Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I’m not stating that ONE can or can’t run a 6.1secs like C&D did. I’m just stating the facts that the new T1 trucks are a second quicker than the previous generations. The proof is in the articles. 
 

And your run of a 6.2L vs a 5.3L is about on par. The article states the 5.3 did quarter in 14.7.   So C&D must not be wrong then??????

 

Have you ran it with your Pulsar LT yet??  Curious if it helps. I’m still debating on one. 

Posted
1 hour ago, TNTSilverado said:

Yeah, I know they claim that outcome. But I question it, a lot. If I could get low 7’s in my 5.3L RST, I would be very happy. I don’t think I’ve seen anyone else run a 5.3L / A8 below 7. 

  • 9 months later...
Posted

Car And Driver always has the lowest times because they account for every single variable. This includes elevation, temperature, humidity etc. For ex. If they are above sea level for the test, calculations are performed to determine what impact it had on performance. They actually put a number to each and every variable and add, or subtract from the time.

 

They also run the vehicle in both directions and average it to account for any variation in the track, wind, driver etc. And last but not least they also allow 11.5 inches of rollout. Which will subtract .2-.3 from the time.

 

If you want an accurate time, data log it. Nothing will come closer. 

 

But, you'll also be .3 slower then you thought you were 😪

 

Your trucks will also slow down with mileage. Unless you tune it. 

 

Why do you think you buy a new truck every 5 years. Feels old, slow, not what it used to be? Keeps repairs down and sells new trucks.

 

As far as GM is concerned it's their truck, not yours. You just paid for the right to use it.

 

On another note, intake/exhaust etc. does very little for acceleration times. If you want to actually be quicker look at a tune, e85, boost, engine work. Having an intake and full exhaust can help out any one of those mods (a bit). Without a tune it might make some power but it won't really make you any more quick.

 

Weight, suspension, tires etc. Not often improved for acceleration on a truck. But if done right, can have a significant impact.

 

Old thread, I know 🙄 Came across it on google.

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

F' all the magazines and what they say.  My 100% stock 2021 3.23 geared 4x4 crew cab short bed 6.2 RST ran a legit 13.61 at 101 at the track the old-fashioned way. 

Edited by SILVER SLED
  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
28 minutes ago, SILVER SLED said:

F' all the magazines and what they say.  My 100% stock 2021 3.23 geared 4x4 crew cab short bed 6.2 RST ran a legit 13.61 at 101 at the track the old-fashioned way. 

 

Wow, thats impressive! Considering the T1's fully loaded are actually heavier then the K2's. T1's have a larger overall wheel/tire diameter too dont they? Is There an extra shift with the 10 speed in the 1/4 or does it skip gears? What's your elevation, DA?

 

By the way, that was my point. Nobody is going to have the same times, to many variables 😉 

 

*Edit* Well yeah, your damn near sea level!

Edited by M1ck3y
Posted
2 hours ago, M1ck3y said:

 

Wow, thats impressive! Considering the T1's fully loaded are actually heavier then the K2's. T1's have a larger overall wheel/tire diameter too dont they? Is There an extra shift with the 10 speed in the 1/4 or does it skip gears? What's your elevation, DA?

 

By the way, that was my point. Nobody is going to have the same times, to many variables 😉 

 

*Edit* Well yeah, your damn near sea level!

Pretty sure it ran through the gears and didn’t skip.  And don’t know what gear it was in at the end. And yes DA was very low. I wasn’t planning on going to the track that day and had almost a full tank of gas.  

  • Like 1
Posted
9 hours ago, M1ck3y said:

Car And Driver always has the lowest times because they account for every single variable. This includes elevation, temperature, humidity etc. For ex. If they are above sea level for the test, calculations are performed to determine what impact it had on performance. They actually put a number to each and every variable and add, or subtract from the time.

 

They also run the vehicle in both directions and average it to account for any variation in the track, wind, driver etc. And last but not least they also allow 11.5 inches of rollout. Which will subtract .2-.3 from the time.

