Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Kennewbike said:

Enormously better

1. My 6.2 with 10 speed shifts so smooth I can barely feel it. My 5.3 8 speed felt like I was getting rear ended many times it would shift gears.  I think its enormously better to drive a truck that shifts well

2. My 6.2 has a ton more power.  I think its enormously better with more power

3. My 6.2 feels simply more "fun" to drive.  I think its enormously better when you spend this kind of money that you enjoy what you are driving.

4. I'm "old school" and still believe in the saying "there is no replacement for displacement".

 

I don't use 93 octane because it is far more expensive where I live, and I did not feel any difference, nor see any MPG increase when I did use 93 octane.  I prefer to not spend money unless I see a return.

 

So you've never driven a 5.3 with a 10 speed?

Where is all that displacement taking you? Over speed bumps at the mall? Stop light to stop light? Where exactly do you use that "ton" of more power?

Edited by steelcity
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted

You use to be able to tune it close to 6.2 power with a 5.3. Up until recently E-85 would do the trick. A little shopping could get you a killer deal on a loaded 5.3. A little tuning the right fuel your there. Saving a ton of money. When working I did that about every two years. Buying a 6.2 and running reg gas doesn’t make sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  • Like 2
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, steelcity said:

So you've never driven a 5.3 with a 10 speed?

Where is all that displacement taking you? Over speed bumps at the mall? Stop light to stop light? Where exactly do you use that "ton" of more power?

Sorry, that was a misprint by me. My first truck was a 2019 5.3 with 8 speed. My second truck was a 2020 5.3 with 10 speed, and now I have a 6.2 with 10 speed.  I enjoyed all of the trucks, but had very hard shifting on the 8 speed. I did really like the 5.3 10 speed a lot, until I got the 6.2. 

 

I noticed the difference in power even just leaving the dealership. The truck took a week to come in and I actually never really thought about the 6.2 and when was pulling out of the dealership, I noticed the difference. Sure you don't need the extra power, and no I don't race it "light to light", but lets face it, more power is nicer. The same went for the Camaro  and the Challenger I have. I could have bought them with 6 cylinder, but more power is more fun no matter how you twist it. 

 

I honestly didn't notice any power gains (seat of the pants is only measurement I used), and no increase in MPG with the 93, but I'll be honest and want to try again since others have said they noticed it. I definitely didn't buy this truck for "performance" (I have cars for that), but I just figured if I'm already spending this much money for a new HC, I may as well get one that puts the biggest smile on my face.  I can certainly see the advantages of the 3.0 for other needs as well. It all really comes down to what you want your truck for I guess.

Edited by Kennewbike
  • Like 2
Posted

The computer will derate the power on the 6.2L under load with 87 octane if it is pushed hard.  You might never notice it and running 87 won't hurt it.  But if I were towing heavy up hills I'd probably want higher octane gas than 87.   

Posted
21 hours ago, leverett.scott said:

 

I currently have a 2019 RST, 5.3, 8 speed. I'm trading it in the get the 10 speed, I had a ton of transmission problems with my old Silverado, not doing it with this one.

My problem is, I can't figure out what engine I want, 3.0 or 6.2.

 

6.2

Pro

- 420 hp emoji41.png

- Decent gas mileage

- Higher tow capability

Con

- Premium gas

- Towing gas mileage?

 

 

3.0

Pro

- Great gas mileage

- Good for towing

Con

I might miss the sound of a V-8.

Lower tow capability

Expensive in the shop once out of warranty.

 

I plan to buy a boat in the next couple yrs, do not tow much now. I plan to keep the truck for a long time.

 

Let me hear your opinions, thanks.

 

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Don't forget the price of DEF fluid, frequent fuel filter changes, and the higher price of fuel for the 3.0

  • Like 3
Posted
20 minutes ago, SILVER SLED said:

Don't forget the price of DEF fluid, frequent fuel filter changes, and the higher price of fuel for the 3.0

Frequent fuel filter changes?  Im 9,000 miles in and it still says 83% remaining .... 

 

DEF, cant argue that.  But, its use is not obscene ....

  • Like 2
Posted
The computer will derate the power on the 6.2L under load with 87 octane if it is pushed hard.  You might never notice it and running 87 won't hurt it.  But if I were towing heavy up hills I'd probably want higher octane gas than 87.   
Thanks for the info.

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk

Posted
Frequent fuel filter changes?  Im 9,000 miles in and it still says 83% remaining .... 
 
DEF, cant argue that.  But, its use is not obscene ....
If you are driving in NORMAL conditions daily, how often do you all think you have to fill the DEF tank?

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk

Posted

Tough question.  90% of my driving is towing a trailer.  So, Im not a good reference.

 

Again though, its not crazy use.  I dont think its ever been much below half when Ive filled it back up.  you get mileage notices on the info screen and there's a gauge.

 

Certainly not a disqualifier for the benefits of the 3.0

 

2 tank refills probably covers the cost of DEF compared to a 6.2 using premium. (mileage + fuel cost savings).

Posted
5 hours ago, steve841 said:

Tough question.  90% of my driving is towing a trailer.  So, Im not a good reference.

 

Again though, its not crazy use.  I dont think its ever been much below half when Ive filled it back up.  you get mileage notices on the info screen and there's a gauge.

 

Certainly not a disqualifier for the benefits of the 3.0

 

2 tank refills probably covers the cost of DEF compared to a 6.2 using premium. (mileage + fuel cost savings).

