4.2 and 4.9 Ford's and 3.9 Dodges than any other kind of truck, and countless 4 cylinder quarter-tons. It was all we needed and they lasted plenty long. The image of what a truck is and what it supposedly has to have for "real work" or someones ego is alot different, contrary to popular belief, in suburban USA than in the hills and hollers that everyone is trying to claim their from.

 

I'm not downplaying how cool modern engine technology is, I'm simply making a statement that "real rednecks", whatever that is, usually don't half-live out of a Denali for 20 years. A truck is something to depend on, not much else.

You mean fake leather seats and heated steering wheels are NOT the primary concern of most country folk?!?!

 

What the heck is wrong with those barbarians?!?!

 

:crackup:

 

It's somewhat amazing to me to see pickup trucks discussed like mini vans as well:

 

"You've GOT to have the 8" video screen with individual surround on the back of the headrests Trent! How will the children watch Youtube en route?!"

 

My first concern has always been fitting my sporting gear. :dunno:

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted

This may be true, but if anyone REALLY drives out to the sticks, I'm talking hours from an interstate or mall, where anyone who acts like some big country bo because it's what's in now since Duck Dynasty and modern commercial country music and all those other contributors to posing have come about, and you pull into a gas station with a sign from 1978 and nothing for sale but fatback, mountain dew, the cheapest brands of smokeless tobacco and Busch is in the premium beer section, and you look who pulls in, I gurantee that the majority of the trucks gassing up will be two wheel drive V6's or I6's with mud grips on the rear wheels only, complete with straight pipes from when the exhaust fell off in 1997 and a dog who never leaves the shotgun seat. Growing up I saw more 4.3 Chevy's, 4.2 and 4.9 Ford's and 3.9 Dodges than any other kind of truck, and countless 4 cylinder quarter-tons. It was all we needed and they lasted plenty long. The image of what a truck is and what it supposedly has to have for "real work" or someones ego is alot different, contrary to popular belief, in suburban USA than in the hills and hollers that everyone is trying to claim their from.

 

I'm not downplaying how cool modern engine technology is, I'm simply making a statement that "real rednecks", whatever that is, usually don't half-live out of a Denali for 20 years. A truck is something to depend on, not much else.

 

So this dog will hunt eh? :rollin:

  • 2 years later...
jefferoonie Enthusiast

jefferoonie

Posted
Posted
On 3/27/2017 at 12:38 PM, Brian S. said:

I don't have a 4.3l, I'm on my second 5.3l.

 

I just jump into these threads because I had a 4.3l and for towing my ~3000lb fishing boat, and doing the outdoor sports related hauling I do, it worked great.

 

I paid less in insurance, less for gas, and think I paid less for the truck because demand is soft on 4.3s. (I think I paid around $30K for a LT2 Z71 4wd Xcab and the list was $42 or $43).

 

It drove and towed about the same as the 2010 5.3l I traded in on it. (and when I traded the 4.3 in they only knocked $1k off my negotiated trade in price off it when they pulled it up on the computer and found out is was a 4.3l)

 

The 4.3s are far under rated on truck forums. Just because this gen of trucks came out with more hp/torque doesn't mean the hp/torque most of us had for decades doesn't work any longer.

 

Yeah, I know this thread is old, but I couldn't resist.  It was fun to watch. 

 

I have a 2019 Silverado, with the 4.3l.   Compared to my 2002, with the 5.3l, it's not a slug.  Then again we're talking a 17 year difference.  The HP and Torque rating are pretty much the same between my two trucks.  I'm willing to bet if you were happy with the 5.3l in an early 2000s Silverado, you'd be fine with the recent 4.3l.

 

The only thing I really noticed is that the idle on the 4.3 is rougher than the 5.3.  The 2002 was smoooooooooooth, even when it has over 200k miles on it.

 

 

YukonXL04 Enthusiast

YukonXL04

Posted
Posted
On 11/18/2019 at 9:33 AM, jefferoonie said:

 

Yeah, I know this thread is old, but I couldn't resist.  It was fun to watch. 

 

I have a 2019 Silverado, with the 4.3l.   Compared to my 2002, with the 5.3l, it's not a slug.  Then again we're talking a 17 year difference.  The HP and Torque rating are pretty much the same between my two trucks.  I'm willing to bet if you were happy with the 5.3l in an early 2000s Silverado, you'd be fine with the recent 4.3l.

 

The only thing I really noticed is that the idle on the 4.3 is rougher than the 5.3.  The 2002 was smoooooooooooth, even when it has over 200k miles on it.

 

 

Ok but how many of us were happy with the 5.3 power in 2002? I know I wasnt. I had a 2500 with the 6.0. Towed alot of boats though.