 

If you want an accurate time, data log it. Nothing will come closer. 

 

But, you'll also be .3 slower then you thought you were 😪

 

Your trucks will also slow down with mileage. Unless you tune it. 

 

Why do you think you buy a new truck every 5 years. Feels old, slow, not what it used to be? Keeps repairs down and sells new trucks.

 

As far as GM is concerned it's their truck, not yours. You just paid for the right to use it.

 

On another note, intake/exhaust etc. does very little for acceleration times. If you want to actually be quicker look at a tune, e85, boost, engine work. Having an intake and full exhaust can help out any one of those mods (a bit). Without a tune it might make some power but it won't really make you any more quick.

 

Weight, suspension, tires etc. Not often improved for acceleration on a truck. But if done right, can have a significant impact.

 

Old thread, I know 🙄 Came across it on google.

 

 

You can think that an exhaust and CAI doesn’t help but @OnTheReel has numerical data stating he picked up 3 tenths of a second by adding them. I did it as well with my truck with the S&B and Corsa exhaust. So believe what you want but we have the numerical data that proves you wrong. And with a tune it would only make it run even better. I know my 2018 6.2L with 8 speed along with S&B and Gibson Catback Dual Sport exhaust before and after hand held Hypertech installed was night and day different than stock.  
I am debating on the Diablo handheld here in the spring to get the full potential of my CAI and exhaust. It runs great now but if it helps my 2019 out like my 2018. Then I will be very pleased. 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, TNTSilverado said:

You can think that an exhaust and CAI doesn’t help but @OnTheReel has numerical data stating he picked up 3 tenths of a second by adding them. I did it as well with my truck with the S&B and Corsa exhaust. So believe what you want but we have the numerical data that proves you wrong. And with a tune it would only make it run even better. I know my 2018 6.2L with 8 speed along with S&B and Gibson Catback Dual Sport exhaust before and after hand held Hypertech installed was night and day different than stock.  
I am debating on the Diablo handheld here in the spring to get the full potential of my CAI and exhaust. It runs great now but if it helps my 2019 out like my 2018. Then I will be very pleased. 

 

He didn't. Map is slightly higher (at high speed) with an after market air intake. But not 3 tenths worth. 

 

The bottleneck isn't in the parts, it's in the tuning. For emissions and warranty reasons.

 

Headers > boost > engine work 

 

Negative pressure > positive pressure > better breathing

 

A canned tune is basically increasing timing. If your truck falls within spec and you have enough octane, yep you'll make power. However, a lot of trucks miss out and don't work with the one size fits all tuning.

 

*Edit*

 

Numerical data? Good luck with that. There's to many variables and I doubt you or him did anything more then a couple passes. 

 

What about the vehicles that made zero power increase,  actually lost power, or made power but got slower? 

 

Run a-b on a different day and you get completely different results.

Edited by M1ck3y
Posted

All I know is my new 6.2L AT4 Sierra is a lot more spirited than my 5.3L Yukon.  It would have to be a few car lengths at least in the 1/4 mile.  It is also a few MPG less around town and that is me with an egg taped to the bottom of my foot when driving the truck.

  • Like 1
Posted

“@M1ck3y” He can think what he wants. If he has a 6.2L or 5.3L come on over and I’ll prove that a 6.2L with exhaust and S&B CAI will take a stock 6.2L.  Oh wait I’ve done it!!  But I’ll do it again just for $hits and giggles and to prove a point! 
 

Plus, I also have a 5.3L in the family.  My stepdad has a 2020 Sierra SLT 5.3L with 10 speed and it gets gapped considerably by my 6.2L, but his new 5.3L would gap my older 2016 and 2017 5.3L all day long. The K2s were “dogs” because of the lazy transmission programming in them. 


