Jump to content

5.3L vs 6.2L V8

Ferrari Eater
 Share

Recommended Posts

blckblt Enthusiast

blckblt

Posted
Posted

for what it is worth my best 25 mpg is 23.8, best 50 is 21 and my best 400 is 16.7.  I have 3500 miles on the truck.  The best 25 and 50 were both on a recent trip that was mostly country roads with speed limit of 55.  Mix of flat and hills.  Pretty good IMO with the trailboss (2in lift, duratracs and no front chin spoiler).

 

I haven't gotten enough miles to get a good 400 mile trip that didn't have a lot of idling and stop and go.  We went from winter to 90 degrees last week and with C19 I haven't been going anywhere for the previous 10 weeks (work commute is 2 miles).

  • 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

Ferrari Eater Enthusiast

Ferrari Eater

Posted
  • Author
Posted
14 hours ago, Mikedfw said:

You didnt word it wrong, that's one of the many reasons this thread is so crazy.

That's not the only reason. Some people are trolls, some people respond too much to trolls, and others are just dedicated to this subject. Also, did you mean to say didn't or did?

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted

There is a great deal more to a motor being Better than the most powerful.

 

GM's very own Gen1 'Mouse' motor for example. 100,000,000 made. Let that number sink in a minute. ONE HUNDRED MILLION!

 

In race trim exceeding 2,000 hp. Well though out tune will net upper mid 20's mpg numbers. Anyone can work on one and you can still buy them new. It will be a while before the Ecotec3 reaches that feat. Many thought the LS would....yea....not

 

The GM 3800 series 3 is a Better Motor than the 6.2 almost equal in accomplishments to the Mouse and more durable. Perhaps GM's finest work...

 

The Gen 1 400 CID was never as good as the 350. Lack of a full water jacket hurt the cooling layout. The 327 would outlast a 350 generally and was more flexible. 

 

Being large and powerful is not a bad thing, it just isn't the only thing.

 

Well unless "most powerful' is  your only criteria. If so buy a Ford 3.5 V6...   450 HP over 500 lb/ft.

 

What do you know about these two motors you haven't read? All you know is they are 'different' in power and 'alike' in construction... sort of.  Ask this question 40 years from now. After you decide what BETTER means. 

  • Like 1
Mikedfw Enthusiast

Mikedfw

Posted
Posted
That's not the only reason. Some people are trolls, some people respond too much to trolls, and others are just dedicated to this subject. Also, did you mean to say didn't or did?
Didnt. I was saying that your post was worded fine, it really isn't confusing at all, but people are making it that way for no apparent reason.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

  • Thanks 1
Mikedfw Enthusiast

Mikedfw

Posted
Posted
There is a great deal more to a motor being Better than the most powerful.
 
GM's very own Gen1 'Mouse' motor for example. 100,000,000 made. Let that number sink in a minute. ONE HUNDRED MILLION!
 
In race trim exceeding 2,000 hp. Well though out tune will net upper mid 20's mpg numbers. Anyone can work on one and you can still buy them new. It will be a while before the Ecotec3 reaches that feat. Many thought the LS would....yea....not
 
The GM 3800 series 3 is a Better Motor than the 6.2 almost equal in accomplishments to the Mouse and more durable. Perhaps GM's finest work...
 
The Gen 1 400 CID was never as good as the 350. Lack of a full water jacket hurt the cooling layout. The 327 would outlast a 350 generally and was more flexible. 
 
Being large and powerful is not a bad thing, it just isn't the only thing.
 
Well unless "most powerful' is  your only criteria. If so buy a Ford 3.5 V6...   450 HP over 500 lb/ft.
 
What do you know about these two motors you haven't read? All you know is they are 'different' in power and 'alike' in construction... sort of.  Ask this question 40 years from now. After you decide what BETTER means. 
Ok, so this post was asking to compare a 5.3 liter v8 made by gm to a 6.2 liter v8 made by gm.

All these other engines are irrelevant, I'm not saying that there are no engines better than the 6.2 and I dont know where you got the idea that is what was being discussed.

Again, comparing these two specific engines, power is the primary difference.

6.2 has more power, better acceleration, better passing power, better at higher altitudes (due to having more available power), basically the same towing and mileage, reliability about the same. How is it not the better engine? What differences are there between these two specific engines that makes you think the 5.3 is better than the 6.2 or at least, what makes you think that being better in this specific scenario is about anything other than power?

Again, if we are talking value or comparing to a diesel engine, then you would have a point, there are other factors involved then, but these are two engines made by the same company for the same purposes, one just does everything the other can do, but with less engine strain, or faster.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
M1ck3y Senior Enthusiast

M1ck3y

Posted
Posted (edited)

I think the ls7 is the best...

