Jump to content
  • Sign up for FREE! Become a GM-Trucks.com Member Today!

    In 20 seconds you can become part of the worlds largest and oldest community discussing General Motors, Chevrolet and GMC branded pickups, crossovers, and SUVs. From buying research to owner support, join 1.5 MILLION GM Truck Enthusiasts every month who use GM-Trucks.com as a daily part of their ownership experience. 

6.2 Fan Club


Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, TxTruckMan said:

But yet people are on this site claiming left and right that CAI and exhaust give them huge bumps in power and mileage?  LOL!  I just don't get it.  You either want the power or you don't.  Why spend the $2500 on a $55K+ truck but then try to save $5 at the pump each fill up?  That makes no sense at all.

Every truck I owned except the one I have now had a premium tune, exhaust and CAI or drop in. It could have been slower because of it. It shifted firmer, rev higher and sounded good to me. I believe premium fuel is about 20$ per tank higher than regular fuel now. Since I retired and have to buy my own fuel. I don’t buy vehicles that requires it. Taking my trips that would be 240$ round trip minimum. To cruise at 72 mph. Of course I use a CRV for trips 25$ fills it up.  So it’s all a mute point.😳

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, f8l vnm said:


And now we will be at least 10 years until a power bump. The 6.2 IMO does just fine ( yes a 20-30 hp/tq jump would be really nice) but the 5.3 is the engine which needs more love. It’s the only 5 liter V8 with less then 400\400.  
( not counting Tundra as they are about to release probably a 400/500 set up like the Ford Eco as they going to Turbo 6. ) you can tell GM spent 95% of their truck R/D into their interior. Which needed it badly. 
And now we have the hand built by god :)  2.7 in which GM absolutely crushed it with 310/420. Only thing was the 8A…cmon GM , start putting the 10R80 in everything. Ford did even in their base 3.3 motor.  I could for sure see this engine stealing more sales from the 5.3. 

I suspect next power bump will be in the form of all electric. I was heavily considering the Cybertruck but for now super happy with my 6.2. Plenty of power to put a grin on my face and good enough fuel economy to put a grin on my wallet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, KARNUT said:

Every truck I owned except the one I have now had a premium tune, exhaust and CAI or drop in. It could have been slower because of it. It shifted firmer, rev higher and sounded good to me. I believe premium fuel is about 20$ per tank higher than regular fuel now. Since I retired and have to buy my own fuel. I don’t buy vehicles that requires it. Taking my trips that would be 240$ round trip minimum. To cruise at 72 mph. Of course I use a CRV for trips 25$ fills it up.  So it’s all a mute point.😳

National average is now up to 60 cents difference between regular and premium. A 20 gallon fill up will net $12 extra dollars. But if you get better mileage while on premium it almost becomes a moot point. 1 mpg is about 7% better mileage. Premium costs 18% more. So really it’s only ~$7 a fill up for premium gas and better performance. If you can’t afford an extra $7 per fill up, maybe you shouldn’t have gotten the 6.L? 🤔. That’s my opinion anyway. 

Edited by TxTruckMan
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, TxTruckMan said:

National average is now up to 60 cents difference between regular and premium. A $20 gallon fill up will net $12 extra dollars. But if you get better mileage while on premium it almost becomes a moot point. 1 mpg is about 7% better mileage. Premium costs 18% more. So really it’s only ~$7 a fill up for premium gas and better performance. If you can’t afford an extra $7 per fill up, maybe you shouldn’t have gotten the 6.L? 🤔. That’s my opinion anyway. 

I averaged 50K miles a year for 40 years working. I used hand held tunes on them since they were available. All my trucks had free flowing exhaust and tuned for highway cruising. Using premium fuel made no difference no matter how I  had them turned for fuel mileage. I didn’t have to worry about fuel cost it was a write off in my business, just like my trucks. I could drive anything. I loved to test different tunes, fuels. It helped with driving boredom. I drove so much. I even had tunable exhaust by changing disks. Experimenting with different back pressure for performance and mileage. Supper Trapp it’s called. In my area there’s .75-1.00 difference between 87-93 grade fuel. Now being retired and buying my own gas. I don’t like to waste money on gas. I put my extra money in vacations and gambling. The gas hog truck is for in town pleasure. The CRV and Genesis are trips. The Acura intagra type R is for fun. Money isn’t the problem. Sounds like a good idea for a thread though. How much better mileage do you get with premium vs reg gas. 

