Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

My 6.2 gets 20 mpg easily and consistently. Old '11 Tahoe 5.3 at its best barely made 19 on identical roads and trips, usually only 18 mpg. 

Not loaded up figures also. And no comparison to the power on tap with the 6.2. 

Look at the window stickers, same mpg ratings for the 5.3 or the 6.2. 

Posted (edited)

My 02 5.3  avalanche with the 373 gear got 17 mpg at 72 mph on the interstate. My 14 gmc  with the 342 gear got 22 mph at 72 mph. I posted it at the time on an old gas mileage thread on this forum. With several hundred miles driven on that tank. I saw as much as much as 24 mpg at 60mph. Those were normal for that truck. 

Edited by KARNUT
Posted (edited)

In June I bought an LT with the 2.7. I liked the grunt it put out. But at 700 miles the oil pan started leaking, and it gave me a chance to rectify my "mistake" of not getting the 5.3 to begin with. I also was just not satisfied with the sound of the motor. So I traded it back in to the same dealer. Cost me a little more to get into the 5.3 that way, but I'm completely happy with my truck now.

I've had five brand new Chevy trucks in my life, along with a few used ones and I have to say that I like this one the best. So long as it treats me well for as long as the others did I will have no regrets. I put a Magnaflow 14" on it and it now sounds as it should, imo. I drive around in L9 all the time to keep it running all 8, and it has as much grunt as I need. A bit less than the 2.7 but that's due to the turbo on the latter. And I like the 10sp better than the 8, even though I'm only using 9 of the gears. I've had a couple of 350's in my trucks, and a 400 small block. None of them put out 355hp or close to 400lbs ft of torque. Technology has made for some great vehicles in the last 25 years or so. I average close to 18mpg every tank. The 5.3 is a hoot.

Edited by TrueBlue
  • Like 2
Posted

Ive had my 2.7 HO for about 5K miles. For the first 4000 it was stock. The motor has 100% surpassed every expectation I had on it. Pulling hills with the turbo you fly past other trucks while getting 20+mpg. The power is there and the torque is there. The very top end it gets sluggish, but you rarely drive there. Its quiet if thats what you like, and the light overall weight rides nice and helps with wear and tear. 

 

The last 1K miles ive since added a 3" lift and 35's with a black widow muffler and have a CAI and hot/cold pipes in the garage to still get put on. Yes the MPG has gone down as expected but i'm still about 17mpg city with all that low end pep and it can still break the 35's loose. It doesn't sound like a honda with the black widow (they love turbo's) Just a muffle delete it likely would though. 

 

If I had to do it all over again, I would stay with the 2.7L

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

I have 115k+ miles on my 2020 5.3 and there is no lag whatsoever.  It gets after it whenever I need it to.

Posted
On 10/29/2023 at 2:23 PM, Silverado4x4 said:

I don't know what year your Ram was but all new vehicles come with torque management to protect the drivetrain. When my 5.3 was new it learns your driving style with the tranny but after I put about 1000 miles on or give our take it really woke up power and shifting wise, I love my 5.3 power and more than enough for what I need. Iam with you on the 4 cylinder motor as I don't want a 4 cylinder in a truck I don't care if it had 500hp but its always revving rpms and can't get past the sound of it. I could hear it now from people " Hey man nice truck what motor you have ummm its a 4cylinder" WHAT? But iam not downing it but it's not for me. Thats why there are choices.

The 2.7turbo is a great motor, however I buy the 5.3. I love it. The more I drive it the more responsive it gets. A lot of the lag is due to fuel management and driveline protection ,But it learns as you drive it. You will always have a little bit of lag in the new trucks. Doing a dfm delete helps a lot. I notice when I drive mine more aggressively that the next time I get in to go somewhere it is very responsive and aggressive for a little bit while I’m driving normal. Can’t go wrong with either engine though. The 2.7 turbo is a beast , well built engine in my opinion.

Posted
On 10/30/2023 at 6:19 AM, dieselfan1 said:

10 mpg from a 6.2????

C'mon man this is 2023 not 1983 

My 2023 High Country 6.2 has averaged 18-19 mpg since day one.

My best was a 100 mile run averaging 24 mpg.

I also have a 2022 with the 5.3

and it doesn't get as good mpg

Average of 16-17 mpg since it was new.

Work and back is 80+ miles for me and I’m getting 22-23 consistently with my 5.3 and I’m a crew cab z71 5.3 L84 all interstate though.

Posted
7 hours ago, Mshawn said:

Work and back is 80+ miles for me and I’m getting 22-23 consistently with my 5.3 and I’m a crew cab z71 5.3 L84 all interstate though.

Iam getting the same mileage as you on the interstate but I did see 27mpg on a 50 mile average on the dash.

