Jump to content

Most Reliable GM Truck Engine

GN2018
 Share

Recommended Posts

customboss Senior Enthusiast

customboss

Posted
Posted

304 BIG BLOCK GM V6 was most dependable GM engine. When GMC stopped making their own truck engines and switched to Chevy we started the slide to mediocrity. 

  • Like 1
Atlas Senior Enthusiast

Atlas

Posted
Posted

Is the rate of failure on the 4.3 V6 trucks with AFM about the same as the 5.3?

 

Pre-2013, the 4.3 was ancient, but very simple and reliable.

  • Like 1
newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Atlas said:

Is the rate of failure on the 4.3 V6 trucks with AFM about the same as the 5.3?

 

Pre-2013, the 4.3 was ancient, but very simple and reliable.

 

 

The LV3 Gen 5 4.3 Ecotec3 seem to hold up rather well.  They still can have lifter failure though.  They do run 5w30 where the 5.3 and 6.2 run 0w20, so "perhaps" there's a factor there but no guarantees.  

 

The LV1 4.3 in the Express/Savana do not have AFM.  

  • Like 2
  • 1 month later...
Snow White Enthusiast

Snow White

Posted
Posted (edited)

if it has no computer, no abs, a manual transmission, and no emissions it'll cost you 1/2 of a new truck but is still 40K... and is probably in very good shape.  the safety is far less.... thats the down side.  K20 is the way if you ask me.  rebuilt 454 is great.  ideally you have holley efi on it and you'll never buy another if it doesn't rust out.

 

square body forever.

Edited by Snow White
jumbo-slaw Enthusiast

jumbo-slaw

Posted
Posted
On 3/3/2026 at 6:47 PM, Snow White said:

if it has no computer, no abs, a manual transmission, and no emissions it'll cost you 1/2 of a new truck but is still 40K... and is probably in very good shape.  the safety is far less.... thats the down side.  K20 is the way if you ask me.  rebuilt 454 is great.  ideally you have holley efi on it and you'll never buy another if it doesn't rust out.

 

square body forever.

 

uh huh, until its stolen and you have to walk.  That's the problem with the 01-06.5 trucks, get one in good shape and it'll be stolen. Highly desirable and not by just us.

 

 

OP, if you want reliable you're going to have to pay for it and keep up on maintenance. 

PunchT37 Enthusiast

PunchT37

Posted
Posted
On 1/27/2026 at 10:39 AM, newdude said:

 

 

The LV3 Gen 5 4.3 Ecotec3 seem to hold up rather well.  They still can have lifter failure though.  They do run 5w30 where the 5.3 and 6.2 run 0w20, so "perhaps" there's a factor there but no guarantees.  

 

The LV1 4.3 in the Express/Savana do not have AFM.  

One wonders why the oil spec change? Could it be the added balance shaft?

Snow White Enthusiast

Snow White

Posted
Posted
On 3/5/2026 at 11:46 AM, jumbo-slaw said:

 

uh huh, until its stolen and you have to walk.  That's the problem with the 01-06.5 trucks, get one in good shape and it'll be stolen. Highly desirable and not by just us.

 

 

OP, if you want reliable you're going to have to pay for it and keep up on maintenance. 

not that hard to prevent, kill switch on the positive battery cable, no dumb thief is going to be smart enough to look for a kill switch and just hide the switch in the frame rail.

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
On 3/13/2026 at 3:02 PM, jumbo-slaw said:

 

 

That is data I collected on my personal truck showing how both water temperature and base oil types affected bulk oil temperatures. I did a similar study changing viscosity later. For the study in question all three oils were 5W30. I'm currently doing a study using different weights v wear metals. A guy can learn a bunch no one will tell you if you are willing to PAY  and put in the time. You also learn there is allot of lies told by marketing and OEM's and swallowed whole by Social Media drones. 

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
On 1/18/2026 at 8:03 PM, GN2018 said:

I’m looking for a truck/suv for my daughter. She tows a small trailer so I would prefer a towing package however, my biggest concern is what engine to get. My fear is her getting an engine with fuel management and the engine blows up on her.  Is there any engines that are fairly described as bulletproof?  I’m not sure what years or engines to look for as I begin my search.   Any help would be appreciated. 

 

I don't know how big a trailer she pulls but if it is small and my main concern was longevity I'd put my money on the original IRON 4.3 V6. 85-86 LB1 carbureted or 93-95 LB4 with throttle body injection in a CK. Darn near unkillable if maintained. Dad's had two go over 500K and remain oil tight and oil stingy. He replaced a few water pumps and a front cover seal on the first one. 

BIGDOGx Senior Enthusiast

BIGDOGx

Posted
Posted
On 3/5/2026 at 11:46 AM, jumbo-slaw said:

 

uh huh, until its stolen and you have to walk.  That's the problem with the 01-06.5 trucks, get one in good shape and it'll be stolen. Highly desirable and not by just us.

 

 

OP, if you want reliable you're going to have to pay for it and keep up on maintenance. 

01-06.5 are desirable?? I don't get that because they were not the prettiest truck and if you think these newer gen v-8's are noise lol, you had like a 80% chance you would get a motor that suffered from piston slap. I had a coworker who bought a brand new 2001 and literally a year and a half later you could here that thing start from a 1/4 mile away the piston slap was so bad. Right now the only gmt-800's i see on the road are beat up pretty bad, just by age and weather conditions.

KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted

The 01-06s GM trucks are my favorite. I had several new and used. I would put programmers on them, true duals and cold air intakes on each one. Run them up and down pipelines, drive hundreds of miles daily. I have an 02 Avalanche currently my grandson now drives. I always have an eye out for one. My brother in law is passing 275K on his 06 Tahoe. Did they have problems? Probably. Did I have any,? No. There’s still plenty around me. 

BIGDOGx Senior Enthusiast

BIGDOGx

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, KARNUT said:

The 01-06s GM trucks are my favorite. I had several new and used. I would put programmers on them, true duals and cold air intakes on each one. Run them up and down pipelines, drive hundreds of miles daily. I have an 02 Avalanche currently my grandson now drives. I always have an eye out for one. My brother in law is passing 275K on his 06 Tahoe. Did they have problems? Probably. Did I have any,? No. There’s still plenty around me. 

Got to love that Texas weather, i live in Massachusetts and they all literally leave pieces on the roads when they hit a bump they are all so rusted out most times.🤣

 

I still don't understand the "they are on the top of list for car thieves" though. I mean there really are no factors imo that make them a valued item for car thieves unless i'm missing something.

KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, BIGDOGx said:

Got to love that Texas weather, i live in Massachusetts and they all literally leave pieces on the roads when they hit a bump they are all so rusted out most times.🤣

 

I still don't understand the "they are on the top of list for car thieves" though. I mean there really are no factors imo that make them a valued item for car thieves unless i'm missing something.

I agree. They are pretty basic. Easy to modify and drive great with little intrusion. 

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

    • AidenVorpagel
      cam upgrade in CA

      By AidenVorpagel · Posted

      hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • B14Sierra
      Noise after AFM delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Did you figure it out?
    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • Atlas
      Wow I'm in a pickle. (Broke down truck) and a story.

      By Atlas · Posted

      So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...