Edited by KARNUT
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

In my area there’s .75-1.00 difference between 87-93 grade fuel.

Where are you filling up?  I have never seen .75-1.00/gal difference that I can remember...  I’m filling up at Costco now, .30-.35/gal difference, so ~$7/gal per fillup.  Yes, other places are 0.40-0.50/gal more.
 

On a different note, folks can think & do/run whatever they want, but this motor needs premium to run to it’s published specs, etc.  Can programming, knock sensors, etc, compensate?  Yes, but you won’t get the same performance.  If driven mildly yes you may get the same mileage, but not when you push/work it.  Ford’s ecoboost is the same - manual says run a minimum of 87 but the goes on to say for best performance and to meet published specs to run premium.  More and more vehicle are going towards premium due to CAFE and emissions standards.
 

There is a push to have all new vehicles run premium (or even higher octane than current premium) - engines designed to run premium get better gas mileage, and thats why it’s being discussed (by manufacturers, fuels producers, .gov, etc).

Edited by RCF71
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Amcguy1970 said:

 

Best or favorite/nicest? Not sure how someone can say best ever a year in without waiting to see if it has any problems or things pop up they don't like; unless this is your first vehicle ever I guess or you only keep a vehicle for a year? We usually wait until we get rid of a vehicle to determine how good it was. Best for us was a 91' Astro van, though not the nicest it was the most reliable and lasted the longest with no problems outside of an alternator over nearly 250k; all the while spending much of the time towing a boat at its weight limit with a family of 4 in it around the great lakes. 

 

 

Because no one can tell the 10hp difference and the less than 1mpg difference between regular and premium doesn't cover the cost upgrade... It isn't like you get a 50hp bump or anything, it is minimal and the cost savings favors regular. Now towing or hauling or running hard we use premium, otherwise it is 87 most of the time. If it was required that would be a different story. 

 

Tyler

The Corsa exhaust gives you 17 hp net on average and the S&B let’s the engine breath better. The combo has seen .3 tenths of a second quicker in 0-60. I’d say that’s a difference. OnTheReel has the data and I had it on my last truck with a handheld phone app. 
Also, even though it’s to required it’s highly recommended, anyone can choose to run the octane they prefer but if you are buying a 6.2L and then worrying about the gas. You choose the wrong engine. To get 420HP required premium. That’s all I am saying. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, f8l vnm said:


And now we will be at least 10 years until a power bump. The 6.2 IMO does just fine ( yes a 20-30 hp/tq jump would be really nice) but the 5.3 is the engine which needs more love. It’s the only 5 liter V8 with less then 400\400.  
( not counting Tundra as they are about to release probably a 400/500 set up like the Ford Eco as they going to Turbo 6. ) you can tell GM spent 95% of their truck R/D into their interior. Which needed it badly. 
And now we have the hand built by god :)  2.7 in which GM absolutely crushed it with 310/420. Only thing was the 8A…cmon GM , start putting the 10R80 in everything. Ford did even in their base 3.3 motor.  I could for sure see this engine stealing more sales from the 5.3. 

I don’t disagree with you the 5.3L should have around 400-410HP and the 6.2L could easily have 480-500hp and be respectable in Fuel economy. But with an old corvette ZR1 motor sitting in the parts bin and the Camaro ZL1 motor also available, why not cook up a supercharged truck. It’s asinine for GM to be missing out in this market.

 

hell they have 3 lifted trucks now, which HARDLY NO ONE will use them for their intended purposes.  Just glorified EGO pounding pavement haulers. GM missed the buck on being the first to hit the market with a true sport truck with one of those engine stated above!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, TNTSilverado said:

I don’t disagree with you the 5.3L should have around 400-410HP and the 6.2L could easily have 480-500hp and be respectable in Fuel economy. But with an old corvette ZR1 motor sitting in the parts bin and the Camaro ZL1 motor also available, why not cook up a supercharged truck. It’s asinine for GM to be missing out in this market.

 

hell they have 3 lifted trucks now, which HARDLY NO ONE will use them for their intended purposes.  Just glorified EGO pounding pavement haulers. GM missed the buck on being the first to hit the market with a true sport truck with one of those engine stated above!  

