Jump to content

Getting another one.

leverett.scott
 Share

Recommended Posts

steelcity Enthusiast

steelcity

Posted
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
  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

OnTheReel
OnTheReel

Yup. If ya can’t feed it, don’t breed it. Or something like that. ?   I don’t see much point in buying a performance engine and then running junk fuel through it. 11.5:1 compression. I don’t

SILVER SLED
SILVER SLED

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

OnTheReel
OnTheReel

Can’t beat the entertainment of the 6.2. But it is a thirsty MOFO. Currently at a lifetime economy of 14.1 MPG. Gonna see how gas prices are with the new leadership. Might wind up in a 3.0 by this tim

KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
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
Kennewbike Enthusiast

Kennewbike

Posted
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
jjackkrash Enthusiast

jjackkrash

Posted
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.   

SILVER SLED Senior Enthusiast

SILVER SLED

Posted
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
steve841 Enthusiast

steve841

Posted
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
leverett.scott Enthusiast

leverett.scott

Posted
  • Author
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

leverett.scott Enthusiast

leverett.scott

Posted
  • Author
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

steve841 Enthusiast

steve841

Posted
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).

redwngr Senior Enthusiast

redwngr

Posted
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

redwngr Senior Enthusiast

redwngr

Posted
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

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
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.  

Leevon Enthusiast

Leevon

Posted
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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • ryan35205
      Lets Talk Z60 Suspension

      By ryan35205 · Posted

      Did the KYBs keep it the same height in the front? I was concerned that pre-assembled assembly would raise it up an inch to standard non-z60 height.. I guess which it would make the rake 1 inch instead of 2 inches.
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Thank you for keeping the train on the tracks and for a thoughtful engagement. I enjoyed the reflection on a previous stance to refine and improve your position. I like that inquisitive flexibility about you Atlas.    No the process isn't sterile. Hundreds, perhaps thousands of miles of piping, vessels, pumps. Chevron, the people I worked for, were keenly aware that there is a market for what is known as their "ISOCLEAN" line of lubricants. These are lubricants that are the same as those sold bulk that are further processed by filtration to a level your particular application demands. They will filter and package and provide lab documentation as required. Do not kid yourself. Every gallon of oil that goes into a Chevron Turbine, reciprocating compressor, generator is prefiltered and tested before being charged. Lest wise it was when I was there in the plants I worked in.    There are requirements set by manufactures for the cleanliness of the oils used in their equipment. OTR such as CUMMINS has standards shared with customers on this. Commercial interest selling to Ma and Pa do, but don't share that information. Not even upon request but internally, they do exist.    The GM study sited, (Graph from Machinery Lubrication in previous post) only shows "relative" importance.  I find that fascinating. By constructing the graph like this they admit there are dozens of factors in engine life and via scientific method determined the effect of 'relative cleanliness' on engine life not in miles but in 'FACTORS'. This allows a certain amount of reverse engineering does it not?   They even provided some touchstones. Beta 75 as a reference point. Wonderful stuff!!   Smaller blenders CAN and some DO take the time and effort to do better than a refinery or large bulk blender, like Warren Oil, in improving the "in the can" cleanliness. No I don't have a list but testing could generate that information.    Again, but one of several levers we can pull to improve engine life. The simplest is keeping a clean work station while doing your own oil changes.     
    • Mykel544
      New Guy from Oklahoma

      By Mykel544 · Posted

      Thank you. I'll give it a try 
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      I just spent the last 45K miles doing samples every oil change over more than a full year to get the data for seasons and break-in to broke in.    I found the same thing to be true. Something was always teetering on done or had stepped off the cliff long before the OLM was DOA. In fact, I found about a thousand mile difference between summer and winter. That is during the winter half the OLM was STILL too long. Even the severe schedule was to long in the winter.   Now having done the work I can say I was NOT DISAPOINTED. I saw nothing I didn't already know. Nothing my father hadn't already demonstrated in his 2K OCI's pushing dated iron on dated oils and weak filters to mileages well beyond 300K.   Building on his work through use of Lab testing it wasn't hard to find the correlation between 'sight/feel/odor, the things dad relied on, and test results. Use of current viscosity stable chemistries & filters has pushed that marker for my motors out to 3K summer, 4K winter.    So the early lies were 3K on conventional oil and the lie upon the lie was 7K+. turns out to be off by a factor of two.    So... it is true that modern chemistry has doubled the useful oil life. But the base milage that came from was off by double. It's how good lies work. Partly true, sometimes mostly true so that your meter isn't set off. It also means that non-shear-stable shelf oils are only now as good as the old oils were in their best case scenario.    So the question now is how do we improve on that? Thus the question into cleanliness among the other items listed in the post quoted below.    If this bores you, feel free not to participate.       
    • newdude
      2027 Chevrolet Silverado: Official Discussion

      By newdude · Posted

      Is it though?  Like LTZ, not a high take rate.  Current Sierra has AT4, Denali and Elevation as its main bread winners.  Each trim accounting for 25-35% of sales for Sierra.  SLT makes up about 10-15% at best.        Like others have predicted here for GMC, it will be:   - Pro (equal to WT Chevy)   - Elevation (replaces SLE and SLT)   - AT4 (and X)   - Denali (and Ultimate).  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...