Jump to content

6.2 Engine: To Premium Or Not, Facts Here

truck_newbie
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 39
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

truck_newbie
truck_newbie

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

dieselfan1
dieselfan1

Lets beat a dead horse some more. My 2 cents is if GM recommends it, use it. If you cheapskates want to save a few bucks go ahead. I didn't buy $70,000 truck to save a few bucks on fuel

BringTheRain403
BringTheRain403

If you can afford a $60k+ truck you can afford an extra $6-$8 per fill-up to put the recommended fuel in it. If your budget is that tight then maybe you shouldn't be buying that truck. Just sayin...

truck_newbie Enthusiast

truck_newbie

Posted
  • Author
Posted
47 minutes ago, gone_fishing said:

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?

I only fill-up at Shell. In my neck of the woods, they have a sticker that says can contain up to 10% ethanol. I don't know if that also applies to the v-power/premium.

 

Your analysis on timing is what EE in the video explains. An engine that lists recommended is designed to adapt. It will try to advance timing as much as possible because that's what gives the best fuel economy and power. Based on the results in the study, it seems the L86/L87 engine has been tuned to advance timing for fuel economy only. If you switch to regular, it will retard timing and use more fuel but give you the same power. An engine that requires premium will not retard timing by much if at all. That's why the Audi in the study was knocking because it required premium. 

truck_newbie Enthusiast

truck_newbie

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 hours ago, aseibel said:

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.

I don't understand your reasoning. People are of course free to put whatever fuel they want in their engine. I see this less of cheaping out on premium fuel and more of what you gain or lose by going regular. This study has proved, and backed it up with scientific data that you don't gain anything by running premium (adjusting for the mpg gain of premium) on the 6.2. 

 

Personally, if i pay for something, i want to be sure i'm getting the benefits. I paid extra for the 6.2 engine because i know i'm getting significant extra hp and torque over the 5.3. Based on this study, I've come to the realization that i'm not gaining anything by fueling the 6.2 with premium. 

  • Like 1
Hydro4acid Enthusiast

Hydro4acid

Posted
Posted

Can we assume that both previous generation 6.2L and this generation 6.2L will both have the same response to 87 octane vs 91/93? 


Ethanol will obviously provide a mpg hit, but if its cheaper without power loss...why not.

 

 

BringTheRain403 Senior Enthusiast

BringTheRain403

Posted
Posted

Ethanol would be better than premium and jump the HP by a bit too. It's a higher octane. The new motors aren't flex fuel tough and running ethanol would cause a CEL to come on...

 

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

aseibel Senior Enthusiast

aseibel

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, truck_newbie said:

I don't understand your reasoning. People are of course free to put whatever fuel they want in their engine. I see this less of cheaping out on premium fuel and more of what you gain or lose by going regular. This study has proved, and backed it up with scientific data that you don't gain anything by running premium (adjusting for the mpg gain of premium) on the 6.2. 

 

Personally, if i pay for something, i want to be sure i'm getting the benefits. I paid extra for the 6.2 engine because i know i'm getting significant extra hp and torque over the 5.3. Based on this study, I've come to the realization that i'm not gaining anything by fueling the 6.2 with premium. 

I'm just saying, why pay more for a truck with a 6.2, only to put regular gas in it? Did you really need the 6.2 then? If you want to take advantage of every horse under the hood, you pay for premium fuel. If you don't need those few extra horses, then a 5.3 would suit you just fine.

  • Like 2
BringTheRain403 Senior Enthusiast

BringTheRain403

Posted
Posted

If you can afford a $60k+ truck you can afford an extra $6-$8 per fill-up to put the recommended fuel in it. If your budget is that tight then maybe you shouldn't be buying that truck. Just sayin...

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
UncleDave Enthusiast

UncleDave

Posted
Posted

In my neck of the woods, we don't have 91 everywhere, but we do have 93. The 93 is on average $0.30/gal more than 87. That's roughly $7 more per fill from almost empty. If I fill once per week that's an extra $364/year, or $30.33/month. If you can afford an extra $30/mo, then it's worth it to fill with premium exclusively and enjoy the benefits thereof. JM2C.

  • Like 2
truck_newbie Enthusiast

truck_newbie

Posted
  • Author
Posted
58 minutes ago, aseibel said:

I'm just saying, why pay more for a truck with a 6.2, only to put regular gas in it? Did you really need the 6.2 then? If you want to take advantage of every horse under the hood, you pay for premium fuel. If you don't need those few extra horses, then a 5.3 would suit you just fine.

