Jump to content

Back in a GM again and it feels good.

travis73

By travis73
in Hobbies, Tech & Outdoors

Recommended Posts

travis73 Enthusiast

travis73

Posted
Posted

Hi all, so in 2015 after many years of owning all GM vehicles I decided to try something different so I bought a Ram, It was an ok truck but boy am I glad to be back in a GM. Here is my new 2018 GMC.

CIMG3400.JPG

CIMG3401.JPG

mookdoc6 Senior Enthusiast

mookdoc6

Posted
Posted

What kind Engine is in this "Shorty" why did you choose this engine?  What Ram are you comparing it too?  Thanks!  Glad you came back...

travis73 Enthusiast

travis73

Posted
  • Author
Posted
45 minutes ago, mookdoc6 said:

What kind Engine is in this "Shorty" why did you choose this engine?  What Ram are you comparing it too?  Thanks!  Glad you came back...

It's a 5.3L with 342 gears,  I chose this engine because I had a similar set up in my 2011 GMC Sierra and loved the way it worked, also I am not a fan of the 4.3L engine. The Ram I am comparing it to was my 2015, it was a reg cab short box too, it had the 3.6L pentastar engine with 355 gears.

mookdoc6 Senior Enthusiast

mookdoc6

Posted
Posted
37 minutes ago, travis73 said:

It's a 5.3L with 342 gears,  I chose this engine because I had a similar set up in my 2011 GMC Sierra and loved the way it worked, also I am not a fan of the 4.3L engine. The Ram I am comparing it to was my 2015, it was a reg cab short box too, it had the 3.6L pentastar engine with 355 gears.

Ok, great thanks!  How do you feel honestly about the pentastar engine on power/mileage etc? 

travis73 Enthusiast

travis73

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 minute ago, mookdoc6 said:

Ok, great thanks!  How do you feel honestly about the pentastar engine on power/mileage etc? 

I honestly loved the 3.6L engine, it was very smooth and quiet and it had almost as much get up and go as my 5.3L does, as for milage it was better if I was just jigging arround but the 5.3L gets better highway milage. The Ram was a good truck, it just lacked rear suspension, and the front suspension was terribly rough, it was an enginering problem because my truck had the same suspension under it as a full size truck with a hemi, and since the pentestar sat so far back and was so much lighter it made the front end over sprung, basically the worst riding pick up I've ever owned.

mookdoc6 Senior Enthusiast

mookdoc6

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, travis73 said:

I honestly loved the 3.6L engine, it was very smooth and quiet and it had almost as much get up and go as my 5.3L does, as for milage it was better if I was just jigging arround but the 5.3L gets better highway milage. The Ram was a good truck, it just lacked rear suspension, and the front suspension was terribly rough, it was an enginering problem because my truck had the same suspension under it as a full size truck with a hemi, and since the pentestar sat so far back and was so much lighter it made the front end over sprung, basically the worst riding pick up I've ever owned.

Wow!  Thanks for the dissertation on the short comings with the RAM V6 setup.  We are battling out on GM'S new platform and if the 4.3 stays or goes DODO.  So I wanted to see your opinion.  I am not much of need POWER guy either it just never seemed beneficial or Dollar sense to grab GM'S 4.3 V6 even though I don't need a V8.  If it was presented to me same exact truck everything and gearing.....3K cheaper yeah, OK.  But it's not that way.

 

I think the RAM 3.6L is "OK" but is not even truck material worthy but it seems they nailed it with the 8speed mated to give it the overall performance....Unfortunately, the placement on chassis is off.  I think GM nailed the new iteration 4.3L GDI "truck engine" only problem is nobody wants to buy it or when it's 2 out of 20 it starts costing GM money to offer it.  

  • 1 month later...

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • PunchT37
      Parking Brake - Automatic Engagement Questions

      By PunchT37 · Posted

      I have a `25, 1500 that auto sets on incline. Never knew that at first. I have the electronic shifter. Just think if it didn`t do that? Unlike a mechanical shift that you can muscle out of park, how would you get this thing out? That would be a problem.   What I found out later is, I don`t have to push the button to release. Just put it in gear.   Setting parameters? Don`t know if it`s possible.
    • SoCal Angler
      Parking Brake - Automatic Engagement Questions

      By SoCal Angler · Posted

      2023 GMC 3500 HD, SLE, 6.6L Gas, 4x4, 6 Spd Options:  SLE Convenience Package; Driver Alert Package 1; Spray on Bedliner; X31 Off Road Package; TRAILERING MIRRORS, HEATED POWER -ADJUSTABLE, AUTO DIMMING, WITH TURN INDICATORS WHEELHOUSE LINERS, REAR INC. REAR AXLE - 3.73 RATIO INC. GVWR, 11,350 LBS. (5148 KG) INC. FRONT AND REAR PARK ASSIST, INC. ULTRASONIC     I have been launching my new boat and noticed some things related to the parking brake.. I usually set the parking brake (habit) when on flat ground for typical driving.    When backed down on the launch ramp to launch the boat and I place gear selector into Park, the parking brake activates automatically. My second nature is to set parking brake manually and noticed I was turing the parking brake off.  The parking brake appears to be setting itself automatically.   I looked all over my owner's manual and only found references to being on an incline and manually setting parking brake, or at times parking brake will be auto engaged, but nothing specific to my situation.    When is the parking brake automatically engaged?  Under what specific circumstances?  Can the auto set parameters be changed?     I like the auto set feature.  It would be nice if always engaged when shifted into Park and released when shifted out of Park (like my wifes 2025 RAV4).   Thanks!    
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...