What brand(s) of truck(s) do you drive?? >> EVERYBODY VOTE!<<

[Bigredmariner]

I't more than my 305 so it's still good in my book

Yeah, too bad GM always seems to lag behind in the power department. If GM is so serious about cutting costs, though, I really think the 4.8 should be ditched and just leave the 5.3. They get pretty much identical mileage and the 5.3 makes more power and torque, so the 4.8 really has no point. The 4.3 could use a good updating or replacement, as well. I'd hate to see a V6 with such great torque abandoned, though. That's something most ALL truck engines seem to lack these days in comparison to their horsepower amounts.

Oh?

GM 6.2l = 403 hp
Dodge 5.7l = 380 hp
Toyota 5.7l = 381 hp
Ford 5.4l = 310hp

Yeah, GM does seem to be lacking in the power department.

Truth in advertising.

 

[K1500 Cheyenne]

I't more than my 305 so it's still good in my book

Yeah, too bad GM always seems to lag behind in the power department. If GM is so serious about cutting costs, though, I really think the 4.8 should be ditched and just leave the 5.3. They get pretty much identical mileage and the 5.3 makes more power and torque, so the 4.8 really has no point. The 4.3 could use a good updating or replacement, as well. I'd hate to see a V6 with such great torque abandoned, though. That's something most ALL truck engines seem to lack these days in comparison to their horsepower amounts.

Oh?

GM 6.2l = 403 hp, 417 lb.-ft
Dodge 5.7l = 380 hp, 407 lb.-ft
Toyota 5.7l = 381 hp, 401 lb.-ft
Ford 5.4l = 310hp, 365 lb.-ft

Yeah, GM does seem to be lacking in the power department.

Well, obviously not the top of the line 6.2, which is beast, but the others could use some work.

Compare the 4.8 (295hp, 305lb-ft) to Dodge's 4.7 (310hp, 329lb-ft), Toyota's upcoming 4.6 (310hp, 327lb-ft), and Ford 3V 4.6 (292hp, 320lb-ft). It's overall the most lacking of those despite its size. There's the Ford 2V 4.6 (248hp, 294lb-ft), which compared to the others in the class REALLY sucks, but I think they intend it to be a V6 replacement. Should've kept the V6 and ditched that 2V, but that's Ford's problem; GM's supposed to be the standard for trucks.

The 5.3's (315hp, 338lb-ft) only real competition would be Ford's 5.4 (310hp, 365lb-ft; 320hp and 390lb-ft on E85), which has quite a bit more torque. However, back to what I was saying, I think the 5.3 should fill in the 4.8's position since the mileage is so similar (which is superior to most all other truck V8s), and it has power and torque on or above the level of the other V8s in the 4-liter range.

Back to the V6s, Ford no longer has one, and Dodge's is a joke (210hp, 235lb-ft). That really just leaves Toyota's 4.0 (236hp, 266lb-ft; 239hp, 278lb-ft with premium). That's quite an advantage over the 4.3 (195hp, 260lb-ft). This is the only engine that's REALLY out of date, which has had roughly the same power and torque (at least in its top of the line forms; it actually had 200hp from 1992-1994 and 1999-2002) since 1992. We're getting near two decades here without a serious update. Maybe it's at its limit (as much as I'd hate to hear), but we could use a new V6 most of all. A new V6 based on the Camaro's LLT would be SWEET! Just modify it for truck use with some more torque, and it'd be killer!

 

[DV2000NJ]

Well, obviously not the top of the line 6.2, which is beast, but the others could use some work.

Compare the 4.8 (295hp, 305lb-ft) to Dodge's 4.7 (310hp, 329lb-ft), Toyota's upcoming 4.6 (310hp, 327lb-ft), and Ford 3V 4.6 (292hp, 320lb-ft). It's overall the most lacking of those despite its size. There's the Ford 2V 4.6 (248hp, 294lb-ft), which compared to the others in the class REALLY sucks, but I think they intend it to be a V6 replacement. Should've kept the V6 and ditched that 2V, but that's Ford's problem; GM's supposed to be the standard for trucks.

