Westers Poll of 2003 models only

lrymal · August 29, 2003

After reading many of the General Motors truck boards, I **think** I'm noticing disappointments of the Westers, but mainly from the '03 trucks.

My theory, such as it is, is that the '03 PCM may have been set from the factory with better optimized values than the '02s and earlier. I have nothing to base this on, but it might explain why the '03 vehicles sometimes feel peppier and zippier than the earlier trucks.

If this is true, then the Westers might, could be, maybe, not have as much of an ability to improve the '03's settings.

This is just a guess and is in no way a bash against the amazing service that the Westers upgrade offers.

496Cubes · August 29, 2003

I noticed a little improvement, but not the great improvement I was expecting. I think a lot of people are just happier with their shifting, but with a manual that's the same. I didn't return it as I think there was a little improvement and I hope to make a cam change in the future which will require programming.

2003 2500HD with 8.1/ZF-6 Speed

bigtruck21 · August 29, 2003

If i'm not mistaken, the 03's have more power than the earlier models. 5.3L 285 vs 280 or 275. The 04's 5.3L has 295. I don't know what gm is doing to get these increased numbers, but if it's pcm work, I can see where the westers wouldn't work as well

Tungsten · August 29, 2003

This is how I understand it.....

The 99 5.3 had 270hp. Then the 00-03 have "285hp"

But I have heard that in 02 that they changed the cam to the vette cam giving the engine around 300hp. I am not sure how true this is, But if I remember right the 02 guys where laying down more HP on the dyno and getting a little better 1/4 times. Maybe GM is finally getting around to updating the specs? Who knows.

surferdude · August 30, 2003

My 99 has the wimpy 5.3L at 270hp - it sure woke up with a catback, Predator, and K&N FIPK. I'm hoping to switch over the Wester's since all of the guys with 99-02's are raving about it's performance.

OR maybe DiabloSport can give me a better program for my Predator? Not sure.

Butch 02 Denali · August 30, 2003

A friend of mine at my C3/Sierra Denali forum has a 2003 Sierra Denali with a 325 hp 6.0 with 4:10's, AWD and Quadrasteer, a heavy truck! It's hardly broken in yet at 1800 miles. He put the Wester's in yesterday, drove around for awhile, then took it to the track. I was with him two weeks ago when he ran the 16.2's. The only change he made was the Wester's PCM, and now he's running 15.3's!!! He did get the 93 octane tuning though! It seems that all the programs, whether handheld or custom programmed like the Wester's work different on different vehicles, some get huge gains, like my friend, and others are marginal, and everything in between! No test or comparison is going to tell you how the program is going to run in your truck, you need to try it yourself and make your own decision. The dyno or the track are not the only indicators of "performance", SOTP is a real thing to the person driving the vehicle, even though it's hard to measure. You can have two programs that produce identical dyno hp, but one "feels" much better in throttle response and low end punch, which one would you choose?

See for your self, here's a link to his post.

http://groups.msn.com/GMCC3Owners/g...436698373328489

Butch 02 Sierra Denali

kazuaki · August 30, 2003

Butch, this is the same response I made to your post on Pickuptruck.com. I'm not trying to start an argument here or anything, but this excerpt from your friend's posts seems to indicate he changed more than just the PCM to make those ET gains.

"So I backed up a 15.3 with a 15.3 with my best before the Westers being a 16.194 in stock trim.

I had 370 miles on the truck and completely stock for the 16.194 at 83.23

Now I have the Volant cold air with ram air, throttle body bypass, screen removed from the Mass air meter, over 1800 miles and the Westers computer."

Butch 02 Denali · August 30, 2003

No problem! here's the answer I made over at PUTC!

All he's saying in that statement is these are all the things he has now, although he did make that 16.194 pass when it was all stock, when I raced him, he had screened his mas, done the throttle bypass and added the Volant with the ram air, and ran an IDENTICAL time, 16.1. It was a hot night though, 89 deg with high humidity and I was .2 off my time too. Do you really think the mods he did make much difference, other than the Wester's? The intake is worth at most 2-5 hp, the bypass has probably no effect, and the mas descreen makes it lose some lower end and gain some top end. I've tried runs with the screen in and out and the 1/4 mile times are identical.

Butch 02 Sierra Denali

bigtruck21 · September 2, 2003

Here is a graph of before and after dyno with the tb mod. dyno graph

It netted me about .5mpg w/o using the extra power

kazuaki · September 2, 2003

Got this email response from Lyndon today:

"Yours might be one of the software 'glitches' that GM has that I've got to do a different program with. Send it back for an upgrade. I've got new tuning parameters and some features that will make this version of software wake up this truck. If this doesn't work, Greg--we'll refund your $$.

I'm hopeful and now the waiting begins. I hope the extra shipping charges and the extra waiting aren't for nothing...

ricks · September 2, 2003

I installed Wester's PCM on my 2003 Sierra after installing a Gibson dual sport cat back exhaust and a K&N FIPK.

My truck's performance increase was most noticable after the PCM installation. Lyndon programed the PCM (including the other mod's) for 87 octane. My truck kicks ass. I'm still impressed with the performance. Gas mileage has improved, but only when I can controll myself.