v6 vs. v8 debate

[Brian S.]

 

 

Depreciation is a tricky thing and getting values from sites like KBB are subjective at best. What something is worth is and what someone is willing to pay for it are two totally different things. Case in point, KBB, might say your truck has a value of $33K, but you might easily find no one is willing to pay that, maybe they will pay more, or maybe there is no demand, in that case is your truck worth $33K? What is fair to say is what is the market trend supporting? If 80% of Silverado's and Sierra's are sold with a V8, that would lead deductive reasoning to agree that more buyers prefer a V8, which would also translate to the used market. I agree that the sole purpose of optioning a truck shouldn't be based on resale. In regards to fluctuating gas prices, statistics show that in the US in regards to full size sales, there is no uptick in V6 sales when prices spike, what the market shows is buyers will buy car based SUVs, use a utility trailer, or rent a pickup truck when they really need it. Car and Driver wrote an article when the new K2s came out, back then V6 sales accounted for only 5% of 1500 sales, that was back when gas was close to $3.00/gallon.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-chevrolet-silverado-v-6-instrumented-test-review

 

 

Steve, don't you think that is a bit misleading? The 4.3l V6 they were talking about had 195 hp and 240 ft lbs torque.

 

The new 4.3l has 285hp and 305 ft lbs torque on regular gas, and that jumps to 305hp/330 ft lbs torque on E85.

 

Do you think the new one "might" be a "slightly" more reasonable choice? You know, the whole 46% more horsepower and 27% more torque at minimum thing?

 

Now the 5.3l from 2013 had 315hp and 335ft lbs torque. That's 10% more hp and torque for the 2013 engine that most people bought, unless the new 4.3l guy runs E85. Then the new 4.3ls have 3% less hp and 1% less torque.

 

Think hard about those numbers Steve. The new 4.3l has at worst 90% of the power of the 2013 5.3l.

 

Now I know you were driving a Taco truck back then, but I had a 2002 5.3l Silverado, a 2005 5.3l Silverado, and a 2010 5.3l Silverado that felt pretty similar to me. (including towing my 3000lb boats)

 

I'll go one further:

PERSONALLY, I wouldn't be on internet forums talking down to the 4.3l owners like the 5.3l is some mucho macho, fire breather.

 

http://www.caranddriver.com/toyota/camry

 

A 6 cylinder Toyota Camry will drive away from our 5.3s like they were standing still at a stoplight race.

 

The 6.2l is the only one that can really lay claim to "big, manly truckin' engine".

[Brian S.]

Out of curiosity Silverado Steve, do you think the millions of guys that are driving 5.3ls from 1995 -2013 are saying to themselves, "Thank god I have 10% more horsepower than those Gen V 6 banger guys! That 10% makes all the difference!"?

[Silverado Steve]

No, i don't think theres a direct correlation between these stats, the old 4.3 and the current 4.3. The fact is as i mentioned in my previous post is that there is no direct correlation of gas prices going up and the sales of 4.3s going up. As i also mentioned, that article was written when gas was well over $3.00/gallon. Also true was truck sales across the board fell at the peak of heightened gas prices and the economy tanking, including mid size trucks. When gas prices spike, people stray away from buying new trucks and trend towards economy cars, sedans and CUVs. I think as usual you are trying to read between the lines and make assumptions as to what i am trying to say. Also true, a 2.5 4cyl Camry will walk away from a 5.3 1500; two totally different beasts my friend...Power to weight ratio matters, a v-twin Harley will walk away from a 6.2 1500 as well, are you trying to say they should put a v-twin into a full size? See how that reading betwen the lines works?

 

Steve, don't you think that is a bit misleading? The 4.3l V6 they were talking about had 195 hp and 240 ft lbs torque.

 

The new 4.3l has 285hp and 305 ft lbs torque on regular gas, and that jumps to 305hp/330 ft lbs torque on E85.

 

Do you think the new one "might" be a "slightly" more reasonable choice? You know, the whole 46% more horsepower and 27% more torque at minimum thing?

 

Now the 5.3l from 2013 had 315hp and 335ft lbs torque. That's 10% more hp and torque for the 2013 engine that most people bought, unless the new 4.3l guy runs E85. Then the new 4.3ls have 3% less hp and 1% less torque.

 

Think hard about those numbers Steve. The new 4.3l has at worst 90% of the power of the 2013 5.3l.

 

Now I know you were driving a Taco truck back then, but I had a 2002 5.3l Silverado, a 2005 5.3l Silverado, and a 2010 5.3l Silverado that felt pretty similar to me. (including towing my 3000lb boats)

 

I'll go one further:

PERSONALLY, I wouldn't be on internet forums talking down to the 4.3l owners like the 5.3l is some mucho macho, fire breather.

