Jump to content

5.3L vs 6.2L V8

Ferrari Eater
 Share

Recommended Posts

the wanderer Enthusiast

the wanderer

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, N55_6MT said:

Not to keep talking in circles here, but I haven't missed your point. I've totally agreed with you that the 6.2 will loaf along happily at times when the 4.3 or 5.3 would be in a lower gear. The point I'm making is that there is nothing wrong with that, and not something I encounter much in day-to-day driving. I've driven trucks with the 5.3 and the 6.2 over the years and to me the "feel" has always been much more stark up until this generation when the transmissions are the same. I drove a 10spd 6.2 Denali and a 10spd 5.3 SLT back to back fully expecting to be lusting after the 6.2.  To my surprise, the difference at normal levels of acceleration (i.e. not breaking the law) was imperceptible because the 5.3 is already plenty capable for the job of driving my groceries around. 

 

At the end of the day you shouldn't be caring a whole lot if a engine is running at higher RPM or a lower gear, all you should care about is capability and if your chosen engine has the ability to do the task you're asking of it while delivering the economy you need. The differences between the engines only show up when you start getting near the limit of the engines capability, up until then it's just not that big of a deal. 

 

And yeah, my truck is kind of an appliance. I didn't buy it for a sporty drive or to have neck-snapping acceleration, I've got other cars for that (see my user name). I bought it so I can tow my TT, haul ****** to the dump, pick up groceries and drive to work occasionally. And that's OK...

 

Yes it's OK. And yes you can notice it. I'm comparing 6.2 vs 4.3.

 

Grumpy made the claim that there is no difference as long as both have the power to move the truck at the requested speed. That's what I'm arguing. There IS a difference. And it IS noticable.

 

I'm arguing the fact: "there is a very noticable difference", not the opinion: "it does or does not matter."

 

Whether you care or not, or whether your prefer one or the other, that's not my issue. Just don't claim there is no difference to try and justify your purchase.

  • 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

Yondu Enthusiast

Yondu

Posted
Posted
On 5/27/2020 at 6:28 PM, Jonofmac said:

Nice. So you're now resorting to personal insults instead of showing any data. I provided a snippet of how a piezoelectric knock sensor works because you were confused. I corrected your claims, buddy lol. My ego suffers no bruises from your unsubstantiated claims or personal insults. I actually am an electrical engineer with both hardware and software experience for embedded devices and frequently work with several large OEMs (I do more than just automotive).

 

To correct you trying to put words in my mouth, I never said it will anticipate knock before it can happen. I'm saying knock is not a binary yes there is knock/no there is not knock entity. I'm saying that you can measure the relative combustion volume/knock level and see if you're on the threshold before you get to full blown pinging. No, you won't exactly how far from knocking you are, just that you're at seeing higher combustion pressure rises.

 

You act like the only vibrations that occur in an engine are knock. You clearly lack the understanding of what knock is and what is causing this vibration. I explained it once but I guess it didn't stick...

 

To try to dumb it down more: as fuel gets ignited, pressure in cylinder rises quickly and this force pushes down on piston. This pressure profile varies greatly depending on when the fuel mixture is ignited (amongst other things). Too late, make reduced torque. Too early, peak pressure occurs as piston still going up (also results in negative work/reduced torque). These vibrations from combustion are ALWAYS PRESENT, but to varying levels depending on when ignition occurs and charge density.

 

Yes, I completely agree that knock sensors cannot see the future. I never claimed they could. They must measure things that already happened. What you repeatedly fail to comprehend is that these vibrations that they see exist in every combustion cycle, regardless of whether knock is happening or not. The relative magnitude of these vibrations are what change as rapid cylinder pressures increase. ECUs sample this analog current/voltage. Misfire detection wouldn't be possible if they saw 0 vibrations except when knock occured.

 

Don't believe me? Go hop on HPT or EFI live and change your knock sensor sensitivity to make it sensitive. You'll get "knock" reported under light throttle. The reverse is true too default_smile.png

 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

It's like you either didn't read what I said or you are chosing to ignore and explain things I already explained.  Then you go on to explain things that were never even brought up because you assume I didn't already know them, like you explaining them is proof that it's new to me. 

