Jump to content

5.3L vs 6.2L V8

Ferrari Eater
 Share

Recommended Posts

ullose272 Enthusiast

ullose272

Posted
Posted

Maybe I should hook up my torque app and check the timing and knock. Others who run 87 on the 6.2 should do the same. This will help end that argument. No?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Maybe? It would be interesting, especially in the heat of summer, towing something. When its really being worked hard. Ill say my wife has a yukon with a 6.2 and i know damn well she doesnt put premium in it.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

  • Haha 1
  • Replies 308
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Jonofmac
Jonofmac

You appear to be one of those people that enjoys talking down to every option that isn't what you have. Nice. 1) a "chipped" 5.3 in 2018 alone gets you 385/413 HP/tq vs the stock 6.2 420/460 HP/tq.

jlong1984
jlong1984

The 5.3 has more than enough power and torque for my needs. I didn't even consider the 6.2 when making my purchase. 

Ferrari Eater
Ferrari Eater

I never imagined that after asking if the benefits of one engine outweigh the other, that people would be yelling at each other about piezoelectric knock sensors.

Posted Images

Jonofmac Enthusiast

Jonofmac

Posted
Posted
You are wrong, without a max trailering package the 6.2 does not give you any additional towing capacity. While it does give you more power it doesnt change the sticker in the door

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Not what the data shows, bud. The 6.2 data doesn't have any max trailering package in it, just standard axle ratio.

The 5.3 numbers are all over the place depending on trailering package?Screenshot_20200520-185637_Chrome.jpgScreenshot_20200520-185848_Chrome.jpg

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Jonofmac Enthusiast

Jonofmac

Posted
Posted
Maybe? It would be interesting, especially in the heat of summer, towing something. When its really being worked hard. Ill say my wife has a yukon with a 6.2 and i know damn well she doesnt put premium in it.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

I posted a link in another thread (or maybe this one) where the 6.2 was tested by AAA with premium and regular.
It showed that there was a very small power difference between the two and a ~7% fuel mileage difference.

Yes, spark is pulled at part throttle and wot with 87. It doesn't mean anything though. Engine adjusts to run based on the fuel it has. If you run premium you get 1-2 more mpg. Cost of premium doesn't offset the mileage gain.

They ran tests on 0% to 6% grades to simulate different loads on the engine.

They determined that even though GM recommends premium, they suggest you're better off running regular unless you care about the insignificant power loss.

The premium fuel requirement is debunked. It's a false argument.Screenshot_20200520-204819_Drive.jpg

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Jav_eee Enthusiast

Jav_eee

Posted
Posted
I posted a link in another thread (or maybe this one) where the 6.2 was tested by AAA with premium and regular.
It showed that there was a very small power difference between the two and a ~7% fuel mileage difference.

Yes, spark is pulled at part throttle and wot with 87. It doesn't mean anything though. Engine adjusts to run based on the fuel it has. If you run premium you get 1-2 more mpg. Cost of premium doesn't offset the mileage gain.

They ran tests on 0% to 6% grades to simulate different loads on the engine.

They determined that even though GM recommends premium, they suggest you're better off running regular unless you care about the insignificant power loss.

The premium fuel requirement is debunked. It's a false argument.Screenshot_20200520-204819_Drive.thumb.jpg.a9ef732bdeab580aa313196e641c32f7.jpg

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


Well with current fuel prices I’m cool with running 93. When they go up next year (or whenever) I might go to 87.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
M1ck3y Senior Enthusiast

M1ck3y

Posted
Posted

The 6.2 will wake up, for me it was around 10000 km. You'll go from, "huh, thought it would feel faster", to "holy ******, about damn time". 0-100 mph is effortless and you'll slam into the speed limiter like you just hit a wall. I'm on 18" wheels, and yes it does make a difference.

 

I think gm severely undercut the l86/87's power. fuel economy, cost and the fact that they couldn't let it make the same or more power then the c7. Im willing to bet they have at least one or two intake manifold designs hidden away.

 

As things sit. You put a 6.2 intake manifold/throttle body on a 5.3, e85 or 93 for that matter... It really narrows that gap. you have to ask, why even make the 6.2 if the 5.3 will get the job done.   

ullose272 Enthusiast

ullose272

Posted
Posted
The 6.2 will wake up, for me it was around 10000 km. You'll go from, "huh, thought it would feel faster", to "holy ******, about damn time". 0-100 mph is effortless and you'll slam into the speed limiter like you just hit a wall. I'm on 18" wheels, and yes it does make a difference.
 
I think gm severely undercut the l86/87's power. fuel economy, cost and the fact that they couldn't let it make the same or more power then the c7. Im willing to bet they have at least one or two intake manifold designs hidden away.
 
As things sit. You put a 6.2 intake manifold/throttle body on a 5.3, e85 or 93 for that matter... It really narrows that gap. you have to ask, why even make the 6.2 if the 5.3 will get the job done.   
Fun factor.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

M1ck3y Senior Enthusiast

M1ck3y

Posted
Posted (edited)
17 minutes ago, Jonofmac said:

I posted a link in another thread (or maybe this one) where the 6.2 was tested by AAA with premium and regular.
It showed that there was a very small power difference between the two and a ~7% fuel mileage difference.