The 5.3's (315hp, 338lb-ft) only real competition would be Ford's 5.4 (310hp, 365lb-ft; 320hp and 390lb-ft on E85), which has quite a bit more torque. However, back to what I was saying, I think the 5.3 should fill in the 4.8's position since the mileage is so similar (which is superior to most all other truck V8s), and it has power and torque on or above the level of the other V8s in the 4-liter range.

You do realize, that you are comparing GM's THIRD V8 to all of those manufacturer's SECOND V8s, right?

And comparing the 5.4 to the 5.3 doesn't make much sense, since the 5.3 is GM's second tier V8, while the 5.4 is Ford's most powerful offering.

The GM motors might not be putting out the most horsepower per liter, but your original statement about GM lagging in the power department is just false. The 6.2 is the most powerful engine available in a half-ton, and the 5.3 is the most powerful engine offered as a "second" V8 (and both, despite their larger size, are very competitive efficiency wise, as well).

 

[Bigredmariner]

Well, obviously not the top of the line 6.2, which is beast, but the others could use some work.

Compare the 4.8 (295hp, 305lb-ft) to Dodge's 4.7 (310hp, 329lb-ft), Toyota's upcoming 4.6 (310hp, 327lb-ft), and Ford 3V 4.6 (292hp, 320lb-ft). It's overall the most lacking of those despite its size. There's the Ford 2V 4.6 (248hp, 294lb-ft), which compared to the others in the class REALLY sucks, but I think they intend it to be a V6 replacement. Should've kept the V6 and ditched that 2V, but that's Ford's problem; GM's supposed to be the standard for trucks.

The 5.3's (315hp, 338lb-ft) only real competition would be Ford's 5.4 (310hp, 365lb-ft; 320hp and 390lb-ft on E85), which has quite a bit more torque. However, back to what I was saying, I think the 5.3 should fill in the 4.8's position since the mileage is so similar (which is superior to most all other truck V8s), and it has power and torque on or above the level of the other V8s in the 4-liter range.

You do realize, that you are comparing GM's THIRD V8 to all of those manufacturer's SECOND V8s, right?

And comparing the 5.4 to the 5.3 doesn't make much sense, since the 5.3 is GM's second tier V8, while the 5.4 is Ford's most powerful offering.

The GM motors might not be putting out the most horsepower per liter, but your original statement about GM lagging in the power department is just false. The 6.2 is the most powerful engine available in a half-ton, and the 5.3 is the most powerful engine offered as a "second" V8 (and both, despite their larger size, are very competitive efficiency wise, as well).

Dan the stat man.

 

[Vmax2007]

Well, obviously not the top of the line 6.2, which is beast, but the others could use some work.

Compare the 4.8 (295hp, 305lb-ft) to Dodge's 4.7 (310hp, 329lb-ft), Toyota's upcoming 4.6 (310hp, 327lb-ft), and Ford 3V 4.6 (292hp, 320lb-ft). It's overall the most lacking of those despite its size. There's the Ford 2V 4.6 (248hp, 294lb-ft), which compared to the others in the class REALLY sucks, but I think they intend it to be a V6 replacement. Should've kept the V6 and ditched that 2V, but that's Ford's problem; GM's supposed to be the standard for trucks.

The 5.3's (315hp, 338lb-ft) only real competition would be Ford's 5.4 (310hp, 365lb-ft; 320hp and 390lb-ft on E85), which has quite a bit more torque. However, back to what I was saying, I think the 5.3 should fill in the 4.8's position since the mileage is so similar (which is superior to most all other truck V8s), and it has power and torque on or above the level of the other V8s in the 4-liter range.

You do realize, that you are comparing GM's THIRD V8 to all of those manufacturer's SECOND V8s, right?

And comparing the 5.4 to the 5.3 doesn't make much sense, since the 5.3 is GM's second tier V8, while the 5.4 is Ford's most powerful offering.