 

Exhausting. 

Yondu Enthusiast

Yondu

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, TXGREEK said:


It’s always like that. This is why my friends are shocked that I participate in a forum! I’m sure that the Chinese Virus has a lot to do with the attitudes but there’s not one discussion that doesn’t involve a couple idiots that spring up out of the cracks just to cut someone down for not agreeing with them.


Sent from Above

As long as you can come in and tell everyone everything you have is the bestest cause you're the bestest with no disagreements you're chipper. If not, they're cockroaches.  Irony much?  

TXGREEK Senior Enthusiast

TXGREEK

Posted
Posted
As long as you can come in and tell everyone everything you have is the bestest cause you're the bestest with no disagreements you're chipper. If not, they're cockroaches.  Irony much?  

Are you an internet Troll? You’re envious because someone is expressing their personal experiences with products apparently out of your league? The discussion is about recommending a 5.3 or 6.2, not what others have or you can’t afford.

Now, either you’ve got something, anything constructive to add to the discussion, if not then I’m sure you’ll find somewhere you feel much more comfortable at.

Moving along now.....


Sent from Above
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Jonofmac Enthusiast

Jonofmac

Posted
Posted

Are you an internet Troll? You’re envious because someone is expressing their personal experiences with products apparently out of your league? The discussion is about recommending a 5.3 or 6.2, not what others have or you can’t afford.

Now, either you’ve got something, anything constructive to add to the discussion, if not then I’m sure you’ll find somewhere you feel much more comfortable at.

Moving along now.....


Sent from Above
I'm ignoring this yondu guy lol. He's just a prick that likes to argue. I suggest you do the same

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
TXGREEK Senior Enthusiast

TXGREEK

Posted
Posted
I'm ignoring this yondu guy lol. He's just a prick that likes to argue. I suggest you do the same

 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

Yeah, I’ve had run ins with him in the past and his cockroach buddies in the past. Thanks, I’ve already blocked him....

 

 

Sent from Above

JimCost2014 Senior Enthusiast

JimCost2014

Posted
Posted
On 5/28/2020 at 6:33 AM, Ferrari Eater said:

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.

Yea, it is still going, and gaining a little bit of momentum, which begs the question, could a 5.3 or 6.2 get this baby to 200 posts quicker????

  • Like 2
Chevyguy273 Enthusiast

Chevyguy273

Posted
Posted

To the op. This has turned into an absolutely insane post. The name calling over a tiny object has been interesting. But back to your question. I have test driven both engines in the trim I want. Both are great engines. I don’t think either one is better than the other. But for me. I just can’t help myself. I had to have the 6.2. So that’s the one I ordered. It’s got more power. I love the 10 speed transmission. And it’s perfect for me. I can’t wait until it arrives at my local dealer. Just my .02. 

TXGREEK Senior Enthusiast

TXGREEK

Posted
Posted

Reality is that the 6.2 gives more bang per cubic inch than the 5.3. Personally, my experience has proven the 6.2L gives more mpg’s than my 5.3 ever did and lots more smiles per mile than any 5.3 could ever give. Only negative with the 6.2 is tread life [emoji23]


Sent from Above

  • Like 1
superhighsierra Enthusiast

superhighsierra

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 5/29/2020 at 1:37 AM, Yondu said:

As long as you can come in and tell everyone everything you have is the bestest cause you're the bestest with no disagreements you're chipper. If not, they're cockroaches.  Irony much?  

 

I think you nailed it. These are the guys in life who purchase the extended warranties, the same guys who have never turned a wrench a day in their lives, these guys are a dealers wet dream. Their truck will never see dirt a day in its life and they all drive 10 miles under the speed limit but yet they come on here to circle jerk about their "big 6.2's." Yet they will never get any of the benefit of having a 6.2 out of the vehicle but are over here with an "0-face" thinking of the raw-power of the 6.2... LMAO & GTFOH

 

It's the same $hit with the guys with AT4's who are circle jerking about their off-road capabilities. The same guys who have Crew Cabs and think they are better because they paid more for them lol. The same guys with $hitty ass 6" Rough Country lifts, Chinese wheels, etc who think their roller skate @ss looking truck looks good and is some sort of mechanical marvel. FOH.