Here, diesel is quite a bit cheaper than high test.

 

DEF, from a bulk location (truck stop) is about $3.00 usgal.

Both 6.6's I ran got 1100 -1200 mpg, doing primarily daily driver work.  Based on posts here and other forums, it's appears that the def indicator is a bad way to try and determine mileage -- so I took it to a bulk pump and topped it off and recorded the odometer reading.

Someday I'll be able to post def mpg for this one, along with info about what the def level/range indicator has shown. 

 

So far (but it's early) it's using less fuel than the 6.6.  I'll be disappointed if the def usage isn't as good or better than the 6.6L

Posted
6 hours ago, leverett.scott said:

If you are driving in NORMAL conditions daily, how often do you all think you have to fill the DEF tank?

Sent from my SM-G981V using Tapatalk
 

I'm expecting 1200 mpg or more, based on experience with 2011 LML and 2018 L5P

Posted

Big thing right now too is GM cut the option price on the 3.0 so its cheaper to buy and cheaper to fill up at the tank.  Comparing them on fueleconomy.gov, its almost $5000 cheaper in fuel costs over 5 years to operate the diesel, and even if you add in DEF, fuel filters and a bit more for oil changes, its still cheaper in that 5 year window.  

Posted

Can't go wrong with any of them.  I'd be concerned about the long-term repair cost potential of the 3.0 though.  Anything with a 10-speed...8-speed is a turd.  

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

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,944
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    flyclt
    Newest Member
    flyclt
    Joined
  • Who's Online   5 Members, 0 Anonymous, 636 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • The timing marks are ok, that is #1, you can turn it over until they line up and it won't change anything, the crankshaft turns twice for every camshaft revolution, I have always set up SB Chevs as your pic shows using a straight edge
    • Someone's been here before.... There is a receipt for a 3-piece timing set, purchased earlier this year.   Is this picture something, or, nothing?   I have the timing cover off and my crank is perfectly TDC and the keyed gear's locating mark is dead on 12 o'clock.   The cam gear locating mark is also at 12 o'clock. Now, I'm not an expert, but all the install guides say the two locating marks should meet and be perfectly aligned when installing a timing set. The mark on the crank should be dead on 12:00 and the cam gear's mark should be dead on 6:00, and both marks should be perfectly vertically aligned.   I believe the timing gear is keyed or has a dowel that ensures it can only be installed on the cam in one position, so I have to believe the cam is out of phase somehow. At the very least, with a triangular bolt pattern, it can only be installed in one of 3 different positions.   Before I pulled the front cover, the truck was running alright, no service engine soon lights except an occasional P0172 / rich condition. Timing -16 timing at idle (should be +16), and total -35% fuel trim, two conditions I haven't been able to figure out.   In related news, my injector tested pretty well, wasn't leaking, but I had it rebuilt anyway, and it's on it's way back to me.         Along with this discovery, the good and bad:   Good: The oil pan seal appears undamaged.   Bad: -The timing cover has been reused, and the positioning dowels have been broken. That could explain some of the leaking. -Some kind of white paste or grease was used to try to seal the oil pan seal and timing cover (since wiped off..). -Then, someone globbed silicone all over the front of the cover and also buried the ckp sensor in it. But, they didn't put any inside the cover or use RTV to try to seal the oil pan seal with the timing cover (good).
    • The guy that owns K&P filters last I checked in with him has over 300,000 miles on his Dodge base Hemi using his own 35 micron absolute stainless mesh filter from its first oil change.    The GM study I've posted a dozen times shows the relationship in engine life based in multiples of base units, not miles or years. That is the base unit is the number of miles the motor ran using the reference filter efficiency.    The above two paragraphs dismantle anecdotal arguments IF one changes oil often enough to prevent particle formation and the motor is in otherwise good shape. That is not full of silica (no air filter) or suffering a metallurgical issue that is not part of the lubrication discussion. Poor heat treat in example.   Data from UOA's I've reviewed from more than a few engines can show remarkably broad variations in oil cleanliness using the exact same filter over the course of an engines life.     Lastly there is the common sense of it. Wear debris WILL circulate the engine BEFORE it ever sees a filter in route to that filter and WILL harm the pump which NEVER sees filtered oil.    Alpha question then becomes, given the facts, how long do you believe is a reasonable service life from a vehicle you are certain you will not pass down? That is the junk yard will be it's resting place when you're done with it? (the moral issue most don't care about).    Omega question is then how diligent are you prepared to be in general mechanical, air & oil maintenance? Preventing particulates and keeping them sufficiently dilute; preventing the precursors from generation, amalgamation and precipitation.    If I get a good look at the engine bay of a vehicle I have a fair idea of the owners commitment to the inside of the power train. That 30 micron WIX is still more efficient than a sieve.                 
    • It also depends on what criteria someone is using for “best” when talking filters.  Are we going off best efficiency?   Best quality/QC?  Etc. because the two may not mutually exclusive.  
    • They’re not the same wiz as 10-15 years ago.  QC has fallen pretty hard.  The XP line was never good though in the first place.    https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/wix-filter-rusted-through.386492/post-6991372   https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/i-ve-used-my-last-wix-filter.27299/   https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/looking-for-a-better-replacement-for-wix-51258.403977/   https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/convince-me-in-using-the-purolator-boss.401537/post-7420147   the forums are littered with posts and examples of not great wix filters the last couple years 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...