Hard to believe but its only off a few mph from the stock tires

you can its called a DPF delete. Brands like Spartan do it. They start around a grand to do. Did one on buddies truck. You take the DPF off put a straight pipe and reprogram the computer to basically block it from running regen.

You get more MPG and blow black smoke. Problem is most people including my buddy once you do it you start having problems.

I have a 2008 F-250 with the 6.4 diesel. At 50k miles I did a full DPF delete along with deleting the egr coolers. I did a Spartan setup. I now have 142k on the truck & have yet to have one single issue with this setup. I run the +210hp tune when towing & the +275 tune for daily driving.
I get about 17hwy & 10 towing 10,500lbs. I have 37's & a 4" lift.

http://media.chevrolet.com/media/us/...silverado.html

Thought I would share this as it seems Chevy has kind of stepped up to the plate the 5.3 is now comparible to the EB. Its obvious that chevy was out to match ford as their numbers are not any better than the EB but at least they are now in the same ball park and not 5 years behind anymore. One major difference is your still not going to get all the torque at 2500rpm like the eco and the eco still has 40 more torque.

But still shows the capability out there and what can be done with lighter trucks. And another option for the Ford haters.

Its looking good for sure. Max torque at 4100 its going to be spinning and it wont hold high gear in the hills like the EB will.
There is about a 75 Ft/Lb gap at freeway speed in top gear.

Interesting its April and no 6.2 info I can find yet.

Can you get a 34 gallon tanks on these trucks?

UD

dont know. the 6.2 is coming out. But Im assuming MPG will not be great. This thing will not tow close to the EB, bu a big step up for the silverado, compared to that pile they have running the roads now.

I think the mileage will be pretty good for what it is. Im guessing around 18-19 with the lower axle ratios (that I wouldn't buy)

So they will claim the full size "mileage king" using a 3:15 shortbed peg leg 4x2 model.

The 3.1 litre V4 mode should keep it humming at 65-70 fairly cheaply and be able to hold top gear on modest hills unloaded. In this regard its got less discplacement to feed than an EB, but it still has V8 friction.

Still even with VVT chevies single cam setup cannot vary the intak e and exhaust valves independently of one another like the EB can, it can really only advance or retard the whole thing concurrently as I can see it. If I have this wrong help me out.

It will have higher HP and higher TQ number and a higher tow rating than the EB

The 5.3 is somehow rated higher(11500) with lower HP and TQ already- a questionable rating.

But the question to me is- forget about the ratings.

Will it be a better tow vehicle?

The number one thing I'll look at is how much torque is on tap at freeway speed in top gear usually 65-70 at around 1900-2K.

I highly doubt it will have 400 ft pounds at 2K like the ecoboost does.

I want to see chevy do well as it only benefits us consumers and despite losing a ton of money on GM stock - I still have a sweet spot for them.

Interesting how they are talking about "proven" when the engine is basically new. It would seem to me the "proven" claim is falderal at this stage.

The EB is more proven than the new 5.3 or 6.2

Anxiously awaiting real data.

Uncle Dave

with the dod(displacement on demand) or whatever they are calling it now. On two cars that had it once you get past about 60mph it very rarely went into 4cyl mode. I know a lot people gripe about it, I didnt see it as a problem, but just didnt see the usefullness in either. All I know is my last 07 chevy truck with the 5.3 got 14mpg regardless, truck was unmodded, dont know what the problem was with it.

I too wonder if less performance numbers how you claim a higher tow rating, I know frame, tranny and all come into play here.

That I also find funny is they are trying to deflect heat from what I have seen that the 5.3 is the same engine just revamped, which GM says is a totally different engine. But in the same breath talk about proven , doesnt really make sense.

I too am a chevy guy, dad worked there, and his dad worked there. I just got to the point with spending 40 plus K, that I was going to buy the best vehicle between the big three. And chevy has by far not had the best truck for a while now. Even now I think they put themselves back in contention, but are not really a clear front runner on anything.

There are few things that help the GM trucks, the first is the truck is lighter. So for GVWR more of it goes to trailer than truck. Also, the torque curve is very flat on these engines, not EB flat but very flat for a NA motor (check out the Ford 5.0/6.2 curves in comparison). Likewise in real world hiway usage you are in 4 cyl mode, same as is tested by epa at 55-60 mph. With EB as you go faster you are more in the boost, which I would imagine is why the fuel economy at real highway speed is not too commensurate with the EPA rating (which Fuelly.com seems to support w/ real values). Last, this is not an upgraded engine, so it will cost less than the EB which is an upgrade over the 5.0. As this should get better mileage, cost less, and be plenty powerful I don't see too much drawback.

If you really want to tow heavy the 6.2 will more than get it done, question is what will the fuel economy be, and how will it compare under load to the EB where it really sucks gas? As UD had pointed out, as a 3.1 L 4 cyl it could do all right w/ light load at a minimum.

In the end Ford has more power in the EB over the 5.3, just like the 6.7 makes more peak power than the 6.6, but in every single comparison the D Max is the better truck, particularly the powertrain.

The DoD was pretty lightly used in the GMT900, these new engines will use it much more. I get 13+ w/ a 6 in lift and 33 in mud tires, how hard were you driving to get 14 haha?

For proven, I'd say the basic OHV SBC configuration has been around forever, and is more proven than a twin turbo v6 for sure. The individual tech added though not as much.

If you look at the new CTS 3.6 TT, GM has a motor that would put EB in it's place easily if a turbo V6 was the better truck solution.......it's not being put in the truck.