Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

There have been multiple threads/posts on what fuel to feed the 6.2 beast. Since GM only recommends premium fuel, it’s become a gray area and most people don’t like gray areas. Not surprisingly, there are passionate opinions on either side. I for one am a facts guy and prefer to go with actual numbers rather than some romantic notions of what someone thinks. It turns out this experiment has already been done for the L86 engine. Our engine is the L87 but it makes the same power and torque as the L86 and it seems the only difference is the addition of DFM for the L87.

 

 

Summary below

1.       Knock: No audible knock was observed with regular fuel.

2.       Power: Reduction in power was average of 0.7% which evaluates to 2.94hp. I was actually quite surprised by this, I was expecting more. If you claim you can tell a 0.7% difference, then more power to you.

3.       MPG: The biggest gain was fuel economy. They recorded an average of 7.1% reduction in mpg with regular. If you live in an area where premium fuel cost is less than 7.1%, then by all means go for it. Where I live, premium is $15 more on a $45 regular fill-up.

 

I’m not here to tell you what fuel to feed your 6.2 but if you prefer numbers like me, then maybe this can help you make an educated decision. Will probably get some flak for this but that’s ok.

 

AAA Report

 

 

  • Like 4
Posted (edited)

I'm old school and the compression ration on these engines being what it is, back in the day premium was the only thing you ran to keep from destroying the engine  from pre-ignition.   Now today we have computers and direct injection along with fancy variable valves.  But I still say compression is compression and fuel ignition still are the same.  If you want to make sure your engine lives long and you plan on keeping it, paying the extra for premium is the only way to go.

 

Now if you trade every three years then it wouldn't matter.  Justin at Black Bear Performance even stated that to at least run mid grade.  He see's what goes on inside the computer and how the engine reacts.  So his recommendation is based on his trade of tuning and seeing what comes through is email on individuals sending in tune files and I'm sure he can tell who runs what grade of fuel by the engine file.

 

Just my opinion.

Edited by Black02Silverado
  • Like 2
Posted

Using Premium Unleaded Gas in my AT4 had failed to produce an increase in gas milage. Simple math makes 87 octane the best fuel to use. 

Posted

Justin used to tell me the same with my 5.3 Tahoes, seems the gas in my area was crap and he said that I should run at least 89 based on what he saw on his computer. 

Posted (edited)
14 minutes ago, Black02Silverado said:

I'm old school and the compression ration on these engines being what it is, back in the day premium was the only thing you ran to keep from destroying the engine  from pre-ignition.   Now today we have computers and direct injection along with fancy variable valves.  But I still say compression is compression and fuel ignition still are the same.  If you want to make sure your engine lives long and you plan on keeping it, paying the extra for premium is the only way to go.

 

Now if you trade every three years then it wouldn't matter.  Justin at Black Bear Performance even stated that to at least run mid grade.  He see's what goes on inside the computer and how the engine reacts.  So his recommendation is based on his trade of tuning and seeing what comes through is email on individuals sending in tune files and I'm sure he can tell who runs what grade of fuel by the engine file.

 

Just my opinion.

I can understand tuning requiring premium. Is he saying the same for an un-tuned factory car? If so, what facts is he basing this on?

 

There are other advantages to premium such as more detergents. The detergents argument matters less these days because of direct injection so you are going to get carbon build-up on the valves either way. 

Edited by truck_newbie
Posted
14 minutes ago, BlueAT4 said:

Using Premium Unleaded Gas in my AT4 had failed to produce an increase in gas milage. Simple math makes 87 octane the best fuel to use. 

Personally, i saw a 1.5 mpg improvement when i used premium. Didn't notice any other difference. 

Posted

The computer can and will compensate for lower octane fuel, it will retard the timing to prevent knock. This absolutely will reduce performance and if you get some really bad 87 you may experience knock and you may not hear it. It’s your truck but there is a reason GM recommends higher octane, it might only be for better performance, but isn’t that why you bought the 6.2.

  • Thanks 2
Posted

I don't know why anyone would choose to pay extra for a 6.2 and then put 87 in it. There are plenty of 5.3's available for the cost conscious consumer.

 

But if you do have a 6.2 and are more concerned with cost of fuel/mile, you are not coming out ahead by paying for 93 octane. Any small gains do not offset the extra cost.

 

Just like anyone with a 5.3 who buys premium fuel won't notice any benefits either.

 

Put in the gas you want, its your truck.

  • Like 1
Posted

High compression (over 9.6:1) requiring premium is for NON direct injection engines. For the 2014-18, compression on stock 5.3 L83 and 6.2 L86 direct injection engines are both 11:1, yet 5.3 did not require premium. DI changes everything, as pre-ignition can be mitigated, so I imagine there is no real need for premium in the 6.2. Awesome to see 0-60 in 5.4 seconds from car and driver from the 6.2 in a 19 4x4 crew cab; thats like a fuggin supercar in the 80s, lol...

Sent from my SM-T580 using Tapatalk

Posted
2 hours ago, spizike9 said:

Good info. Thanks for the post. 

I second this... thanks.  

Posted
2 hours ago, truck_newbie said:

I can understand tuning requiring premium. Is he saying the same for an un-tuned factory car? If so, what facts is he basing this on?

 

There are other advantages to premium such as more detergents. The detergents argument matters less these days because of direct injection so you are going to get carbon build-up on the valves either way. 

