Notices
GMT 900 Trucks General Discussion 2007 - 2013 Trucks | General Discussion

New trucks are out

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 06-01-2013, 06:00 PM
  #1  
10 Second Truck Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (13)
 
RS/SS 4.8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: San Antonio Tx
Posts: 1,258
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default New trucks are out

Was picking up the 2014 Imapla my dad bought and saw the new trucks sitting in the lot. They just took em in yesterday and I think they look good. I didnt get any pics but whos gonna go buy one and be our guinea pig.
Old 06-01-2013, 06:31 PM
  #2  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
 
62nalide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Dallas TX
Posts: 1,953
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Yeah seen 2 at the dealer also they looked bad ***. I want me a rcsb 4x4 this winter lol
Old 06-01-2013, 08:00 PM
  #3  
On The Tree
 
silverado6.2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

After seeing the performance of the 5.3, i'm out. It'll take some mods to make it as quick as the 13 stock
Old 06-01-2013, 10:00 PM
  #4  
Staging Lane
 
2K Silvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by silverado6.2
After seeing the performance of the 5.3, i'm out. It'll take some mods to make it as quick as the 13 stock

What exactly do you mean? It is lighter and it has more power and torque. Something up with the suspension?

"Optional 5.3-liter V-8 rated 355 hp at 5,600 rpm, 383 lbs.-ft. at 5,600 rpm (380 hp, 416 lbs.-ft. on E85). "
Old 06-01-2013, 10:07 PM
  #5  
On The Tree
 
silverado6.2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 2K Silvy
What exactly do you mean? It is lighter and it has more power and torque. Something up with the suspension?

"Optional 5.3-liter V-8 rated 355 hp at 5,600 rpm, 383 lbs.-ft. at 5,600 rpm (380 hp, 416 lbs.-ft. on E85). "
Watch the review here....trucks a turd! http://www.gm-trucks.com/forums/topi...do-0-60-video/

Last edited by silverado6.2; 06-01-2013 at 10:37 PM.
Old 06-01-2013, 10:09 PM
  #6  
On The Tree
 
silverado6.2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

8.78 seconds to 60. I'm guessing the hp is not in a good rpm range.
I'm just comparing their results to my truck. Bone stock 13 k1500 ecsb. 6.2 with 3.73's 403 hp and 417 lb-ft and mine will go 0-60 in 6.10 seconds with a best of 6.09, worst 6.35. Maybe the truck has 3.08 gears?

Last edited by silverado6.2; 06-01-2013 at 10:23 PM.
Old 06-01-2013, 10:42 PM
  #7  
Staging Lane
 
2K Silvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by silverado6.2
8.78 seconds to 60. I'm guessing the hp is not in a good rpm range.
I'm just comparing their results to my truck. Bone stock 13 k1500 ecsb. 6.2 with 3.73's 403 hp and 417 lb-ft and mine will go 0-60 in 6.10 seconds with a best of 6.09, worst 6.35. Maybe the truck has 3.08 gears?

I think the main problem is you are comparing the 5.3 to your 6.2, them are very different beasts. Also he had traction control on, why not put it in 4wd and go.


The engine in itself is a great design. I can't wait to see someone spool it with e85. Direct injection is something that has been needed for a while.
Old 06-01-2013, 10:49 PM
  #8  
On The Tree
 
silverado6.2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 2K Silvy
I think the main problem is you are comparing the 5.3 to your 6.2, them are very different beasts. Also he had traction control on, why not put it in 4wd and go.


The engine in itself is a great design. I can't wait to see someone spool it with e85. Direct injection is something that has been needed for a while.
I was comparing it to my 6.2 because the hp/tq aren't that far off. not enough to justify near 3 seconds. Like I said, maybe it's geared different, maybe a different driver or stretch of road would produce different numbers.
Old 06-01-2013, 10:53 PM
  #9  
Staging Lane
 
2K Silvy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Northern Michigan
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by silverado6.2
I was comparing it to my 6.2 because the hp/tq aren't that far off. not enough to justify near 3 seconds. Like I said, maybe it's geared different, maybe a different driver or stretch of road would produce different numbers.
Guess we will need to wait and see. He never did said anything about gearing. If the TCS is anything like what I have seen on other makes/models applying the brakes to keep the tires from spinning won't do any good.

I just got to wonder if he had it in 2WD with TCS on. 4WD would yield much better launches especially with the low end torque that thing has now.
Old 06-01-2013, 10:58 PM
  #10  
On The Tree
 
silverado6.2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 2K Silvy
Guess we will need to wait and see. He never did said anything about gearing. If the TCS is anything like what I have seen on other makes/models applying the brakes to keep the tires from spinning won't do any good.

I just got to wonder if he had it in 2WD with TCS on. 4WD would yield much better launches especially with the low end torque that thing has now.
I hope his run was just a dud. I never tried a 0-60 run with mine in 2wd but i'd guess it would add considerable time with tcs.


Quick Reply: New trucks are out



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:28 AM.