 

http://www.caranddriver.com/toyota/camry

 

A 6 cylinder Toyota Camry will drive away from our 5.3s like they were standing still at a stoplight race.

 

The 6.2l is the only one that can really lay claim to "big, manly truckin' engine".

 

[Silverado Steve]

Funny you ask Brian. I know a couple of former generation 5.3 owners, who now own a K2 with the 5.3 and what they say is the new 5.3 gives me 70 more hp and almost 100 more lbs/ft of torque with better overall mpgs and more towing capability..... not the 4.3 has caught up to the old 4.8. I think the former mindset vastly outweighs the latter and 80% of GM buyers think the same. You sure do spend a lot of time trying to convince people otherwise. You also try to convince people with V8s that the should of bought a V6....put you efforts and talents to other things...man. I think we all agree choices are great and we all had reason we bought what we bought. From a cost standpoint only, i don't think there is an overwhelming argument that the 4.3 is a big money saver versus the 5.3...lets leave it at that...imwould think youmwould agree, seeing how you used to drive a 4.3 and now own a 5.3 right? Like I said, spend your collective efforts on ither things....stop picking useless arguments......no one including myself have ever said the current 4.3 is a bad motor. For me, incant see losing 30% capability to save what amounts to $1K overall as a true saving, someone else might...more power to them.

 

 

Out of curiosity Silverado Steve, do you think the millions of guys that are driving 5.3ls from 1995 -2013 are saying to themselves, "Thank god I have 10% more horsepower than those Gen V 6 banger guys! That 10% makes all the difference!"?

[Knightfall]

Just chiming in again here; by the time I would want to sell my truck it probably won't be worth a whole lot. It'll more likely be owned by a proud high school kid who saved up a couple thousand for it. Might even have an Antique tag. Just saying this because resale definitely isn't everything. And as far as the whole capability testosterone match you guys got, I know plenty of people who worked their trucks in oil fields, on citrus plantations, and on ranches HARD that had maybe 250 HP at most. Probably more like in the 180's. Those trucks did fine. Yeah, trailers are heavier now and the work is probably easier (in a way, new trucks' size can make things harder), but it wasn't impossible by any means. Don't get me wrong, I love how far engineering has come with motor technology and I hope things keep on getting more powerful, and I may own a V8 one day. But dern y'all. You can do alot with these motors that have similar stats to an 80's 454. I just want straight 6's to come back.

[Silverado Steve]

One thing i like about the current crops of LD full size trucks is that if you want and need, they can perform with the capability of what took a 2500 from 15-20 years ago, so you can have the ride and comfort of a LD truck and pull that 8K lb trailer without the day to day rough ride and handling of a HD. Improvement is a great thing.

 

 

Just chiming in again here; by the time I would want to sell my truck it probably won't be worth a whole lot. It'll more likely be owned by a proud high school kid who saved up a couple thousand for it. Might even have an Antique tag. Just saying this because resale definitely isn't everything. And as far as the whole capability testosterone match you guys got, I know plenty of people who worked their trucks in oil fields, on citrus plantations, and on ranches HARD that had maybe 250 HP at most. Probably more like in the 180's. Those trucks did fine. Yeah, trailers are heavier now and the work is probably easier (in a way, new trucks' size can make things harder), but it wasn't impossible by any means. Don't get me wrong, I love how far engineering has come with motor technology and I hope things keep on getting more powerful, and I may own a V8 one day. But dern y'all. You can do alot with these motors that have similar stats to an 80's 454. I just want straight 6's to come back.

[Brian S.]

Funny you ask Brian. I know a couple of former generation 5.3 owners, who now own a K2 with the 5.3 and what they say is the new 5.3 gives me 70 more hp and almost 100 more lbs/ft of torque with better overall mpgs and more towing capability..... not the 4.3 has caught up to the old 4.8. I think the former mindset vastly outweighs the latter and 80% of GM buyers think the same. You sure do spend a lot of time trying to convince people otherwise. You also try to convince people with V8s that the should of bought a V6....put you efforts and talents to other things...man. I think we all agree choices are great and we all had reason we bought what we bought. From a cost standpoint only, i don't think there is an overwhelming argument that the 4.3 is a big money saver versus the 5.3...lets leave it at that...imwould think youmwould agree, seeing how you used to drive a 4.3 and now own a 5.3 right? Like I said, spend your collective efforts on ither things....stop picking useless arguments......no one including myself have ever said the current 4.3 is a bad motor. For me, incant see losing 30% capability to save what amounts to $1K overall as a true saving, someone else might...more power to them.

 

 

I don't know Steve, 0-60 and quarter mile times are just sexier than tow capacity.

 

And more useful, as most people aren't towing or hauling anything near the capacities of the 4.3l. Which is ironically the same as the tow capacity of the 5.3 if the 5.3 has the standard 3.08 gears and the 4.3 has the 3.42s.

