Jump to content

E85 2016 Silverado Reg Cab 6spd 4x4 5.3 upgrade

SCR71822

By SCR71822
in Modifications & Accessories

 Share

Recommended Posts

Jacoby Enthusiast

Jacoby

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, TXGREEK said:

 

That’s what I wanted to know. Black02silverado says he uses it in his older 6.2 all the time with zero issues hmmmm

 

 

Sent from above

And I’ve argued with him about that on here before. He shouldn’t be using it but it’s his truck so whatever. Apparently he’s an environmentalist and cares about his carbon foot print over anything else. 

You don’t run E85 in a vehicle not equipped for it

  • Like 2
  • Replies 94
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

SCR71822
SCR71822

There are three reasons I want to be able to run e85, it can make more power, it is readily available in Illinois, and its cheaper than 87 but has over 100 octane.   I've been running e15 in

SCR71822
SCR71822

Well I have since added a recalibrated thermostat 180-190 that gives me a good temp drop but not too low so cold weather driving and the Air Raid modular intake pipe. I started changing parameter

Black02Silverado
Black02Silverado

Agree, but there is an advantage to running E85.  It burns super clean. So carbon buildup is not an issue. Another one is the higher octane, and one other thing, at least for me.  I like the smell of

Posted Images

TXGREEK Senior Enthusiast

TXGREEK

Posted
Posted
And I’ve argued with him about that on here before. He shouldn’t be using it but it’s his truck so whatever. Apparently he’s an environmentalist and cares about his carbon foot print over anything else. 
You don’t run E85 in a vehicle not equipped for it

At the least, you’ve got to give him credit for doing what he feels is right.


Sent from above
Jacoby Enthusiast

Jacoby

Posted
Posted
Just now, TXGREEK said:


At the least, you’ve got to give him credit for doing what he feels is right.


Sent from above

I did in the other thread. 

 

It’s still not a good enough reason to run fuel in your vehicle it’s not designed to run on. 

  • Thanks 1
TXGREEK Senior Enthusiast

TXGREEK

Posted
Posted
I did in the other thread. 
 
It’s still not a good enough reason to run fuel in your vehicle it’s not designed to run on. 


Agreed


Sent from above
SCR71822 Enthusiast

SCR71822

Posted
  • Author
Posted
39 minutes ago, TXGREEK said:

 


I’d like to just run e85 whenever but I don’t have a 6.2 flex fuel kit yet and the question was if I need a conversion kit for my 6.2 before I can run E85?


Sent from above

 

I believe the possibility exists that it will run very lean as it wont be putting in enough fuel, if the % of alcohol gets way up there.  e85 is general 53% to no more than 83% alcohol, so it depends on where you get you e85.

  • Like 1
TXGREEK Senior Enthusiast

TXGREEK

Posted
Posted

I appreciate it and I’d jump on the flex kit just to have options but not going to jeopardize my 100k extended warranty.


Sent from above

swathdiver Senior Enthusiast

swathdiver

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, SS502 said:

You’re one of the lucky few...nearest E85 around here is in Tallahassee (160 miles) unless something has changed since last October. I would convert my 6.2 today if it was readily available. The E85 locator shows it’s here but it’s not right unfortunately.

In Navarre, there's a Circle K/Exxon that shows they carry E85.  Over in Oyster Bay is a Shell that carries it and another and a Pride on 181 between Clay City and Belforest.  Probably not convenient.

  • Thanks 1
SS502 Senior Enthusiast

SS502

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, swathdiver said:

In Navarre, there's a Circle K/Exxon that shows they carry E85.  Over in Oyster Bay is a Shell that carries it and another and a Pride on 181 between Clay City and Belforest.  Probably not convenient.

I'll check it out, I go through Navarre quite a bit actually although highway 98 this time of year is horrible. Thank you!