Now, will both of those increase even more with a tune….absolutely!   Which is why I did it with my 2018 and will do it in the spring with my 2019. Don’t have time to let my truck sit for a week while ECU is sent out. 

  • Haha 1
Posted

Most of the time since I started driving I would trade for the next one because of HP increases. Every truck I did mods to increase power up to supercharging. All had tunes of some kind. Finally my 2014 was the one that I only tuned the transmission. I was finally satisfied. Of course I was 58. That may have had something to do with it. 

  • Like 3
Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, TNTSilverado said:

“@M1ck3y” He can think what he wants. If he has a 6.2L or 5.3L come on over and I’ll prove that a 6.2L with exhaust and S&B CAI will take a stock 6.2L.  Oh wait I’ve done it!!  But I’ll do it again just for $hits and giggles and to prove a point! 
 

Plus, I also have a 5.3L in the family.  My stepdad has a 2020 Sierra SLT 5.3L with 10 speed and it gets gapped considerably by my 6.2L, but his new 5.3L would gap my older 2016 and 2017 5.3L all day long. The K2s were “dogs” because of the lazy transmission programming in them. 


Now, will both of those increase even more with a tune….absolutely!   Which is why I did it with my 2018 and will do it in the spring with my 2019. Don’t have time to let my truck sit for a week while ECU is sent out. 

 

Think what I want? 

 

Are you under the impression that I came up with this conclusion? If you are, your wrong. I am not an experienced racer, tuner etc. But I've have talked with people that fall into this category. The internet is full of people that know what they're talking about as well, but you need the ability to sift through the bull ******. And you sir, do not know what your talking about. 

 

Why are you talking about tunes? I said tunes are good! 

 

Don't get your panties in a twist, take a deep breath, relax... These facts don't make your truck any less cool.

 

And if I'm being completely honest here, if you think you made horsepower with an air intake/exhaust (which you probably did). Acceleration improvements likely occured because your more confident, you think you have an edge, and you think it make's you faster. Therefore you are faster 😘

Edited by M1ck3y
Posted
11 minutes ago, M1ck3y said:

 

Think what I want? 

 

Are you under the impression that I came up with this conclusion? If you are, your wrong. I am not an experienced racer, tuner etc. But I've have talked with people that fall into this category. The internet is full of people that know what they're talking about as well, but you need the ability to sift through the bull ******. And you sir, do not know what your talking about. 

 

Why are you talking about tunes? I said tunes are good! 

 

Don't get your panties in a twist, take a deep breath, relax... These facts don't make your truck any less cool.

 

And if I'm being completely honest here, if you think you made horsepower with an air intake/exhaust (which you probably did). Acceleration improvements likely occured because your more confident, you think you have an edge, and you think it make's you faster. Therefore you are faster 😘

Again. My panties are not in a “twist”. I’m just stating what I’ve done. So I do know what I’m talking about if I’ve done it. You obviously don’t. I can and have the data that shows it is faster along with racing a few here and there.  You just “keep” talking to people. I’ll take care of the real world stuff. Sounds to me “if I’m being honest “ your confidence is lacking and you don’t have the “balls” maybe too try it out??🤫🤔🤔🤔


I also offered to prove it to you just for $hits and giggles.  And I’d love to see the look on your face 🤣🤣😂.  

 

As for tunes. I was and have stated from my first post that they are GOOD. Just that with an exhaust and CAI they would be even better.  Maybe you didn’t comprehend that??  It’s ok. It takes u a bit to catch up. We obviously can see that!! 

 

as for @Silverado 4x4. I could care less if you like to drag race or not. Many do! Everyone is different. Thank god we aren’t all boring. 
 

Enjoy your Thanksgiving peaches 🍑 

Good day!!

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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,758
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Randy Ginoza
    Newest Member
    Randy Ginoza
    Joined
  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,803 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • 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?
    • 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
    • And use RA's 5% discount code if you buy from them.  google for the code, one is always available.
    • Just don't turn the steering wheel as much?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...