6.2 vs 5.3 and premium gas

[01 Hoe]

Any body have any regrets getting a 6.2 liter over the 5.3L

and must you use premium gas in it?

im not as concerned with the cost of the gas as is the requirement to use it.

I have an 01 LT with a 5.3. Its tuned for 93 and changed all my shift points with no speed limiter. 4L80E

Any body have any regrets getting a 6.2 liter over the 5.3L

and must you use premium gas in it?

im not as concerned with the cost of the gas as is the requirement to use it.

I have a 01 LT 5.3 tuned for 93. All shift points changed and speed limiter removed. Headers. Magnaflow exhaust. MSD plugs wires and coil packs. I guess im babbling off point. For the price you pay for a 2020 or 2021 you could build a few 2000 to 2003 or 4 models from the LM7. Unless you like the new body style ughjhh. But to eavh their own. The LM7 has so many available parts its easy to make it an LS monster cams lifters valves and such. Then just throw a supercharger on it and your golden.

 

[swathdiver]

I have an 01 LT with a 5.3. Its tuned for 93 and changed all my shift points with no speed limiter. 4L80E

I have a 01 LT 5.3 tuned for 93. All shift points changed and speed limiter removed. Headers. Magnaflow exhaust. MSD plugs wires and coil packs. I guess im babbling off point. For the price you pay for a 2020 or 2021 you could build a few 2000 to 2003 or 4 models from the LM7. Unless you like the new body style ughjhh. But to eavh their own. The LM7 has so many available parts its easy to make it an LS monster cams lifters valves and such. Then just throw a supercharger on it and your golden.

You're right, to each his own. Some folks don't have the time or are not mechanically inclined to be wrenching on an older truck. Many just want to load up the kids and go and not think about that o-ring in their oil pump when they're crossing Death Valley.

 

[Bill 1960]

You're right, to each his own. Some folks don't have the time or are not mechanically inclined to be wrenching on an older truck. Many just want to load up the kids and go and not think about that o-ring in their oil pump when they're crossing Death Valley.

Exactly. I used to tune for max performance, but after a few mechanical close calls far from home I started building for reliability. We travel too much, and a major repair to your only transportation on the far side of the country is different than at home where there’s extra vehicles to drive and no urgency to a repair.

 

[Eusibius2]

Gotta admit, I read almost the entire thread. One question though - if we're all driving full size Chevy's (or GMC), do we really care about gas mileage THAT much? I mean seriously... If I was fuel conscious, I'd buy an electric truck or SUV. Rivian R1S is pretty fun to look at and explore. Not sure I'd own one, but it's a great start to a better environment. And it's not a Tesla.

 

[fr8bil]

I have years of experience with the 6.2 in my 2010 Sierra Denali I've owned for 11 years and six months. Noisy lifters at start-up, never tried 87 in it but a huge diff between 91 and 93 when I can find 93. Replaced OEM cast iron headers with Doug Thorley headers and less restrictive Magnaflow muffler in the first 3 months of ownership. Kind of senseless to do a Cat-Back since the General made the truck with 3 & 1/2 ", mandrel-bent exhaust and that really woke-up the 6.2 and added more low-end torque.

Our Daughter has a 2017 Caddy Escalade ESV that includes the 6.2 with over 88K on it and she surprised me by saying she ALWAYS runs 87 in it. Since she lives over 600 mi. away, I don't ride in it often but after a recent visit when I discovered the long-term 87 use, I started listening for any knocking or pinging and heard none....zero. Not sure what gives there....did the PCM re-calibrate itself over time and retard the timing or did Caddy do such a good job of insulating the firewall that pinging/knocking is unheard in the front seats ?

Recently bought a 2020 Yukon with the 5.3 to deliberately save $$ on the absurd extra-cost of Premium vs. the 6.2 and installed the GM cat-back system made by BORLA in search of fewer downshifts in our hilly terrain. THAT was money well-spent as there was an immediate improvement in power/torque and noticeably less or later downshifting when climbing the same hills....sounds pretty good too !