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

I'm surprised no one has mentioned "Sport Mode".  I use it all the time.  I feel no lag with my 5.3👍

 

Lou

Edited by lowrider
  • Like 1
Posted
11 hours ago, lowrider said:

I'm surprised no one has mentioned "Sport Mode".  I use it all the time.  I feel no lag with my 5.3👍

 

Lou

I’ve noticed that too. In sport mode it’s a lot more responsive. Thanks for bringing that up

Posted
4 hours ago, Mshawn said:

I’ve noticed that too. In sport mode it’s a lot more responsive. Thanks for bringing that up

 

Granted, I've barely made it past 500 miles on the new truck and I do know that the various control modules will take some time to adjust, but I notice NOTHING different from Sport Mode on my truck. :(

Posted
On 10/29/2023 at 11:29 PM, newdude said:

 

 

Do you drive with your foot stuck to the floor?  Or idle a lot?  Stop and go?  Because a 6.2 will get way more than 10 mpg any day of the week otherwise.  We have a 2020 Tahoe with a 6.2/10 speed in our loaner fleet and in 7,000mi its averaged 19.5mpg.

 

5.3 with the 10 speed is a great drive.  5.3 is cheap to operate too because it just needs 87 octane.  10 speed fires off shifts and allows that 5.3 to work its power better than the 6 and 8 speeds it had before. 

 

2.7 Turbomax is a great driver as well, especially over the 19-22 non HO/Turbomax ones.  And it too just needs 87 octane.  I have a 2.7 HO and absolutely love it.  More than both 5.3/6 speed trucks I had, a 2018 and a 2012.  

 

6.2 is a blast but 91 octane or higher is a must and that can add up if you are on a budget.  

I thought it was recommended to use at least 91 octane in the 2.7 turbos, using 87 will affect mpg's and engine wear and tear long term.

Posted
18 minutes ago, Chris Barber said:

I thought it was recommended to use at least 91 octane in the 2.7 turbos, using 87 will affect mpg's and engine wear and tear long term.

 

 

87 is all that's needed.  GM engineered and tuned it for 87.  

Posted
20 minutes ago, Chris Barber said:

I thought it was recommended to use at least 91 octane in the 2.7 turbos, using 87 will affect mpg's and engine wear and tear long term.

 

Nope. This is from the 2024 manual, but same Turbomax engine.

Screenshot 2023-12-06 at 9.14.29 AM.png

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

    342,902
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    whenindoubtuseahammer
    Newest Member
    whenindoubtuseahammer
    Joined
  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 267 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • are there any codes? with lots of rust, perhaps disconnect/clean both sides of the connection/examine cable ends (the wires) for corrosion going into the sheath & replace if necessary/reconnect ALL the power AND ground cables between the battery, engine, frame, cab, fuse box and starter charm.li (website) has a no-start diagnostic procedure you can work through to get it working.
    • Its no wonder you've gravitated to the oil types and brands you have in later years after trying certain brands and one being a specialty oil or at least very hard to come by up here and the other would have been a commonly found oil of the era and the vastly different outcomes as a result to using the vehicles in question the same distance for an OCI . It shows what marketing hype can do without actually having the product to back up the claims and that is no different now with the insane claims that are written on the side of a bottle of oil from some of the off the shelf oils.    What has surprised me and I was already finding this out before I bought my truck with the GDI engine, that this newer fancy technology that seemingly would suggest better fuel economy/emissions with this high pressure spray of fuel is not in reality kind at all to the engine or at least the oils life. Yet they insist on claiming long OCI with this technology just like they did with the port or similar type fuel injection systems when in reality its a step back in oil life to have a GDI system.    I think the mistake your making Grumpy is that your not sending your samples to Blackstone and getting the feel good glowing report that you can run it another 1000 or more miles and then send another sample where they say run it yet another 1000 miles and on and on it goes until your sending in something that looks a lot like road tar and then they may suggest you change your oil within the next 1000 miles 😆
    • I am guessing that engines of that design back then had a better ability to be abused and survive longer than a new design engine with the long timing chain and the overhead cams and phasers etc. But I would never guess that an engine could go that far and not fail spectacularly or at least die a slow death. 
    • In the 80's 90's I'd run Honda's 7,500 miles between changes using Red Line HP 5W20 and do it for hundreds of thousands of miles with issues. Back in the day it was an SAE 20 with the HTHS of a SAE 30 and SN add load. It was also very polar. Oxidation VOA was over 120. Besides those motors were SPFI and lean burn tech. I could have likely run it longer but never did.    We had a Toyota bought new I ran on Pennzoil's latest and greatest synthetic of the day with "Penthane". A made up word for a very low dose of PAO. Tried 7,500 mile OCI's in that Group III/VI chemistry and the rings tapped out at 90K. Rocker box wasn't as bad as the one Punch put up but it wasn't good either. Also a SPFI motor.    I'm around 3,750 across the board on these GDI monsters and the oil it tapped out by then usually on TBN/TAN crossover and color. Red Line HP Euro.    The AMSOIL SS brochures tell you to follow the OEM values for the service class but that it can be run up to 25K if monitored. I can't imagine what motor could go that distance and not tap out. I've never owned one.    Yes, I know. Lot's of people do. I'm just not going to be one of them. 
    • I knew a guy in the early 80's that bought a new Monte Carlo and ran it a 100,000 miles without ever changing the filter or the oil. Just kept adding. It looked like that inside.     
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...