 

I came on here from another platform and figured people would have knowledge to offer as I had never built out a half-ton. Don't get me wrong there are a few guys who know their stuff and who are actually doing cool stuff to their trucks, but for the overwhelming majority its just a bunch of guys who tuck in their t-shirts lubing each other up about stuff that they would get laughed out the building for elsewhere. 

 

On 5/29/2020 at 2:31 AM, TXGREEK said:


Are you an internet Troll? You’re envious because someone is expressing their personal experiences with products apparently out of your league? The discussion is about recommending a 5.3 or 6.2, not what others have or you can’t afford.

Now, either you’ve got something, anything constructive to add to the discussion, if not then I’m sure you’ll find somewhere you feel much more comfortable at.

Moving along now.....


Sent from Above

 

You do realize that a 6.2 costs $1500 more than a 5.3 right? You are insinuating people couldn't afford an extra $5/mo on their payment. You guys are the biggest group of fanny pack wearing, posers I have ever had the privilege of interacting with in my life. You do realize that the 6.2 only puts out 65 more HP than the 5.3? LOL change my manifold, put on a CAI and give me a performance exhaust and my 5.3 would produce better on the dyno. Give me a supercharger and my 5.3 would blow your 6.2 away on the dyno. If they ever figure out how to crack the CPU, chip my 5.3 and it will $hit on your 6.2. 

 

spacer.png

Edited by superhighsierra
  • Sad 1
TXGREEK Senior Enthusiast

TXGREEK

Posted
Posted
 

You do realize that a 6.2 costs $1500 more than a 5.3 right? You are insinuating people couldn't afford an extra $5/mo on their payment. You guys are the biggest group of fanny pack wearing, posers I have ever had the privilege of interacting with in my life. You do realize that the 6.2 only puts out 65 more HP than the 5.3? LOL change my manifold, put on a CAI and give me a performance exhaust and my 5.3 would produce better on the dyno. Give me a supercharger and my 5.3 would blow your 6.2 away on the dyno. If they ever figure out how to crack the CPU, chip my 5.3 and it will $hit on your 6.2. 

 

giphy.gif

A bit more than average on the insecure side aren’t ya!

 

The thread is about benefits of either 5.3 or 6.2 and that’s off the lot. Why would anyone want to EVER invest in a supercharger for a 5.3 when you can get soooooo much more out of supercharging a 6.2.

 

Nice try, go back into the crack you came out of [emoji23] [emoji13] [emoji38]

 

Looks like this thread is in need of exterminating.....

 

Be safe and Good luck to all,

Sent from Above

superhighsierra Enthusiast

superhighsierra

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, TXGREEK said:

A bit more than average on the insecure side aren’t ya!

 

The thread is about benefits of either 5.3 or 6.2 and that’s off the lot. Why would anyone want to EVER invest in a supercharger for a 5.3 when you can get soooooo much more out of supercharging a 6.2.

 

Nice try, go back into the crack you came out of emoji23.png emoji13.png emoji38.png

 

Looks like this thread is in need of exterminating.....

 

Be safe and Good luck to all,

Sent from Above

 

You read me like a book bruh. 

 

At the end of the day you'll are flexing on 65 HP at best. And I'm the insecure one lol. Great sense of humor BTW...

 

spacer.png

 

  • Confused 1
Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
On 5/20/2020 at 10:51 AM, Ferrari Eater said:

Which engine is better? I assume the 6.2 has more power and the 5.3 has better mpg, but how much of a difference is it?

Ya haven't said what you mean by better yet. 12 pages and no one knows what YOU mean by better. 

  • Like 1
Daly Senior Enthusiast

Daly

Posted
Posted

Couldn't get a 6.2 in a regular cab short box. Ergo 5.3 > 6.2...

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...