  • Like 1
SCR71822 Enthusiast

SCR71822

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well I wanted to reuse the current front engine fuel line, but there is no easy way to bend a 90 degree bend and then out a push connect flare on it.  So, I've decided to cut and use a singe Stainless 90 degree compression elbow in front of the sensor.  It should be here next week.

SCR71822 Enthusiast

SCR71822

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Just finished installing it and testing for leaks so far so good.  I will program the ECM now to see the Sensor.  

 

I would have preferred to bent and flared the existing line but in the space it was impossible.

 

I did put loktite on the stainless elbow threads so it doesn't vibrate loose.

 

 

P_20190327_172010.jpg

P_20190327_172032.jpg

  • Like 1
SCR71822 Enthusiast

SCR71822

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)

Just took for a drive and looked for leaks, no leaks.  Programed the ECM and t saw the alcohol content at 11.8% which is about right since I use E15 usually.

Well I have to wait for my tank to go down so I can fill up with E85.  Here is a picture of the fitting I used, I repurposed the quick connect fitting from the old line I cut.

 

P_20190327_164531.jpg

P_20190327_172024.jpg

Edited by SCR71822
  • Like 1
SCR71822 Enthusiast

SCR71822

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I put about 6 gallons of E85 in to fill the tank.  It is now showing about 30% Ethanol.  It seems to have a little bit more torque and able to stay in V4 mode longer before.  I can't wait to get a full tank of E85.

  • Like 1
SCR71822 Enthusiast

SCR71822

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I'm happy with the conversion so I decided to order the OEM front uel line as well and install, it was only about 55 bucks.  Total cost of the parts is about $130 or so, big cost was the HP tuner.

  • Like 1
swathdiver Senior Enthusiast

swathdiver

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, SCR71822 said:

I put about 6 gallons of E85 in to fill the tank.  It is now showing about 30% Ethanol.  It seems to have a little bit more torque and able to stay in V4 mode longer before.  I can't wait to get a full tank of E85.

I've read that the Gen V 5.3 motor stays in V4 about 50% of the time on gasoline.  These make about 44 horsepower per cylinder and on E85 over 47 hp per cylinder.  Custom tuning may eke out even more performance.

 

My Gen IV 5.3 does really well mpg wise between 20-30% alcohol content, better than on gasoline according to the last 4 tanks of fuel.  Power wise, it loves 80% and gets 2.82 mpg less than gasoline for an average tank of fuel.

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Sugar Bears 2015 GMC Terrain SLE-2 2.4 AWD

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      286,740 Mile Services   8/6/2026   New AC Compressor. Refrigerant oil and dye, evacuate and charge system.  New exhaust system from cat back.  New Iridium plugs plus replace #3 coil Repair/rewire headlamp wiring (passenger side) and replace all forward bulbs. Polish lenses of both assemblies.  Pull rear rotors, clean and adjust parking assembly. Inspect, clean and grease front calipers. Check pads and shoes.  4 wheel power bleed of brake system. Dot 4 Reset idle speed 50 rpm higher New Serpentine belt.    Will need new pads in the rear in about 5K more miles.    Tax Title and License out the door just short of a grand.    AC clutch had bitten the dust. 1 year warranty on the pick and save replacement. Thing will make a Polar Bear cry Uncle.  He spent quite some time on the wiring. It was in the harness and he does nothing half. I got off cheap. I have considerable more light down the road. Sylvania Silver Star replacements.  Gas seal between the porcelain and shell of plug #3 was blown, cooked the coil. That was the cold miss.  Love the new exhaust. I can sneak into the neighborhood again.  Nice to have a working parking brake again. Belle Tire never got it done. That was disappointing.    This was one of her bigger bills and still way cheaper than a payment even given the oil consumption. This thing cost me under a hundred a month in repairs and normal routine costs. What is my incentive to replace it? 🤔           
    • AidenVorpagel
      cam upgrade in CA

      By AidenVorpagel · Posted

      hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • B14Sierra
      Noise after AFM delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Did you figure it out?
    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...