Funny you ask Brian. I know a couple of former generation 5.3 owners, who now own a K2 with the 5.3 and what they say is the new 5.3 gives me 70 more hp and almost 100 more lbs/ft of torque with better overall mpgs and more towing capability..... not the 4.3 has caught up to the old 4.8. I think the former mindset vastly outweighs the latter and 80% of GM buyers think the same. You sure do spend a lot of time trying to convince people otherwise. You also try to convince people with V8s that the should of bought a V6....put you efforts and talents to other things...man. I think we all agree choices are great and we all had reason we bought what we bought. From a cost standpoint only, i don't think there is an overwhelming argument that the 4.3 is a big money saver versus the 5.3...lets leave it at that...imwould think youmwould agree, seeing how you used to drive a 4.3 and now own a 5.3 right? Like I said, spend your collective efforts on ither things....stop picking useless arguments......no one including myself have ever said the current 4.3 is a bad motor. For me, incant see losing 30% capability to save what amounts to $1K overall as a true saving, someone else might...more power to them.

 

 

I don't know Steve, 0-60 and quarter mile times are just sexier than tow capacity.

 

And more useful, as most people aren't towing or hauling anything near the capacities of the 4.3l. Which is ironically the same as the tow capacity of the 5.3 if the 5.3 has the standard 3.08 gears and the 4.3 has the 3.42s.

[Silverado Steve]

I think there is a direct correlation to the availability of the 4.3 and the 5.3 with the 3.08 gears. I have said in other threads, that when comparing those two powertrains, the 4.3 makes sense. As i have also said, i personally would not buy a full size truck with mid size capability....that applies equivocally for me with the 5.3 with the 3.08 gearset. I made sure i got the 3.42 for that very reason. Just like they don't offer the 4.3 in numbers here in Colorado, the same is true with the 5.3 with the 3.08. Plenty of threads on people who were duped thinking they got the 3.42 but have the 3.08.

 

I don't know Steve, 0-60 and quarter mile times are just sexier than tow capacity.

 

And more useful, as most people aren't towing or hauling anything near the capacities of the 4.3l. Which is ironically the same as the tow capacity of the 5.3 if the 5.3 has the standard 3.08 gears and the 4.3 has the 3.42s.

 

I don't know Steve, 0-60 and quarter mile times are just sexier than tow capacity.

 

And more useful, as most people aren't towing or hauling anything near the capacities of the 4.3l. Which is ironically the same as the tow capacity of the 5.3 if the 5.3 has the standard 3.08 gears and the 4.3 has the 3.42s.

[Ianders2001]

I have a 2016 Double Cab silverado V6 and love it. I typically base buyers remorse on most things I purchase, but not this truck. I had a 2016 Tacoma 4 cylinder and put 28,000 miles in it in 8 months. It was the biggest piece of crap I have ever driven. I previously had a V6 Grand Cherokee 2012 and loved it and a 2004 Z71 Tahoe with the 5.3 V8 and liked it (not loved it). I honestly can't tell a difference between the power in the Tahoe and new truck. I put about 36,000 miles per year on a vehicle with 98% of them on the highway at 70 mph. I bought the Tacoma thinking it would have plenty of power for running up and down the roads...boy was I wrong. I am a responsible adult (37 year old engineer) and felt like my days of caring about power were over so I bought the 4 cylinder. I always drive with the cruise control and as long as I can stay below 2,000 rpms at 73 mph, I'm good. The Tacoma was so under powered I couldn't stand it any longer. I do not feel this wat about the V6 Silverado at 73 mph I'm still well under 2,000 rpm. The truck I bought was a rental turn in with about 17,000 miles...so the cost savings were the main driving force in my decision. One time I bought a John boat with a 15 hp outboard. It was plenty fast enough by myself but with another person it wouldn't plane out. I sold it to an old man and he told me something I will never forget, he said "horsepower is like oxygen, you don't think about it until you don't have enough". For my driving habits, the V6 has plenty of power...so much that I am not worrying about it. Coming from a guy who has been driving an under powered truck for almost a year, I can assure you this truck is not under powered.

[Donstar]

This topic has appeared a few times on this forum and I am pleased when people express their satisfaction with the 4.3 V6. It is a strong and capable engine. The fact that two larger engines are offered with the 1500's does not diminish the strengths of this motor. GM offers a wide selection of trim and engine choices and all combinations are terrific, imo!

[paullgj]

My $.02. I've owned lots of Chevy SWB's - the old 4.3 l v-6 ( kind of a slug), 5.0 v-8, 4.8 l v-8, 350 V-8 (several of them) and now the new 4.3 l V-8. It smokes all the previous mentioned vehicles. Granted, my vehicle is the lightest full size truck GM makes - SWB 2wd reg cab with G80 - it is surprisingly economical - trip computer registered 26 mpg yesterday for the 60 mile trip Brownsville to McAllen, Texas. I never had economy like that in my previous vehicles. Resale value? I paid so little for the machine that pct.-wise won't be losing much if I ever wanted to see it. A $70,000 fully tricked-out crew cab, pct.-wise they see a big drop.

