Jump to content

What Engine You Chose and why VOTE

Big_Kahuna
 Share

what engine you chose   

237 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

  • 2 months later...
  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

GETGONE
GETGONE

6.2L Because go big or go home! Of course when I ordered it gas wasn't stupid expensive! I got to order my truck and decided it wasn't too much more to go with the 6.2 over the 5.3 and in the Custom t

Billy Ogle
Billy Ogle

I choose the 3.0 because I drive 60+miles a day to work, needed a new truck that was fuel efficient  and didn’t need a 3/4 ton. 

Anon12345
Anon12345

4 bangers NEVER out do a v8.  4 bangers need boost to even get close to a v8 and people love their rice rockets screaming IIIIIIMMMMM GAAAAAAAY with their fart cans. 

Posted Images

John F. Enthusiast

John F.

Posted
Posted (edited)

I went with the 3.0. There were a few reasons. 1 being i had been driving a 2019 with the 5.3 and really didn't care for it.  it was also a 6 speed. This was a company work vehicle and we had about 6 of these.  My engine was replaced under warranty(56,000 miles) as well as the tranny(15000 miles). A few of the other trucks in our fleet as well had the top ends rebuilt under warranty. Also it never felt smooth when shifting   When it came time to buy myself a new vehicle it wasn't going to be the 5.3. January of 2022 found mine on the lot (no 6.2 available) and made a deal for $8k under MSRP. I couldn't turn down that for the 3.0. 2077953797_Trucknewwheels.thumb.jpg.2c7ffa2a4a8ba44f93a8fd68161179bc.jpg

Edited by John F.
  • Like 2
Jus Cruisin Enthusiast

Jus Cruisin

Posted
Posted

6.2l for mine. Choice was 3.0 diesel or the 6.2l for my model. I swore off diesels 3 trucks ago. Just hated having to put on a glove and trying to avoid all the slopped diesel on the ground I hated smelling like a diesel tech after fillups. 

  • 2 weeks later...
17Z71 Enthusiast

17Z71

Posted
Posted

I chose the 6.2 for my 2022 RST Z71 refresh truck, and I literally bought it about two weeks ago.  I never post much but I joined this site right after I bought a brand new 2017 LT Z71 w/5.3 6 spd.  FFW to March 2019 I traded in on a new LTZ 6.2 Z71.  Holy crap no more sluggish driving and shifts (and way better power).  The 2017 5.3 6 speed never seemed to know what gear to be in going up the hill to my house and 19 6.2 10 speed solved the issues.  I have never driven a 5.3 with the 10 speed and I'm sure it's a fine engine though.  FFW to June of 2021 and I decided to upgrade to the latest Ford F150 with the Powerboost drivetrain in a Lariat high trim (74K almost with a spray in Rhino liner).  You can't go wrong with 430 HP and 570 FT LBS of torque, right?!?  I have had many Ford trucks and cars (loved most) in my life over 53 plus years and have to say this was the WORST experience with a vehicle I have ever had.  I totally never got what I paid for in this "job 1 truck" bluecruise never worked, added gremlins from not updating, scored driveshaft from insulation rub, loudest rapping noise you've ever heard from the transmission on a cold start under a certain cold temp, and fords inability to ever solve any of the issues.  Being back in this refreshed 6.2 glacier blue metallic RST is like a breath of fresh air!  Here comes the Borla exhaust again and great sound!!

  • Like 1
17Z71 Enthusiast

17Z71

Posted
Posted

I do have to admit though that if you spun up the hairdryers in that 3.5 powerboost w/3.73 gears in sport mode it would embarrass a lot of young guy egos in their whatever car at a stoplight.  Haha

  • 7 months later...
TrueBlue Enthusiast

TrueBlue

Posted
Posted

I first settled for a 2.7T in a '23 LT. But after having it for awhile, and developing a leak around the oil pan I ponied up more cash and traded it in on a '23 5.3L LT. Never really wanted a 4 cyl. and definitely didn't want a turbo but it was all I could find at the time. I have to say though that the "little 4 banger" acquitted itself very well. I would never have guessed 50 years ago in my youth that a motor that small could beat an 8 cylinder in any car, let alone in a 5K lb. truck.

Today's technology is truly amazing. I think my 5.3 drives better than the 2.7 but not by much, and is definitely aided by the 10sp. tranny. The gearing in this tranny makes up for the higher torque in the 2.7 as well as the taller gears in the 5.3. Or maybe it's just that I feel right, and back at home in a V8. I've seen that the 2.7 will beat the 5.3 in 0-60 times but only by a few tenths. GM has done themselves proud with all of these motors I think.

  • Like 1
Bikerjon Enthusiast

Bikerjon

Posted
Posted

5.3 in my new Trail Boss. I would love a 6.2 but with gas at $4.09 a gallon for regular today I dont want to spend all of my money on premium fuel. My 2021 TB Custom was a great truck but the 5.3 with the 6 speed never felt "strong" mushy shifting and the tranny never felt hooked into gear. Before anyone corrects me I will state that  I could not order the 2023 Custom Trail Boss wth the 6.2. This new 5.3/10 speed combo is amazng! Feels like much more power. I am sure the extra gears just keep the engine in the powerband better. I just got it piped so I am sure it will even get better.

  • Confused 1
GETGONE Enthusiast

GETGONE

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Bikerjon said:

Before anyone corrects me I will state that  I could not order the 2023 Custom Trail Boss wth the 6.2.