 

 

For those of you that think premium isn't required. I experience audible pinging all the time at part throttle running empty going up hills. I've only ever used shell 91, I'm now trying esso 91; but it did the same thing today. Only option left is 94 octane from different stations. But neither company is top tier and aren't considered to provide quality fuels.

 

I'm also 3000 feet above sea level. Wot no audible knock, just part throttle with slight load. Scares the ****** out of me, because it does not stop unless it downshifts. And honestly, I think the majority of people on hear have no idea what spark knock sounds like and it happens to them all the time.

 

Edited by M1ck3y
Jonofmac Enthusiast

Jonofmac

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, M1ck3y said:

I think the ls7 is the best...

 

 

For those of you that think premium isn't required. I experience audible pinging all the time at part throttle running empty going up hills. I've only ever used shell 91, I'm now trying esso 91; but it did the same thing today. Only option left is 94 octane from different stations. But neither company is top tier and aren't considered to provide quality fuels.

 

I'm also 3000 feet above sea level. Wot no audible knock, just part throttle with slight load. Scares the ****** out of me, because it does not stop unless it downshifts. And honestly, I think the majority of people on hear have no idea what spark knock sounds like and it happens to them all the time.

 

If you're knocking on 91 octane, you've got other issues going on. Bring it in. I experience 0 knock with 87

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Mikedfw said:



Again, comparing these two specific engines, power is the primary difference.

 

. 

Your really have not idea what that word means, do you?

 

BETTER  

 

This isn't philosophy; this is English.  Better: Etymology Old English bettra, earlier betera "of superior quality or excellence," from Proto-Germanic *batizo

 

It has nothing to do with POWER. It has to do with excellence and quality. Does that need to be defined as well? 

 

I didn't ask the question, the OP did. His word, not mine. Difference in and of itself does not make a thing better.

 

How does the 6.2 EXCEL in QUALITY compared to the 5.3?

 

It doesn't

 

 

CamaroVetteGuy Enthusiast

CamaroVetteGuy

Posted
Posted

I can end this argument once and for all. The Silverado is the best looking truck on the market. Having a 5.3 or a 6.2 doesn’t make a difference. You all gonna get massive amounts of pun tang thrown your direction for just its looks. Maybe the 6.2 will get you 2 chicks, maybe?

  • Haha 1
M1ck3y Senior Enthusiast

M1ck3y

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Jonofmac said:

If you're knocking on 91 octane, you've got other issues going on. Bring it in. I experience 0 knock with 87

 
 

Nope, nothing else going on. Your not gm. There's a reason they highly recommend 93 octane. I'm happy that your think your a know it all, but you can't account for all variables, regions, and climates. It even states in the manual if you have audible knocking below 93 octane, fill up with 93 as soon as possible. If you have audible knocking on 93, then you have a problem. People can decide for themselves but I will trust gm over a random forum user. 

the wanderer Enthusiast

the wanderer

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

. 

Your really have not idea what that word means, do you?

 

BETTER  

 

This isn't philosophy; this is English.  Better: Etymology Old English bettra, earlier betera "of superior quality or excellence," from Proto-Germanic *batizo

 

It has nothing to do with POWER. It has to do with excellence and quality. Does that need to be defined as well? 

 

I didn't ask the question, the OP did. His word, not mine. Difference in and of itself does not make a thing better.

 

How does the 6.2 EXCEL in QUALITY compared to the 5.3?

 

It doesn't

 

 

 

You've jumped the rails ages ago. "better" when used in the original question, just refers to "better choice".

 

https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/better

 

Either you're just bored and having fun trolling everyone, or you simply are incapable of admitting you messed up and just want to save face by banging out one useless post after another.

 

It's exhausting reading your posts.

  • Like 2
Mikedfw Enthusiast

Mikedfw

Posted
Posted

. 

Your really have not idea what that word means, do you?

 

BETTER  

 

This isn't philosophy; this is English.  Better: Etymology Old English bettra, earlier betera "of superior quality or excellence," from Proto-Germanic *batizo
 
It has nothing to do with POWER. It has to do with excellence and quality. Does that need to be defined as well? 
 
I didn't ask the question, the OP did. His word, not mine. Difference in and of itself does not make a thing better.
 

How does the 6.2 EXCEL in QUALITY compared to the 5.3?

 

It doesn't

 

 

You are really grasping at straws. If you want me to go by your definition I would say the 6.2 is "of superior excellence" for all the reasons listed previously.

You know what people mean when they say "better". You know what the OP meant. If you want me to start using synonyms here so you can feel like you're right, fine. The 6.2 is superior; of superior excellence.

I'm honestly not sure if you are really this dense or just being difficult or maybe you're just trolling and I'm taking the bait.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

  • Like 3
f8l vnm Senior Enthusiast

f8l vnm

Posted
Posted

been using a mix of 87 and 91 in every other tank when i fill up 

 

I used it on my 2014 Sierra 6.2 and then my 2016 6.2 and now my 2019 6.2 

 

Zero knock , zero issues . Everyone has their own experience but mine has been 87 works just fine. 