 

Get what you serves you best - my $.02 is that the current v-6 ain't no slug, at least in the lighter-weight models.

[Brian S.]

One thing i like about the current crops of LD full size trucks is that if you want and need, they can perform with the capability of what took a 2500 from 15-20 years ago, so you can have the ride and comfort of a LD truck and pull that 8K lb trailer without the day to day rough ride and handling of a HD. Improvement is a great thing.

 

 

Your argument is specious.

 

While it's true the new 5.3l offers around the capability of the old 3/4 tons (and the new 4.3s offer around the capability of older V8s for that matter) you make an arbitrary distinction that makes no sense.

 

1. The new 6.2s and diesels offer much more power and capability than the 5.3s, but in some 3 Bears-esque version of reality, the 5.3 is "just right".

2. There's a lot more to a 3/4 ton pickup than engine power and our 5.3 LDs are in no way a substitute for 3/4 ton trucks. They were built for heavy load work, and also developed torque at much lower rpms for off the line power. You getting that level of torque with your foot on the floor for a couple minutes isn't the same.

 

LD trucks are made to pull boats and light campers.

[Silverado Steve]

Hardly Brian,

 

How many people pull flat trailers loaded with hay bales, or horse trailers that weigh over 8,000 pounds? Around here you see it all the time. Now back 15-20 years ago that requirement would call for a 2500 maybe even a 3500. Today, Rancher Joe can do the same work with a 1500; especially if that drive is just around town or around the farm. My cousins who live in rural Pennsylvania are a testament to this. 15-20 years ago, they all drove HDs to pull a double cattle trailer to the market 40 miles away...today all three drive a Ram 1500, an F150 and a silverado 1500 for the same needs. Now if that trip was long distance with steep hills, lots of braking, you would be right, there would be much more strain on the drivetrain, brakes and transmission of those trucks, but then again we are back to the root of the conversation, buying the right truck for your needs right? I see plenty of private landscapers around town pulling a 12ft utility trailer lodaed with nothing more than a riding lawnmower, a couple of weedwackers, leaf blowers and assorted rakes, shoves and other tools with a 2500....unecessary. The 1500 is now capable to handle these tasks easily if equipped properly.

 

Now introducing the 6.2 and diesels into the equation, the eco diesel in the Ram is a $4,500 upcharge across all trims, the 6.2 is $2500 on trims LTZ on up, which when you figure, is a lot more than $2500 if your factoring an LT. Using your many examples of ethanol in the 4.3, ethanol in the 5.3 brings you to within 20 hps of the 6.2 and 30lbs torque (if equipped) all for $1000 across all trim lines. With those facts, its a hard argument to make that the 5.3 doesnt offers the most bang for the buck in the GM lineup.

 

Your argument is specious.

 

While it's true the new 5.3l offers around the capability of the old 3/4 tons (and the new 4.3s offer around the capability of older V8s for that matter) you make an arbitrary distinction that makes no sense.

 

1. The new 6.2s and diesels offer much more power and capability than the 5.3s, but in some 3 Bears-esque version of reality, the 5.3 is "just right".

2. There's a lot more to a 3/4 ton pickup than engine power and our 5.3 LDs are in no way a substitute for 3/4 ton trucks. They were built for heavy load work, and also developed torque at much lower rpms for off the line power. You getting that level of torque with your foot on the floor for a couple minutes isn't the same.

 

LD trucks are made to pull boats and light campers.

[Donstar]

. With those facts, its a hard argument to make that the 5.3 doesnt offers the most bang for the buck in the GM lineup.

Enjoy your 5.3 but please quit being so combative against a good product by your preferred manufacturer. Your stories/facts (ie Rancher Joe) are entertaining and in return I could entertain you with stories about the loads me and my cousins carried with 60's and 70's 1/2 tons with 98 hp through steep mountain passes (don't worry I won't ;-) To tell me it is a hard argument to justify what I bought is insulting. I have no trouble justifying my choice for myself. The purchase was carefully thought out, I could have spent more, I could have spent less. I negotiated my first truck purchase in 1971 and have owned trucks ever since, I am exceptionally happy with my truck and proud to own it c/w no payments!

.

[boynton6spd]

I have had both.

The V6 is a great engine and will not let you down. The newest version has 285hp!

That being said...

The 5.3 is an absolute beast, and with the new 8spd auto will get better mileage. (trust me).

The added expanse is usually offset with a higher rebate.

If you can squeeze out the extra money do the V8 and you will love it.

If you are financing the truck, the $800 over the course of the loan is almost nothing in my book.

But I totally understand your question...