Yes, spark is pulled at part throttle and wot with 87. It doesn't mean anything though. Engine adjusts to run based on the fuel it has. If you run premium you get 1-2 more mpg. Cost of premium doesn't offset the mileage gain.

They ran tests on 0% to 6% grades to simulate different loads on the engine.

They determined that even though GM recommends premium, they suggest you're better off running regular unless you care about the insignificant power loss.

The premium fuel requirement is debunked. It's a false argument.Screenshot_20200520-204819_Drive.jpg

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 

What that graph doesn't show you is all the extra knock going on in your engine. Yeah it adjusts, after it senses knock. Then it will continuously keep trying to advance, and keep sensing knock; and back and forth. Is that bad? Only you can decide, its your truck.

Edited by M1ck3y
  • Like 2
AlaskaErik Enthusiast

AlaskaErik

Posted
Posted

I have one of each.  The 5.3 just didn't have the power I was looking for in mountainous terrain.  And even with a 5500 lb trailer I was exceeding payload capacity.  My 6.2 pulls a lot more effortlessly.  In normal driving conditions, the 6.2 has noticeably more power and is a good bit faster than the 5.3.  The 5.3 will now be relegated to pulling my 2800 lb trailer, and even a trailer that small still has the truck right at its payload capacity.  So forget about so-called max tow rating.  It's a nonsensical and irrelevant bragging rights number only.  Try pulling anything at the max tow rating and you'll be exceeding every other weight limitation there is, ie Gross Combined Weight Rating, Gross Vehicle Weight Rating, Gross Rear Axle Weight Rating, Payload Capacity and Tongue Weight Capacity.  In fact, when someone tries to quote their vehicle's max tow rating I immediately know that they don't know squat about towing.

  • Like 3
ullose272 Enthusiast

ullose272

Posted
Posted
Not what the data shows, bud. The 6.2 data doesn't have any max trailering package in it, just standard axle ratio.

The 5.3 numbers are all over the place depending on trailering package?Screenshot_20200520-185637_Chrome.thumb.jpg.e278dc3002ec756485c6a4bd7cea7e14.jpgScreenshot_20200520-185848_Chrome.thumb.jpg.fb03e8ba84f3d1207515b7f657a82c0f.jpg

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

I dont know where you got your numbers, but in the chevy trailering brochure all the non-max trailering, v8s and 4x4 dmax have the same 15000 gvcw. The the tow capacitys that differ by 2-300 lbs are due to heavier chassis and body, like crew vs double cabs and short and standard beds

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

  • Like 1
Jonofmac Enthusiast

Jonofmac

Posted
Posted
What that graph doesn't show you is all the extra knock going on in your engine. Yeah it adjusts, after it senses knock. Then it will continuously keep trying to advance, and keep sensing knock; and back and forth. Is that bad?  
Modern knock learn factors don't necessarily wait until knock is detected. Knock is not a clear cut ping always.

Knock sensors are microphones. They can measure the relative combustion volume. They will detect when you're close to knocking well before you get to the audible pinging noise.

I tune GM (and some import) vehicles. I've seen this repeatedly. Hell, even the GM Gen 3 PCMs don't need to see knock to realize they're on low octane. If they do see knock, they will adjust more quickly, but it doesn't require knock to realize it's close to the threshold.

I can datalog my gen 5 truck and see when it knocks and see the knock learn factor.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Jav_eee Enthusiast

Jav_eee

Posted
Posted
I posted a link in another thread (or maybe this one) where the 6.2 was tested by AAA with premium and regular.
It showed that there was a very small power difference between the two and a ~7% fuel mileage difference.

Yes, spark is pulled at part throttle and wot with 87. It doesn't mean anything though. Engine adjusts to run based on the fuel it has. If you run premium you get 1-2 more mpg. Cost of premium doesn't offset the mileage gain.

They ran tests on 0% to 6% grades to simulate different loads on the engine.

They determined that even though GM recommends premium, they suggest you're better off running regular unless you care about the insignificant power loss.

The premium fuel requirement is debunked. It's a false argument.Screenshot_20200520-204819_Drive.thumb.jpg.a9ef732bdeab580aa313196e641c32f7.jpg

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk


Wait this graph is for a 2016. I think the engine and technology have changed since then...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
ullose272 Enthusiast

ullose272

Posted
Posted
I posted a link in another thread (or maybe this one) where the 6.2 was tested by AAA with premium and regular.
It showed that there was a very small power difference between the two and a ~7% fuel mileage difference.

Yes, spark is pulled at part throttle and wot with 87. It doesn't mean anything though. Engine adjusts to run based on the fuel it has. If you run premium you get 1-2 more mpg. Cost of premium doesn't offset the mileage gain.

They ran tests on 0% to 6% grades to simulate different loads on the engine.

They determined that even though GM recommends premium, they suggest you're better off running regular unless you care about the insignificant power loss.

