2017 Sierra SLE 5.3 back from tune

[RMR]

Borla Touring catback and Airaid CAI. Custom tuned at local shop.  299rwhp and 332rwtq.  HP is Ok - but torque is better than I expected. Online calculators put that at motor numbers of 377hp and 417trq. Thought I would share results for those still considering these type mods.

 

HP tuners was used.

[TRKLGND]

48 minutes ago, RMR said:

Borla Touring catback and Airaid CAI. Custom tuned at local shop.  299rwhp and 332rwtq.  HP is Ok - but torque is better than I expected. Online calculators put that at motor numbers of 377hp and 417trq. Thought I would share results for those still considering these type mods.

 

HP tuners was used.

Your engine is rated at 383hp and 416 lb ft of torque using E85 (assuming it was E85 compatible) from the factory with no mods.  Not sure what the tune, exhaust and CAI did for you.

If you have a non FFV 5.3L then the gains you saw put it even with a stock FFV truck.

Edited December 14, 2018 by paracutin

[RMR]

No E85 or Flex fuel. Engine started at 355hp and 383trq. So now you can assess the gains in context.

[pronstar]

Dynos are all different, and extrapolating gains from a single number are meaningless. Especially when trying to compare power at the crank versus wheels.

The only way to tell what your gains are, requires a baseline pull with no mods.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[RMR]

Understood.  I have had many dyno tunes with them. Some using baseline vehicles no mods. In comparing previous efforts, these results are consistent with those efforts.  My truck certainly made some gains with mods prior to tuning.  I only got 5 more hp but 14 trq between baseline and final run. The numbers I sited from a calculator may be off slightly. But I doubt by much.

 

New to this board. That said, I see a lot of folks looking to do similar simpilistic mods. With the same powerplant.  And I've read lots of debates here on canned vs custom tunes. My intent was to show that target audience what they might expect with those mods and a custom tune. 

[TRKLGND]

3 hours ago, RMR said:

No E85 or Flex fuel. Engine started at 355hp and 383trq. So now you can assess the gains in context.

I did.  You spent hundreds to get the same hp and torque as an E85 capable bone stock truck.

[RMR]

There were no E-85 Sierras. E-85 is not readily available where I live and travel.  E-85 would not be a cost effective alternative for someone who drives many miles per week.  Any thoughts on the gains I did get? 

 

 

Edited December 15, 2018 by RMR
Content

[SS502]

4 hours ago, RMR said:

There were no E-85 Sierras. E-85 is not readily available where I live and travel.  E-85 would not be a cost effective alternative for someone who drives many miles per week.  Any thoughts on the gains I did get? 

 

 

Yeah, those who readily have E-85 available tend to forget it’s not everywhere. I have never seen it here or maybe I just haven’t looked hard enough but I can’t use it anyway. My thoughts? Any gain is a good gain so long as it doesn’t reduce the overall reliability. Doesn’t matter what you do, there will always be those who have or know how to do it better. Thanks for sharing what you did/found/used.

[SS502]

8 hours ago, paracutin said:

I did.  You spent hundreds to get the same hp and torque as an E85 capable bone stock truck.

Does this assume E-85 is actually being used? I am not being a smart a$$ I just don’t know. Does the increase in performance and numbers only come to life while utilizing E-85? If so it wouldn’t mean diddly squat here, we have no E-85.

[TRKLGND]

1 hour ago, SS502 said:

Does this assume E-85 is actually being used? I am not being a smart a$$ I just don’t know. Does the increase in performance and numbers only come to life while utilizing E-85? If so it wouldn’t mean diddly squat here, we have no E-85.

Yes.  If you own an Flex Fuel Vehicle you can run E85.  E85 gives the 5.3L 28hp and 33lb ft of torque.  383hp - 416lb ft vs 355hp - 383lb ft.

Unfortunately, E85 is not available everywhere.  So, for you guys that can't get it, you need mods and a tune just to get the same power from your 5.3.  Kinda sucks for you.  You have to spend hundreds to get the power a guy from the midwest can get by switching fuels.

[SS502]

33 minutes ago, paracutin said:

Yes.  If you own an Flex Fuel Vehicle you can run E85.  E85 gives the 5.3L 28hp and 33lb ft of torque.  383hp - 416lb ft vs 355hp - 383lb ft.

Unfortunately, E85 is not available everywhere.  So, for you guys that can't get it, you need mods and a tune just to get the same power from your 5.3.  Kinda sucks for you.  You have to spend hundreds to get the power a guy from the midwest can get by switching fuels.

That does suck, I can’t use it with my 6.2 but I have a few friends with the FF 5.3 and I know they’d certainly enjoy the added power. Thanks for the info ?

[RMR]

Points taken.  Remember though, the tune does more than get me the power gains. It eliminates my torque management, fattens the torque curve and starts it earlier, as well as properly adjusts my AF ratio from mid range on. I will retain my mpg if i still drive it nice. Also shift firmer and faster depending on throttle input.

 

E-85 can be had if you hunt it down as plenty of older road vehicles still exist that can use it (Google shows 4 places). Those who can and use E-85 here are typically turbo vehicles tuned specifically for it. Guys who no longer care about any mpg.

 

Cheers

[Donstar]

Gaining extra horsepower through fuel or tuning is a popular pursuit. These gains have to be measured on special equipment (dyno) to confirm if we have actually increased the power of our trucks.  Most will argue that the extra 20-30 hp is noticeable in their daily driving.  (My truck "feels" more responsive after an oil change!)  My question is, other than numbers on paper, what is gained from going from 355 to 385 hp?  In the olden days the difference between moving from a truck that produced around 105 hp into a beast that produced approximately 135 hp was dramatic.    Three years ago I went from a Vortec 5.3 (315 hp) to a Ecoboost 4.3 (285 hp).   Both vehicles are SLE 4X4 crews with a 6 spd and 3.42 gear ratio.  I haven't experienced any operational differences but there was a huge improvement in fuel (and oil) consumption!  In February I am planning to drive from Vancouver B.C to Houston TX.  I hope to find E85 along the way for the experience but anticipate most of the benefit will simply be in the knowledge that I have over 300 hp moving my truck!

[TRKLGND]

And a tune also potentially voids your power train warranty, if that happens to matter to you. 

[RMR]

The advantages of the tune for me are; I live at 7200ft elevation. Everything I do in Colorado is at 9000-11000 ft. Hunting, ATVing, camping.  With the factory already holding back my crank rated power at less than full throttle, every bit of usable power is desired especially sine those activities involve pulling a trailer into the mountains. The other plus is the drivability of the transmission. Soft pedal input, soft shift. Heavy pedal input, firmer/quicker shift.  Those two things are actually good for the transmission as it applies more power. My torque curve do to the ajustment in power enrichment also makes it respond better to moderate throttle input. Meaning I can pull away from a dead stop with a load better.

Last thing on E85 vehicles. While it generates similar power to what I have now, the factory tune is still holding a portion of that in check in the name of protecting the drivetrain. My set up is not.

 

I have had zero issues with warranty on my previously tuned GM products. As others have said, it would need to be verifiable the tune was the culprit. At this level of minimal modification, and the over engineered strength of the LS motor, 6L80 trans and drivetrain, easily exceptable risk. 

 

Cheers

Edited December 15, 2018 by RMR
grammer