 

Now if i was hot lapping my truck going WOT back to back to back , then maybe 91 would be proffered ( 91 is highest here) 

 

But this is after all a truck . I get on it from time to time and hear zero knock .  What i do hear is a beast of an engine 

f8l vnm Senior Enthusiast

f8l vnm

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

. 

Your really have not idea what that word means, do you?

 

BETTER  

 

This isn't philosophy; this is English.  Better: Etymology Old English bettra, earlier betera "of superior quality or excellence," from Proto-Germanic *batizo

 

It has nothing to do with POWER. It has to do with excellence and quality. Does that need to be defined as well? 

 

I didn't ask the question, the OP did. His word, not mine. Difference in and of itself does not make a thing better.

 

How does the 6.2 EXCEL in QUALITY compared to the 5.3?

 

It doesn't

 

 

Might be time to get more sleep :)  

  • Like 1
Ferrari Eater Enthusiast

Ferrari Eater

Posted
  • Author
Posted
11 hours ago, Grumpy Bear said:

. 

Your really have not idea what that word means, do you?

 

BETTER  

 

This isn't philosophy; this is English.  Better: Etymology Old English bettra, earlier betera "of superior quality or excellence," from Proto-Germanic *batizo

 

It has nothing to do with POWER. It has to do with excellence and quality. Does that need to be defined as well? 

 

I didn't ask the question, the OP did. His word, not mine. Difference in and of itself does not make a thing better.

 

How does the 6.2 EXCEL in QUALITY compared to the 5.3?

 

It doesn't

 

 

You've said the same thing with different fonts at least 5 times now. Please give it a rest.

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
      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. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  
    • Another JR
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By Another JR · Posted

      Have considered installing a DC to DC charger in your camper to replace your isolator?  
    • newdude
      Gas fill door

      By newdude · Posted

      Common failure.  You need to replace the fuel door housing.   The painted cover transfers over to the new housing.  To remove the old one there is 4 spots where you poke the plastic to release it.  
    • newdude
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By newdude · Posted

      No such thing as regenerative braking on a pure ICE vehicle.     Regenerative braking is the re-capture of energy from electric motors and stores it in the battery pack.  So hybrids, PHEV and EVs have regenerative braking.     What you are seeing is the charging system changing modes is all.  Its likely entering charge mode for some sort of reason is all.  All of the charging modes will be listed below.   As for L10 vs D.  L10 turns off automatic grade braking.  L10 puts you in control of grade downshifts where in D it will automatically do it based on brake pedal position and other factors.  Otherwise L10 and D drive exactly the same aside from that one aspect.    Battery Sulfation Mode The BCM will enter this mode when the interpreted Generator output voltage is less than 13.2 V for 45 minutes. When this condition exists the BCM will enter Charge Mode for 2–3 minutes. The BCM will then determine which mode to enter depending on voltage requirements.   Charge Mode The BCM will enter Charge Mode when ever one of the following conditions are met:   Windshield wipers are ON for more than 3 s. Climate Control Voltage Boost Mode Request is true, as sensed by the HVAC control module via serial data. High speed cooling fan, rear defogger, and HVAC high speed blower operation can cause the BCM to enter the Charge Mode. The estimated battery temperature is less than 0°C (32°F). Battery State of Charge is less than 80%. Vehicle speed is greater than 145 km/h (90 mph) A current sensor malfunction exists. System voltage is determined to be below 12.56 V When any one of these conditions is met, the system will set targeted generator output voltage to a charging voltage between 13.9–15.5 V, depending on the battery state of charge and estimated battery temperature.   Fuel Economy Mode The BCM will enter Fuel Economy Mode when the estimated battery temperature is at least 0°C (32°F) but less than or equal to 80°C (176°F), the calculated battery current is less than 15 A and greater than −8 A, and the battery state-of-charge is greater than or equal to 80%. Its targeted generator output voltage is the open circuit voltage of the battery and can be between 12.5–13.1 V. When fuel economy mode is active, the generator is not charging, only maintaining open circuit battery voltage. The BCM will exit this mode and enter Charge Mode when any of the conditions described above are present.   Headlamp Mode The BCM will enter Headlamp Mode when ever the head lamps are ON (high or low beams). Voltage will be regulated between 13.9–14.5 V.   Start Up Mode When the engine is started the BCM sets a targeted generator output voltage of 14.5 V for 30 s.   Tow/Haul Mode (if applicable) Pressing the Tow/Haul Mode button located on the center stack, the vehicle system voltage is raised and the remote (non-vehicle) battery will be charged. Having the headlamps on will raise the system voltage and if the Tow/Haul button is applied it will not serve any purpose. The voltage is regulated between 13.9-14.5 V.      

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...