The premium fuel requirement is debunked. It's a false argument.Screenshot_20200520-204819_Drive.thumb.jpg.a9ef732bdeab580aa313196e641c32f7.jpg

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

https://www.gmc.com/trailering-towing/charts

Heres the gmc trailering brochure if you want to brush up,

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

M1ck3y Senior Enthusiast

M1ck3y

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Jav_eee said:


Wait this graph is for a 2016. I think the engine and technology have changed since then...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

No, its the same engine just different fuel economy crap.

Jonofmac Enthusiast

Jonofmac

Posted
Posted

Wait this graph is for a 2016. I think the engine and technology have changed since then...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
It has changed a bit, yes. But the engine is basically the same. Only difference is DFM instead of AFM, which might close the gap between premium and regular even more in terms of gas mileage. That change was in 2019, so it's still applicable for 2014-2018 trucks, and probably not much different, considering the change between the two is quite minor.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

M1ck3y Senior Enthusiast

M1ck3y

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Jonofmac said:

Modern knock learn factors don't necessarily wait until knock is detected. Knock is not a clear cut ping always.

Knock sensors are microphones. They can measure the relative combustion volume. They will detect when you're close to knocking well before you get to the audible pinging noise.

I tune GM (and some import) vehicles. I've seen this repeatedly. Hell, even the GM Gen 3 PCMs don't need to see knock to realize they're on low octane. If they do see knock, they will adjust more quickly, but it doesn't require knock to realize it's close to the threshold.

I can datalog my gen 5 truck and see when it knocks and see the knock learn factor.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk
 

Well, tell that to all the real tuners who see consistent knock running premium fuel. Whats you company name? Website? I find it hard to believe this would slip by someone who knows what their doing.

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

    • tjonesdfw
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By tjonesdfw · Posted

      Whoever greenlighted the work truck matte black front bumpers on every trim but the AT4X should be fired!  I was hoping that was an AI mistake, but just realized they were on every model of the 2027 Silverado too.     Some parts of the interior do look premium, but the Denali Ultimate dashboard looks like an afterthought.  At least they appear to have lost the microfiber the high end Silverado models showed, but the '27 High Country dash looks better than the Denali.  
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      New member here. I am researching a read-first event-recorder concept for late-model GM V8 trucks. This is not a sales post. There is no product link, price, preorder, or mailing list. I am trying to determine whether the underlying problem is real before building anything.   Has your truck ever had a brief problem such as: - rough running or a momentary misfire - an oil-pressure warning or unusual pressure event - reduced power or a brief stall - a U-code or lost-communication problem - a symptom that disappeared before the dealer or independent shop could reproduce it   If so, I would appreciate the following details: - year, model, engine, and mileage - what happened and under what conditions - whether a DTC and useful freeze-frame data were stored - whether the shop was able to reproduce it - what the eventual confirmed repair was, if known - what additional information would have helped the diagnosis   The concept being evaluated is a removable leave-in recorder that continuously retains a rolling window from before and after an event. It would not tune, reflash, clear codes, or change the vehicle calibration.   I am also not claiming that it could predict lifter failure or see every internal ECM variable.   The real question is whether continuous event history would add enough useful evidence beyond freeze frame, GDS2, and existing scan tools — or whether it would simply be another unnecessary gadget.   For owners and technicians, which problem would make something like this genuinely useful: 1. intermittent misfire or AFM/DFM-related behavior 2. oil-pressure events 3. lost communication or electrical faults 4. none of the above Please be blunt. Negative feedback is just as useful as positive feedback.
    • Atlas
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Atlas · Posted

      No tears over the SLE and SLT trim levels disappearing but I kind of loathe the "Elevation" name. It's a truck--skip the elegance.   The slab-dashboard design is decidedly different. Almost has a Hummer flavor to it. "Professional Grade" seems to be leaning very white-collar, tech-driven these days moreso than blue-collar, functional design.   The Silverado would be my choice between the two new trucks. Pleased with the engine lineup in both. The GMC is a little "too much" for a truck, IMO, and the Denali borders on ridiculous - but I do know there are buyers for luxury trucks out there. It's just not my speed.
    • GMCustomerService
      Electrical problem

      By GMCustomerService · Posted

      Your safety is of utmost importance, @joshua1221, and we understand the importance of having all your lights working in your truck. If you have not already, we highly encourage you to bring your concerns to the attention of your local GM dealer. They are in the best position to diagnose your concerns as well as confirm the compatibility of the mirrors with your truck. Additionally, we would like the opportunity to explore any way we may be of assistance. When you have a moment, please visit: https://s.gm.com/support-request and fill out the support request form with all pertinent details. This form helps our team gather the right information and ensures your request is routed appropriately.
    • newdude
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By newdude · Posted

      - I like the outside but not as much as the Chevrolet.  They ICE'd the EV styling and it works, but I think exterior goes to Chevy on this one.     - SLE and SLT dead = Not.  Surprising.  Fits into the rest of the GMC lineup like this which (aside from Pro) matches the rest of the family.  Elevation, AT4, Denali.     - Interior.  Sophisticated Malaise era.  Why do I say Malaise?  Drawn with a ruler.  Rectangles everywhere.  Looks very premium though.    

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...