Not sure exactly why and it is for stock because I was asking about our 2016 Suburban and getting a tune for it eventually. Best is to email Justin.

Posted
3 hours ago, truck_newbie said:

Personally, i saw a 1.5 mpg improvement when i used premium. Didn't notice any other difference. 

Do you know if the premium fuel was ethanol free? In my area, premium (91 octane) gas is available with ethanol (E10) or without (E0). Just depends on the station. E10 91 octane is generally less expensive then E0. Seems like E0 will usually gain you a little fuel economy. I believe that is because it has more energy (BTU's). Adding ethanol reduces it's energy content but is also cheaper. Hard to say if it pencils out.

 

I'm far from a tuning expert but do monitor timing advance and knock retard with a ScanGauge device. From what I have learned watching these numbers is the computer always seems to want to maximize timing advance as much as possible. If it picks up a few degrees of KR, it backs off timing advance (as it should). From a fuel economy stand point, I imagine the engine is more efficient when the timing is advanced? Even when cruising with a light load (flat road, no wind, not towing) a slight increase in load (incline of a bridge or overpass) can sometimes cause a little KR. Seems like the computer is always trying to push the limit a little. Read somewhere that is does "learn" where it can operate. I wonder if a 6.2 can "learn" to run on 87?

  • Like 1

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • My 2025 Silverado 1500 had to receive a brand-new engine (long block) under warranty last month at only around 16,500 miles. Before the replacement, the truck repeatedly displayed "Engine Oil Level Low" warnings, even though the Oil Life Monitor still showed around 50% remaining after about 6,000 miles since my last oil change. After seeing the warning several times, I checked the dipstick with the engine cold, and the oil level was completely normal. The next day, the message escalated to "Add Engine Oil." At first, I assumed it was just a faulty oil level sensor, so I brought the truck to the dealership. After inspecting the engine, they found internal cylinder wall scoring and ultimately replaced the entire long block under warranty. Before this happened, I was planning to install a 4-inch lift and suspension upgrade on my truck. After needing a new engine at just 16,500 miles, I honestly don't see the point anymore. I also contacted GM to ask whether my vehicle qualified for a buyback, but I was informed that it does not at this time. Anyway, this experience has left me with serious concerns about the long-term reliability of this engine. I sincerely hope NHTSA expands the current investigation or recall to include 2025 model and performs a thorough inspection of affected vehicles. My biggest concern is that these engines may fail shortly after the powertrain warranty expires. If GM truly stands behind this engine, then at the very least, please consider extending the powertrain warranty to 10 years for affected owners. That would go a long way toward restoring customer confidence.
    • Without exception but then I'm the odd duck, right? I know what goes into that test, how it is calculated and thus how to beat it. But EPA values are often not beaten by the general public and the government has in past years adjusted the means and methods to come to those values to more closely approximate "Joe Average".    The only real trick to beating that EPA average is don't drive like "Joe Average".    It's the same method you used to profit from "Economic Migration" and in doing so beat the 'stats'. But you, like me, are not "Joe Average".     The thing you don't seem to grasp is this "Purchasing Power Index" isn't forward looking. It doesn't predict what it going to be but looks backward and states what it was. They are not telling us what the THINK, they are telling us what they MEASURED. Example:    Wife says "I'm going to lose 40 pounds by Christmas". May she does, maybe she doesn't but the doctors office who weighed her when she made that statement and again at Christmas only REPORTS what the RESULT was. You and I can banter about what was possible and what aunt Tilly did till the cows come home but the result is the result. Arguing otherwise is.....irrational. That's all I'm saying. This isn't about:      What you are calling a 'Statistic' is a RESULT not a CALCUATION and as a result the RULE. Like gravity as a rule, it can not be broken. 
    • Just wanted to say thank you for posting this. Years later, your thread is still helping Silverado owners.   I bought my 2025 Silverado 1500 in January 2025, and I've had what feels like the exact same rattle since day one. After reading your findings, I believe my truck has the same issue with the cable carrier contacting the rear sliding window. To be honest, I had pretty much given up on pursuing the issue. It wasn't until I recently drove another brand's pickup that I realized just how quiet their cabin was—and how noisy mine has been all along. On my truck, the rattle happens on almost any paved road, gets even worse on rougher pavement, and I can even hear it during braking and acceleration.   I actually referenced your thread when submitting my case to GM, hoping they'll recognize this as a recurring issue instead of treating it as an isolated incident. The reason I reached out to GM first is because my dealership told me they would need to keep the truck for at least two days just to diagnose the problem. I was concerned that even after two days, they still might not be able to identify the source of the rattle before giving the truck back to me. I had also asked a few dealerships about this issue during previous service visits, but none of them seemed to know what was causing it or had a solution. That's why I decided to contact GM directly first, hoping they might already have an official repair procedure or guidance for this issue.   I also hope GM eventually comes up with an official fix for this problem. I have a feeling there are many Silverado owners experiencing the same rattle, but most either choose to live with it or simply don't know what the cause is.   Really appreciate you taking the time to document your diagnosis. Your post is still making a difference years later.
    • I have 2 choices. 
    • Do you have access to BP fuels? Some stations have Silver 91 E-0 priced the same as their 93 E-10.  There is a local Marathon with 90 alky free for $6 a gallon but I go down the road to BP for $5-ish. They also have a 100 E-0 but that stuff is $10 a pop. 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...