That's a blanket statement and generally i would agree with you if there wasn't any data. Fortunately, there is data. Did you even look at the actual report with the numbers and horsepower/torque charts? I'll summarize below. 

 

5.3 Engine
-----------------
Power = 355 hp; Torque = 383 lb-ft

 

6.2 Engine
------------------
Power (Premium) = 420 hp; Torque (Premium) = 460 lb-ft
Power (Reg) = 417 hp; Torque (Reg) = 460 lb-ft

 

I will still be very happy with the 62 hp i'm gaining over the 5.3 compared to the 65 hp i could be getting. I'm sure that 3 hp delta makes all the difference in a 5500 lb truck. Sorry to be sarcastic, just couldn't help it. ? 

aseibel Senior Enthusiast

aseibel

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, truck_newbie said:

That's a blanket statement and generally i would agree with you if there wasn't any data. Fortunately, there is data. Did you even look at the actual report with the numbers and horsepower/torque charts? I'll summarize below. 

 

5.3 Engine
-----------------
Power = 355 hp; Torque = 383 lb-ft

 

6.2 Engine
------------------
Power (Premium) = 420 hp; Torque (Premium) = 460 lb-ft
Power (Reg) = 417 hp; Torque (Reg) = 460 lb-ft

 

I will still be very happy with the 62 hp i'm gaining over the 5.3 compared to the 65 hp i could be getting. I'm sure that 3 hp delta makes all the difference in a 5500 lb truck. Sorry to be sarcastic, just couldn't help it. ? 

No problem. I agree with you. Just be careful posting facts on the internet. The die hard 6.2 crowd will crucify you. Some people don't understand the difference between "recommended" and "required".

  • Like 2
Snakes709 Enthusiast

Snakes709

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, aseibel said:

No problem. I agree with you. Just be careful posting facts on the internet. The die hard 6.2 crowd will crucify you. Some people don't understand the difference between "recommended" and "required".

My wife was like that. Says to use 91 octane on the gas tank door of her chevy equinox. But in the manual it says 91 is recommended but 87 is acceptable and the ecu will adapt to the octane change. I took the suv across canada/northern states and didnt notice a few gas stations in the states the pumps are 93, 89 amd 87 left to right where its 87, 89 and 91 here. So i accidentally filled up with 93 and holy **** what a difference in that little 2.0 turbo.  

 

Barely felt a difference, if any, on my 6.2 when i put in 91 after the dealership put in 87.  Maybe a little better throttle response but no power or mpg increase. 

truck_newbie Enthusiast

truck_newbie

Posted
  • Author
Posted
48 minutes ago, aseibel said:

No problem. I agree with you. Just be careful posting facts on the internet. The die hard 6.2 crowd will crucify you. Some people don't understand the difference between "recommended" and "required".

Your reply made creating this thread worth it.

 

I really like the saying by Daniel Patrick Moynihan:

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts."

  • Thanks 2
amxguy1970 Senior Enthusiast

amxguy1970

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, Roscopcoletrain said:

curious why some 6.2s knock/ping on 87 vs others 

Placebo effect, they want to hear/feel it (yet most don't know what they are listening/feeling for). I bet they want to feel like they own a motor that only runs on premium like a sports car... If you hear/feel it the truck pulls timing and it goes away and doesn't hurt anything. With modern cars they can detect the smallest of knocks/pings and fix it before it is even noticed by the driver in most cases. 

 

Tyler

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

    • Aimatdeer
      Ac not keeping up

      By Aimatdeer · Posted

      Monday looks like a good day for the dealer to test an ac issue. Hopefully it all turns out good.
    • CamGTP
      Gas Prices

      By CamGTP · Posted

      Paid $2.72 for E85 today.
    • Atlas
      Gas Prices

      By Atlas · Posted

      Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
    • scotthvac.net
      2022-24 halogen - led grille swap

      By scotthvac.net · Posted

      2024 Silverado 2500 HD LTZ grille no camera Parts list   84603331 84913656 84913657 84913654 84913655 84911567 84911568 85646092 85646093 85797921 85797922   11570637  x10-15   grille/bumper bolts 11546500  x10      grille clips 11571006  x10      push/retainer clips 11546454  x6       nut retainers 11611609  x6       M5 bolts 11610700  x6       molding/trim retainers

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...