Yeah they dropped the 6.2 in the Custom in 22. I'm not sure if it was available in the pre refresh trucks or not. For sure was not available on the refresh trucks. The 4.3 was dropped as the base engine and the 2.7 turbo was made the base engine. I'm glad I was able to order my 21 Custom with the 6.2 10 speed vs the 5.3 6 speed.

redwngr Senior Enthusiast

redwngr

Posted
Posted

Everybody's want's, need's and budget are different. 

 

There is a reason why GM offers 4 powerplants in the 1500's. 

  • Like 1
MrMagloo Enthusiast

MrMagloo

Posted
Posted

I have to admit that I'm pretty amazed with the economy of this 3.0L LZO, even with the Max Tow 3.73's.  And it's pretty quick too.  Not unusual at all seeing 30+ MPG averages on the highway, which is remarkable.

GETGONE Enthusiast

GETGONE

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, MrMagloo said:

I have to admit that I'm pretty amazed with the economy of this 3.0L LZO, even with the Max Tow 3.73's.  And it's pretty quick too.  Not unusual at all seeing 30+ MPG averages on the highway, which is remarkable.

If it weren't for the ever increasing sticker price and now double or more interest rate, I'd trade my 21 Trail Boss with the 6.2 for the diesel. I'm averaging 15mpg and best mpg ever was 20.5.

repairman54 Enthusiast

repairman54

Posted
Posted

I'm impressed with the 6.2. Getting 20 -21 highway on reasonably flat roads. Way better than the 16 -18 my old '11 5.3 Tahoe got on the same roads not to mention the big power difference. When shopping the EPA fuel estimates on the window stickers were the same for the 5.3 and the 6.2. Yeah premium recommended in the 6.2, I alternate between regular and premium with 1/2 tank fills. Premium only when towing. The power that is on tap with the 6.2 makes the premium penalty worth it for me.

  • 4 weeks later...
Mshawn Enthusiast

Mshawn

Posted
Posted (edited)
On 4/21/2022 at 7:02 AM, TNTSilverado said:

You stated before the truck was sluggish?? How can a truck be sluggish when it performs was well as a MUSCLE car did 15-20 years ago and it’s not even a performance oriented truck!!!   0-60 times do tell how well a truck performs. Yes, the new 2.7L does offer excellent torque, but it is also down on HP compared to the 5.3L.
 

And the fact you compared it to a Furd 4.6L in a truck was laughable. I could almost get out and run faster than both the 4.6 or boat anchor 5.4L.  Hell my dad still has an 09 F150 with 5.4L and that turd can’t even turn over the tires. 
 

Now, I can totally agree with you that GM FUBR’d the T1 by neglecting their two V8s. Totally frustrating, (especially for me, because I love fast things) there is no reason the 5.3L couldn’t be pushing 380-400 HP with 430ish TQ.  Along with the 6.2L over 450 HP and 500 TQ.   Especially when both V8s get as good and even better than the Ecobust out there by Ford and the new Tundra isn’t passing up any gas stations with their new turbo motor. 
 

What people don’t realize is small displacement motors are great for putzing around town, but the minute you work them their MPGs go down the drain, like the Alzheimer’s Patient’s “IQ” we have in DC 

There is so much more hidden hp and torque in the 5.3 And even the 6.2. To build these engine or do moderate add ons toward increasing the hp and torque is incredible. The 2.7T is just about as maxed as it can be and still be useful and reliable for 150k miles. If this is about ultimate power and torque then up would see these variants of 4 cylinders being used In top fuel drag car. But instead what they use is v8. The statement that the 5.3 is a “outdated dinosaur “ is very untrue. It is great overall reliable compromise between fuel economy, which is a huge determining factor in the light duty truck industry, and v8 power that people enjoy because of the power! There is a place for the 5.3 v8 in this market. 

Edited by Mshawn
  • Like 1
Mshawn Enthusiast

Mshawn

Posted
Posted
On 4/26/2022 at 8:34 PM, Samthebam said:

Bought my Dec.’19 manufactured 2019 in March of 20 during the onset of Covid with the 5.3 6-speed.  It has the max trailering package which gave me 3.73 rear gears in the bigger rear end housing, the rear locking differential, slightly lower stance and stiffer spring rates.
I’ve been very pleased with the power, overall mpg - about 18.5 - and the torque. The rear gearing helps quite a bit.

And I have used regular fuel during all of its just over 20k miles.

Great, great truck.  The max trailering with the lower gears just works.3214EB7A-FB65-472C-A7F5-3BFF71EE5776.thumb.jpeg.ee4ee3d0404d2ced6a7f575cdd9c8aaf.jpeg

this truck is beautiful! Need to get rid of that “volunteer” symbol and add a Razorback!!!!!!! JK!!! beautiful truck!

slimjim2525 Senior Enthusiast

slimjim2525

Posted
Posted (edited)

Had a 2004 with 5.3, traded for a 2007 with 5.3, gave that to my brother and got a 2018 with 5.3.  Hated the 6 speed in the 2018 and the feeling of getting hit from behind every time I came to a stop.  Traded that for the 3.0l with 10 speed.  What a combination.  From 325 miles a tank to 607 miles on my last tank before the low gas light came on.  I am keeping this truck for a long time like I did with the 2007.  My brother still has it and running great at 315K miles.  He had to replace the bed as it rusted out, that it other than routine maintenance.

Edited by slimjim2525

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

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • nfisherman
      Software Update

      By nfisherman · Posted

      Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...