The GM motors might not be putting out the most horsepower per liter, but your original statement about GM lagging in the power department is just false. The 6.2 is the most powerful engine available in a half-ton, and the 5.3 is the most powerful engine offered as a "second" V8 (and both, despite their larger size, are very competitive efficiency wise, as well).

True, but in 1/2 ton reg cabs, GM is lagging.

 

[K1500 Cheyenne]

Well, obviously not the top of the line 6.2, which is beast, but the others could use some work.

Compare the 4.8 (295hp, 305lb-ft) to Dodge's 4.7 (310hp, 329lb-ft), Toyota's upcoming 4.6 (310hp, 327lb-ft), and Ford 3V 4.6 (292hp, 320lb-ft). It's overall the most lacking of those despite its size. There's the Ford 2V 4.6 (248hp, 294lb-ft), which compared to the others in the class REALLY sucks, but I think they intend it to be a V6 replacement. Should've kept the V6 and ditched that 2V, but that's Ford's problem; GM's supposed to be the standard for trucks.

The 5.3's (315hp, 338lb-ft) only real competition would be Ford's 5.4 (310hp, 365lb-ft; 320hp and 390lb-ft on E85), which has quite a bit more torque. However, back to what I was saying, I think the 5.3 should fill in the 4.8's position since the mileage is so similar (which is superior to most all other truck V8s), and it has power and torque on or above the level of the other V8s in the 4-liter range.

You do realize, that you are comparing GM's THIRD V8 to all of those manufacturer's SECOND V8s, right?

And comparing the 5.4 to the 5.3 doesn't make much sense, since the 5.3 is GM's second tier V8, while the 5.4 is Ford's most powerful offering.

The GM motors might not be putting out the most horsepower per liter, but your original statement about GM lagging in the power department is just false. The 6.2 is the most powerful engine available in a half-ton, and the 5.3 is the most powerful engine offered as a "second" V8 (and both, despite their larger size, are very competitive efficiency wise, as well).

GM's third tier V8 would be the 6.0 (or now the 6.2); the 5.3 is second tier, and I'm only comparing it to Ford's 5.4. The 4.8 is the first tier V8, as are the other three 4-liter range V8s I was comparing it to (save for Ford's 3V 4.6, which is arguably first tier since the 2V is the V6 replacement). It's really just the torque that's lackluster with the 4.8.

As far as size goes, I think they should be more comparable unless GM pulled down the 5.3 as the 4.8 replacement (which would REALLY make sense; that's my original arguement, BTW). I realize Ford is pulling as much power as they can get out of their 5.4 so it can compete with the larger V8s, but GM should be able to get similar torque out of the 5.3. Even if we were comparing it to Ford's true second tier, the 3V 4.6, it'd stll be up against the "HEMI" 5.7 and Toyota's 5.7 (and maybe the Titan's 5.6, wherever it fits in), as well. Definitely not the most powerful second tier V8, but it shouldn't be compared as such (hence why comparing in tiers doesn't make as much sense to me).

Even if the 5.3 was out of the picture, the 4.8 and DEFINITELY the 4.3 are lagging compared to competitors. Then again, it may be a sacrifice for better mileage, which GM dominates.

True, but in 1/2 ton reg cabs, GM is lagging.

Amen! Those Tundra and Ram guys are over there laughing at us with their 5.7 RCSBs when we could have complete beast RCSBs with more power and torque and less weight! In many aspects GM's conservativeness is great (We're the only ones with decent interiors!), but when it comes to making performance trucks (at least in RCSB form), it sucks! And to think, we've got LS-based V8s on our hands; why can't they be used?!?

 

[Zembonez]

As entertaining as this is... it's not going to convince anybody of anything. It's a classic Ford VS Chevy type of argument.

Let's move on.

 

[PenguinLTZ]

I like pie

 

[K1500 Cheyenne]

As entertaining as this is... it's not going to convince anybody of anything. It's a classic Ford VS Chevy type of argument.

Let's move on.

Except that GM wins no matter what, it's just a matter of engine!

 

[dietz4ibanez]

Hey guys lets move on!