Notices
GMT K2xx Trucks General Discussion 2014+ Trucks | General Discussion

Tuning

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-07-2014, 09:22 AM
  #11  
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
stone150's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Well that is kinda what I thought. The 6.2 I drove, wasn't too bad, but I drove a 5.3L and it felt like I had to push the accelerator 1/4 of the way before the engine would go. When you drive the cars, it is not like this at all, but I've driven a SRX, Equinox, and an 09 silverado that had this drive by wire sluggishness. I don't see the point of it.
Old 03-07-2014, 10:05 AM
  #12  
TECH Fanatic
 
NKPPhil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,074
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by stone150
it felt like I had to push the accelerator 1/4 of the way before the engine would go.
Well who ever pushes it less than that? Just sayin' ....
Old 03-07-2014, 10:29 AM
  #13  
Staging Lane
 
racerkvn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: North Alabama
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I'll be honest, the first two days after I took delivery of my 14 CC 6.2 High Country I was somewhat disappointed in how it felt compared to my 13 CC 6.2. I did drive it VERY easy grammaw style the first two days though. On the third day I had enough and let it eat, drove more aggresive and I tell ya what, there is no doubt it's got more *** than my 13 as measured very accurately by my butt dyno. In my opinion, it "feels" underpowered because it's so much more quiet inside the truck and there is no exhaust note compared to the previous models. I do miss the sound of my previous truck, it sounded mean, which made me feel mean! This new DI 6.2... makes me feel sorry for the unsuspecting truck in the other lane that doesn't know it's packing 460 ft lbs of *** raping torque under the alum hood.

With that being said, after driving mine for two weeks now, I don't notice anything about it that "feels" underpowered or sluggish. I guess I got used to it. I can't wait to tune it!
Old 03-07-2014, 11:06 AM
  #14  
Staging Lane
iTrader: (1)
 
Smitty2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

I went from a 2000 5.3 to an '09 5.3 6l80 and am now back in an '02 5.3. The tuning did help a bit with the responsiveness of the throttle body opening while moving in one gear and going from no throttle to some. But it still wasn't as responsive as a stock dbc vehicle.

Now while cruising and mashing the gas hard enough to the point that the tranny had to downshift, or rolling up to a stop sign in second gear and making a quick stop only to hit the gas right after, the responsiveness was terrible. I attribute this to how intertwined the tcm's are in to the ecm now and how much more electronically controlled the 6l80 is than the 4l's. In the situations I just described, the tb would close for a period of time while the tranny would find the right gear and then the tb would flick wide open.

I think with tuning, the tb can be adjusted to respond quite quickly, however there is always a delay as it reacts secondary to these newer transmissions.

I think no matter what there is a compromise in the overall responsiveness department when switching to these newer trucks as well as their bloatedness. I just comes down how much you really care about these things because there is no denying how much more luxurious and comfortable the newer trucks are.
Hope that helps.
Old 03-07-2014, 01:17 PM
  #15  
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
stone150's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I drove a 14' SS right after the truck and din't have any of the hesitation issues. I'm sure GM dials in the slow response, but I can't figure out why. It isn't on my Wife's ATS, the vette, but every truck/SUV I have driven has it and I am surprised people don't complain. I guess it is just getting used to it. But after a week of driving my friend's 09, I was happy to have my 01 back.

racerkvn - I'm sure allot has to do with noise and ride, my old truck was much more "raw" than the new ones. But it is like my wife's 07 mustang GT, I had a blast driving that car, it didn't ride great, but the road feel made it seem like you were going fast and having a blast.

I'm looking to get a car for DD use, and I want somethng fun, I'd like a V, but I've driven them and they are so refined, that in some ways they aren't as fun as that old mustang. I think that is why I liked the 14' ss, had a big motor, made a good nose, and had a fairly stiff ride (not harsh).
Old 03-07-2014, 02:31 PM
  #16  
Staging Lane
iTrader: (1)
 
Smitty2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

That's interesting that you say the truck is so much worse than gm's other vehicles. I'm assuming the camaro and vette were autos. Yea it's like I said the responsiveness isn't as simple as just how quick the tb can react to your right foot moving. It's something about the connection between the ecm and tcm that creates a delay before the tb is even given a signal to react.

And I'm right there with you on the "raw" feeling. With the newer trucks having stabilitrak, tc, dbw, and extra weight, it creates a disconnect and they're just slow reacting in every way. That's why I bought my '02. Simple, cheaper, and MUCH more enjoyable to drive in stop and go situations. When I put my foot down, I want the power right NOW. Not most of the time, not some of the time, but every time.

Again, I think it comes down to making a compromise. For whatever reason, only a portion of the reaction time can be reduced via tuning, so a newer truck will never feel as direct and linear as the earlier trucks. So it comes down to how badly you want a newer, cleaner, more comfortable truck. RIP dbc.
Old 03-07-2014, 03:22 PM
  #17  
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
stone150's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Yeah the cars I drove have been a mix of automatics and manuals. But I can see where the automatic would have the greater lag.

I don't really want a new truck at all, I want my old truck (as it was), I have found a few nice NBS trucks, but I'm sure they would just get stolen also. If I had a larger garage, i would get another NBS in a heartbeat.
Old 03-07-2014, 03:52 PM
  #18  
Staging Lane
iTrader: (1)
 
Smitty2000's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

I'm really sorry to hear that it was stolen. Your's was one of my favorite 99-02 nbs' on this site. I really hope it turns up and in tact.
Old 03-07-2014, 04:23 PM
  #19  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (36)
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: somewhere in TX
Posts: 4,929
Likes: 0
Received 21 Likes on 18 Posts
Default

The cars are more performance oriented and so are the drivers who usually drive them. It is my guess the trucks are tuned differently to allow people like my wife and grandparents and workers IE the masses drive them to reduce complaints of touchy throttle and squalling tires on take off. Laugh as you may I have seen these exact complaints first hand.

There are very few out there like us that ever notice the doggy throttle and **** poor outta the hole performance. Even more in the minority are those of us who understand what the computer is doing while it's happening that even further aggarvates those of us in the know.
Old 03-07-2014, 10:56 PM
  #20  
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
 
stone150's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Smitty2000
I'm really sorry to hear that it was stolen. Your's was one of my favorite 99-02 nbs' on this site. I really hope it turns up and in tact.
Thanks, I appreciate it, one thing I found out through this whole deal is allot more people liked it than I ever knew.


Quick Reply: Tuning



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:36 AM.