If GM drops a ZR1 or ZL1 motor or some other supercharged hero in a truck, I'd rather it be in a regular cab short bed 2wd!  I've got a Jeep for playing in the dirt, I want a stoplight screamer!  Make SS mean something again!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, RCF71 said:

Where are you filling up?  I have never seen .75-1.00/gal difference that I can remember...  I’m filling up at Costco now, .30-.35/gal difference, so ~$7/gal per fillup.  Yes, other places are 0.40-0.50/gal more.
 

On a different note, folks can think & do/run whatever they want, but this motor needs premium to run to it’s published specs, etc.  Can programming, knock sensors, etc, compensate?  Yes, but you won’t get the same performance.  If driven mildly yes you may get the same mileage, but not when you push/work it.  Ford’s ecoboost is the same - manual says run a minimum of 87 but the goes on to say for best performance and to meet published specs to run premium.  More and more vehicle are going towards premium due to CAFE and emissions standards.
 

There is a push to have all new vehicles run premium (or even higher octane than current premium) - engines designed to run premium get better gas mileage, and thats why it’s being discussed (by manufacturers, fuels producers, .gov, etc).

I’ve owed and own vehicles that require premium fuel. There’re running more aggressive timing. Even caned tunes require premium fuel if you run a premium tune. It’s more aggressive timing. My 14 GMC had the E-85 option. Running that fuel got you within 25 hp of the 6.2. The 6.2 gets some of its horsepower from aggressive tuning, requiring premium fuel. My stroke, blown Chevy truck ran on premium fuel. Most small turbo engines run better on premium fuel. I haven’t read anything about it benefiting emissions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, AirForceAngler said:

If GM drops a ZR1 or ZL1 motor or some other supercharged hero in a truck, I'd rather it be in a regular cab short bed 2wd!  I've got a Jeep for playing in the dirt, I want a stoplight screamer!  Make SS mean something again!

Why hinder it to a single cab??  Why not offer both. A single and a crew. I want a crew cab SS truck because I have my wife and 2 kids along with a 90lb pound shepherd that I take to our lake house pulling our boat. Would love to have that!  GM has all the goodies right there in house that have been used on other vehicles. Grab  ahold of the parts bin and have at it.   No reason they shouldn’t take hold of this market share when no one else is In it right now. 

Edited by TNTSilverado
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, AirForceAngler said:

If GM drops a ZR1 or ZL1 motor or some other supercharged hero in a truck, I'd rather it be in a regular cab short bed 2wd!  I've got a Jeep for playing in the dirt, I want a stoplight screamer!  Make SS mean something again!


Still would need AWD for sure. 600+ HP in a 2WD truck that weighs nothing in the back would be completely worthless. Even the normal 6.2 is basically worthless if you just leave it in 2WD.
 

The big appeal to these trucks is the traction. On the street you can take down some fairly quick cars. At least up to 60. After that you can’t really fight physics. Or that speeding ticket.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, TxTruckMan said:

National average is now up to 60 cents difference between regular and premium. A 20 gallon fill up will net $12 extra dollars. But if you get better mileage while on premium it almost becomes a moot point. 1 mpg is about 7% better mileage. Premium costs 18% more. So really it’s only ~$7 a fill up for premium gas and better performance. If you can’t afford an extra $7 per fill up, maybe you shouldn’t have gotten the 6.L? 🤔. That’s my opinion anyway. 

Sadly a large percentage of peeps driving late model vehicles can't afford a fill up of any fuel let alone "premium", it's usually $5 here $10 here type of thing. Economics and finance have taken a backseat in public schools to be replaced by AIDs awareness, golf and ESL. An unexpected $400 bill can send them scurrying to the "payroll advance" place.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, TxTruckMan said:

I don’t know why they just don’t get rid of regular gas completely and only sell premium?  It would simplify things and make it cheaper. Win-win.

GM should do the same with the small block. Just offer the 6.2. Technology the way it is you should be able to run all brands of gas. Available HP bumps through different octanes. Even E-85. There’s seems to be very little difference in fuel mileage between the 5.3 and 6.2. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, KARNUT said:

GM should do the same with the small block. Just offer the 6.2. Technology the way it is you should be able to run all brands of gas. Available HP bumps through different octanes. Even E-85. There’s seems to be very little difference in fuel mileage between the 5.3 and 6.2. 

I always feel sorry for peeps that get stuck with that 2.7 and post here looking for any type of upgrade. The threads always start the same: "It's not that bad", um... ya it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.