whisperide wrote: I've done a custom camshaft and a custom tune to match,......I'm happy with my cammed 6.0, I'd do it the same all over again.
Care to elaborate? That sounds like some interesting mods you have there.
KJ
Call Comp Cams and ask for the 3708 lobe for the intakes, and the 3712 lobe for the exhausts, on a 114-degree lobe separation angle, ground 4 degrees advanced. Combine with the GM 12499224 springs. This helps as low as 1600 RPM, and the HP peak is at 5600. What's not to love?
I'm not happy with the guy who did my tune, though the results drive well 99% of the time.
'06 GMC C2500HD RCLB gasser 4.10:1, 4L80E, custom camshaft
'84 Trans Am 6.2 diesel, 700R-4, custom Class-3 receiver
'69 F350 dually. GM 6.2 diesel, turbo, 700R-4, NP208 all pending.
I have noticed that new GM 1500s are now not available in anything bigger the 4.8L.
Huh? The 5.3L is the volume engine and the 6.2L is also available. Do you mean only the 4.8L comes with 3.73 axle? Well, the 5.3L comes with 3.08 or 3.42 and the 6.2L is 3.42 or 3.73 and a 6-spd vs. the 4.8L/4-spd. I'll take the 5.3L/6-spd/308 over any 4.8L 4-spd combo.
Anyway, I have a 2011 Suburban 2500 with 6.0L/6-spd/3.73. I have towed my TT less than 40 miles so far, but it has been great. My travel weight is only 6500-7000 pounds, but would be comfortable up to 10k pounds if the receiver could be upgraded on the SUV. The pickup receiver is better. Except for fuel economy, the 6.0L/4.10 would make any owner happy under 12k pounds, TT or 5er.
Here in Canada the 2012 Silverado 1500 is now 4.8L, except for the LTZ finish that is a 5.3L.
So the LS and LT versions with a 5.3L are gone.
Maybe GM is trying to push there 2500 to the 'trailering fraternity'?
Chevrolet Silverado 1500 LTZ 2007 (new shape)
4x4 Crew Cab VORTEC MAX (L76) 6.0L V8 4L70E 4.10 axle
factory NHT Max Trailering Package.
2010 Coachmen Freedom Express 280 RLS
"...a Waldorf Salad?, sorry we are fresh out of Waldorfs!".......BASIL FAWLTY.
I have noticed that new GM 1500s are now not available in anything bigger the 4.8L.
Huh? The 5.3L is the volume engine and the 6.2L is also available. Do you mean only the 4.8L comes with 3.73 axle? Well, the 5.3L comes with 3.08 or 3.42 and the 6.2L is 3.42 or 3.73 and a 6-spd vs. the 4.8L/4-spd. I'll take the 5.3L/6-spd/308 over any 4.8L 4-spd combo.
Anyway, I have a 2011 Suburban 2500 with 6.0L/6-spd/3.73. I have towed my TT less than 40 miles so far, but it has been great. My travel weight is only 6500-7000 pounds, but would be comfortable up to 10k pounds if the receiver could be upgraded on the SUV. The pickup receiver is better. Except for fuel economy, the 6.0L/4.10 would make any owner happy under 12k pounds, TT or 5er.
Here in Canada the 2012 Silverado 1500 is now 4.8L, except for the LTZ finish that is a 5.3L.
So the LS and LT versions with a 5.3L are gone.
Maybe GM is trying to push there 2500 to the 'trailering fraternity'?
If you're wanting a 4.8L 1500 to tow, then a 4.56:1 gear would do very well with the 4L60E, and you should still average more MPG than mine. I'd still do at least a cam swap ( different specs ) if not a ( cammed ) 5.3L swap, and it would be a very fun machine with a cammed 5.3 and 4.56 gears, but probably overkill.
Getting the big engine hurts MPG all the time, but doesn't help performance more than 20% of the time. Deep gears help performance while only hurting MPG when cruising empty at high speeds. The cam helps performance without hurting MPG.
This thing I have tows better than the final, 290-HP version of the 454, though those had much more torque below 3000 RPM. But I'm getting at least 50% more MPG than that did, too.
Small engines with cams and gears are the trend in cars, and if done right, can be great in work trucks like mine.
The 4.8L is great for guys building turbo cars, but it wasn't bad in the last U-haul pickup I rented. That was a Chevy C1500 RCLB, I needed it while mine was getting the cam. It moved away from a red light just as well as my stock 6.0 did before the cam, partly because the 4L60E has a better first gear than my stupid 4L80E.
Call Comp Cams and ask for the 3708 lobe for the intakes, and the 3712 lobe for the exhausts, on a 114-degree lobe separation angle, ground 4 degrees advanced. Combine with the GM 12499224 springs. This helps as low as 1600 RPM, and the HP peak is at 5600. What's not to love?
I'm not happy with the guy who did my tune, though the results drive well 99% of the time.
So this effectively lowers the RPM where torque and HP curves start to hit? Hmm, that would eliminate a lot of the revving. I've found my truck really wakes up when the tach is in the 3500 - 4500 RPM range.
So this effectively lowers the RPM where torque and HP curves start to hit? Hmm, that would eliminate a lot of the revving. I've found my truck really wakes up when the tach is in the 3500 - 4500 RPM range.
KJ
This cam is resulting in more torque than the stock cam, from 1600 on up. But the shape of the torque curve is still dictated by the intake manifold. This manifold is tuned for best TQ around 4500, and best HP around 5500, but the stock cam is so lame that GM can advertise peak TQ at 4000.
The stock 6.0 works best from 3500-5000, mine works best from 3000-5500.
It's only thirsty when you make use of it. The cam & tune did nothing to my MPG when not towing way over capacity. I don't put my right foot down just to embarras Mustangs. I only did that once, right after the cam & tune.
2006 GMC Sierra 2500HD, 6.0 w/4:10 Long wheel base. Pull a 34' Sunnybrook Brookside with the golf cart in the bed of the truck. Has plenty of power, but as stated before, stops at gas stations more than i would like to. Getting 10-12 hwy and 7-8 pulling.
Offline