 

I still own a 04 yukon with a 5.3, but it has e fan swap, CAI, exhaust and a custom tune. And I'm still not real happy with the power. I put a 24ft enclosed trailer behind it empty... on the highway I pretty much had to run 3-4k rpm to hold 60-65.

 

I have a 6.2 sierra now and I'm pretty happy with the power aspect. Wouldn't mind some more though. I wish they would put out a 500hp stock truck lol

 

I owned a 4.3 s10 blazer, it was ok. Also had a 4.3 in a boat. Not bad. Almost impossible kill them though. Very reliable, just doesn't belong in a full size truck. I use my truck as a truck. Tow dump trailers, travel trailer, boats, utility trailers. I keep 2 large tool boxes in the bed. My truck gets used!

Doublebase Enthusiast

Doublebase

Posted
Posted

I've driven both the 4.3 and 5.3...I currently own a 5.3. 

 

I think there is a noticeable difference in power between the two in everyday driving scenarios...passing, flooring it, pulling out onto the highway. The 5.3 has more "pep" and it just feels more "snappy". I've read many posts on this thread alluding to "slug", when describing the 4.3...I understand what they are saying when compared to the 5.3, but I don't agree when compared to other vehicles in normal driving situations. I think the 4.3 is fine. I think it is "capable" for everyday driving situations, maybe not as snappy and peppy as the 5.3 in passing situations, or situations where you're towing, but I think the 4.3 is fine.
I also think the 4.3 feels much smoother when driving/shifting. I was actually shocked comparing the V6 to the V8 in terms of shifting/V4 engagement and overall driving smoothness. 

 

I'm averaging 24.5 mpg in my double cab 5.3 4x4 V8...that's pretty damn good, but I imagine I could do even better with the V6 (and enjoy the everyday smoothness of that power plant). But I definitely think the 5.3 has more power - I can feel it - it is useful at times, but not needed in my daily 80 mile round trip commute. In hindsight I probably should have went with the 4.3 - I don't tow, I don't drive "fast" and I don't need the power. But the 5.3 is impressive and fuel efficient, nonetheless.  

  • 4 months later...
jefferoonie Enthusiast

jefferoonie

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 11/20/2019 at 3:33 AM, YukonXL04 said:

Ok but how many of us were happy with the 5.3 power in 2002? I know I wasnt. I had a 2500 with the 6.0. Towed alot of boats though.

 

I still own a 04 yukon with a 5.3, but it has e fan swap, CAI, exhaust and a custom tune. And I'm still not real happy with the power. I put a 24ft enclosed trailer behind it empty... on the highway I pretty much had to run 3-4k rpm to hold 60-65.

 

I have a 6.2 sierra now and I'm pretty happy with the power aspect. Wouldn't mind some more though. I wish they would put out a 500hp stock truck lol

 

I owned a 4.3 s10 blazer, it was ok. Also had a 4.3 in a boat. Not bad. Almost impossible kill them though. Very reliable, just doesn't belong in a full size truck. I use my truck as a truck. Tow dump trailers, travel trailer, boats, utility trailers. I keep 2 large tool boxes in the bed. My truck gets used!

I'll give you that.  I  just use mine for tent Camping, towing a 19ft fiberglass boat, hauling crap.  Once in awhile I am towing a car trailer with a car on it. I'm not doing any commercial work with it.

Edited by jefferoonie
Mispelled word
  • 3 months later...
jshrubs Enthusiast

jshrubs

Posted
Posted
On 11/20/2019 at 4:33 AM, YukonXL04 said:

Ok but how many of us were happy with the 5.3 power in 2002? I know I wasnt. I had a 2500 with the 6.0. Towed alot of boats though.

 

I still own a 04 yukon with a 5.3, but it has e fan swap, CAI, exhaust and a custom tune. And I'm still not real happy with the power. I put a 24ft enclosed trailer behind it empty... on the highway I pretty much had to run 3-4k rpm to hold 60-65.

 

I have a 6.2 sierra now and I'm pretty happy with the power aspect. Wouldn't mind some more though. I wish they would put out a 500hp stock truck lol

 

I owned a 4.3 s10 blazer, it was ok. Also had a 4.3 in a boat. Not bad. Almost impossible kill them though. Very reliable, just doesn't belong in a full size truck. I use my truck as a truck. Tow dump trailers, travel trailer, boats, utility trailers. I keep 2 large tool boxes in the bed. My truck gets used!

Have you owned an ecotec 4.3? I currently own one, I've had 3 s10s with the vortec 4.3, and I drive a 5.3 for work. When I started driving my work truck, I obviously noticed the difference but not enough to say I bought the wrong truck. My 4.3 does everything I ask of it in daily driving situations and is capable of much more than that. The vortec 4.3 you're talking about is not the same as the ecotec 4.3 and those comparisons need to be put to bed. Apples to oranges. 