 

[SSGUNNER]

I have years of experience with the 6.2 in my 2010 Sierra Denali I've owned for 11 years and six months. Noisy lifters at start-up, never tried 87 in it but a huge diff between 91 and 93 when I can find 93. Replaced OEM cast iron headers with Doug Thorley headers and less restrictive Magnaflow muffler in the first 3 months of ownership. Kind of senseless to do a Cat-Back since the General made the truck with 3 & 1/2 ", mandrel-bent exhaust and that really woke-up the 6.2 and added more low-end torque.

Our Daughter has a 2017 Caddy Escalade ESV that includes the 6.2 with over 88K on it and she surprised me by saying she ALWAYS runs 87 in it. Since she lives over 600 mi. away, I don't ride in it often but after a recent visit when I discovered the long-term 87 use, I started listening for any knocking or pinging and heard none....zero. Not sure what gives there....did the PCM re-calibrate itself over time and retard the timing or did Caddy do such a good job of insulating the firewall that pinging/knocking is unheard in the front seats ?

Recently bought a 2020 Yukon with the 5.3 to deliberately save $$ on the absurd extra-cost of Premium vs. the 6.2 and installed the GM cat-back system made by BORLA in search of fewer downshifts in our hilly terrain. THAT was money well-spent as there was an immediate improvement in power/torque and noticeably less or later downshifting when climbing the same hills....sounds pretty good too !

So I did did something similar this weekend and purchased the Borla S Type for my RST and call me crazy but I’ve noticed a slightly better fuel economy since I got it installed on Saturday. Maybe it’s too early to tell and need to drive more but just recent filled up at Costco (91) and getting about 15mpg. I have been testing out the sound of the Borla and maybe a slight better response in throttle. But boy is it loud. Good thing I didn’t get the Atak lol.

 

[fr8bil]

So I did did something similar this weekend and purchased the Borla S Type for my RST and call me crazy but I’ve noticed a slightly better fuel economy since I got it installed on Saturday. Maybe it’s too early to tell and need to drive more but just recent filled up at Costco (91) and getting about 15mpg. I have been testing out the sound of the Borla and maybe a slight better response in throttle. But boy is it loud. Good thing I didn’t get the Atak lol.

Mine is the made-for-GM product by BORLA and the only time I hear it is under acceleration. Definite improvement in power/torque noticed as soon as I left the muffler shop.

 

[Stbentoak]

Gotta admit, I read almost the entire thread. One question though - if we're all driving full size Chevy's (or GMC), do we really care about gas mileage THAT much? I mean seriously... If I was fuel conscious, I'd buy an electric truck or SUV. Rivian R1S is pretty fun to look at and explore. Not sure I'd own one, but it's a great start to a better environment. And it's not a Tesla.

Yes.. Yes we do especially as it equates to RANGE. That's why I wanted a Dmax. I want 600 miles a tank... I want not doing 100.00 premium fill ups once a week or stopping on long vacations for fuel 2x a day.... I really want a 30+ gal tank but that's not going to happen. There is more to it than just gas mileage....

 

[Staggered 02]

The 2015 Escalade with the 6.2 convinced me to the point that it ended up being the very reason that I purchased the High Country. That 6.2 is pretty awesome I must admit. I put headers, CAI, exhaust and tuned it. It's crazy fun to drive. I plan to do the same set up on the High Country as well.

My 02 has a 5.3 that is supercharged. The 2011 has an LSX intake headers, CAI, tune etc. Pretty much all of the rides run on premium.

 

[BG1988]

With the current ways the vehicles are programmed, this is not so. Running 87 in a high compression engine is going to bust pistons and rings eventually. We see it all the time on here.

87 octane is in no way better for a high compression engine than 93, unless you are comparing Direct Injection engines that are made to run on 87. They will see little, if any improvement with 93. In older, more traditional injected and carbureted engines, higher octane always benefits the engine over lower octane. The get better mileage, run smoother, cooler, etc.

100 Octane unleaded