  • 2 weeks later...
YukonXL04 Enthusiast

YukonXL04

Posted
Posted
On 7/2/2020 at 4:07 PM, jshrubs said:

Have you owned an ecotec 4.3? I currently own one, I've had 3 s10s with the vortec 4.3, and I drive a 5.3 for work. When I started driving my work truck, I obviously noticed the difference but not enough to say I bought the wrong truck. My 4.3 does everything I ask of it in daily driving situations and is capable of much more than that. The vortec 4.3 you're talking about is not the same as the ecotec 4.3 and those comparisons need to be put to bed. Apples to oranges. 

Wow bring back an old quote lol.

I'm glad your happy. Im happy with mine. 

All done.

  • Like 1
WHITESSTOWPIG Enthusiast

WHITESSTOWPIG

Posted
Posted (edited)

There are a few videos floating around of single cabs with the new gen V6 running door to door with intake/ tune/ header previous gen 5.3 and 6.0 swapped single cabs.They are honestly pretty impressive 6 cylinders considering no one makes anything at all for them.Yeah the new gen 5.3 are a little peppier but its still the lowest performing 8 cylinder on the market right now so thats not really saying much.If you are worried about performance and are somehow blown away by the 5.3 over the V6 I would say your butt is just way too sensitive because its splitting hairs IMO

 

Edited by WHITESSTOWPIG
  • Like 2

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,902
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    whenindoubtuseahammer
    Newest Member
    whenindoubtuseahammer
    Joined

  • Who's Online   1 Member, 0 Anonymous, 497 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Chuck FB
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      Its no wonder you've gravitated to the oil types and brands you have in later years after trying certain brands and one being a specialty oil or at least very hard to come by up here and the other would have been a commonly found oil of the era and the vastly different outcomes as a result to using the vehicles in question the same distance for an OCI . It shows what marketing hype can do without actually having the product to back up the claims and that is no different now with the insane claims that are written on the side of a bottle of oil from some of the off the shelf oils.    What has surprised me and I was already finding this out before I bought my truck with the GDI engine, that this newer fancy technology that seemingly would suggest better fuel economy/emissions with this high pressure spray of fuel is not in reality kind at all to the engine or at least the oils life. Yet they insist on claiming long OCI with this technology just like they did with the port or similar type fuel injection systems when in reality its a step back in oil life to have a GDI system.    I think the mistake your making Grumpy is that your not sending your samples to Blackstone and getting the feel good glowing report that you can run it another 1000 or more miles and then send another sample where they say run it yet another 1000 miles and on and on it goes until your sending in something that looks a lot like road tar and then they may suggest you change your oil within the next 1000 miles 😆
    • Chuck FB
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I am guessing that engines of that design back then had a better ability to be abused and survive longer than a new design engine with the long timing chain and the overhead cams and phasers etc. But I would never guess that an engine could go that far and not fail spectacularly or at least die a slow death. 
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      In the 80's 90's I'd run Honda's 7,500 miles between changes using Red Line HP 5W20 and do it for hundreds of thousands of miles with issues. Back in the day it was an SAE 20 with the HTHS of a SAE 30 and SN add load. It was also very polar. Oxidation VOA was over 120. Besides those motors were SPFI and lean burn tech. I could have likely run it longer but never did.    We had a Toyota bought new I ran on Pennzoil's latest and greatest synthetic of the day with "Penthane". A made up word for a very low dose of PAO. Tried 7,500 mile OCI's in that Group III/VI chemistry and the rings tapped out at 90K. Rocker box wasn't as bad as the one Punch put up but it wasn't good either. Also a SPFI motor.    I'm around 3,750 across the board on these GDI monsters and the oil it tapped out by then usually on TBN/TAN crossover and color. Red Line HP Euro.    The AMSOIL SS brochures tell you to follow the OEM values for the service class but that it can be run up to 25K if monitored. I can't imagine what motor could go that distance and not tap out. I've never owned one.    Yes, I know. Lot's of people do. I'm just not going to be one of them. 
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      I knew a guy in the early 80's that bought a new Monte Carlo and ran it a 100,000 miles without ever changing the filter or the oil. Just kept adding. It looked like that inside.     
    • whenindoubtuseahammer
      My First Project and GMC has me stumped

      By whenindoubtuseahammer · Posted

      Good evening. I was lucky enough to get passed down to me a 2007 GMC LBZ that was my great uncle's. While the underside and rockers are more or less gone I feel like with time I can restore it to working order since it only has 110,000 miles and he put nearly every option he could get without getting the new body style since he did not trust DEF. So far I have done everything I can think of but when I put the key into the ignition nothing happens. I put 2 brand new batteries in it. Cleaned the terminals. Check all the fuses and relays and they all pass with my multimeter. I know I'm missing something that I just cant think of. The only odd thing is the OBD2 port works which makes me think its not the mega fuse. Any advice would be greatly appreciated. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...