svtlightning02

well the gto is a automatic so theres no driver error you stab the gas on 3rd horn and go. you seen the videos he couldnt pull me past 100mph

actually there is a vid of it trapping 108mph. My buddy ran his 1/4 bone stock and trapped 95 in a 4x4

truck has 3.73 gears with 33x12.5x18 open country Mt's. In town 14.5 mpg and on highway running 65mph with cruise on 18.2. With stock tires running 65 with cruise on 22.3

You drive one and you cant tell its a V6. Programmer to programmer the eco will walk the 6.2. My buddy ran a 6.2 z71 mods cai,long tubes, exhaust,custom tune and a 75 shot truck ran a 9.11 to a ecoboost with just a livernoise programmer ran 9.13. both on stock tires and both 4door

sure you could spend $3-4k to out run a truck with a programmer. hell stock for stock the 6.2 chevy has twice the cubic inch

silverado6.2

Well, ya found a sick 6.2. Stock they can run 9.5's. 9 flat usually just involves bolt ons and a tune with a 75 shot putting it easily in the 8's. Not exactly twice the cubic inches and with the turbo the e-boost is prob moving as much air as the 6.2. I can spend 3k on a turbo and be at the msrp of an e-boost as well. At the end of the day, the 6.2 turbo to turbo and dollar for dollar will make more power than the v6 and live longer doing it.

1slow01Z71

iTrader: (36)

And he could get a 2000 rcbs with a junkyard 6.0/turbo and walk your 6.2 for half the cost. Theres no denying that the ecoboost with just a tune is a beast. Low 13s in a crew cab 4wd truck with just a tune is ridiculous no matter the brand. The NA 6.2 will also be much more sensitive to DA, so on a hot summer day the ecoboost will walk he 6.2 even harder, then if you add in elevation... You cant replace boost stock for stock.

silverado6.2

I'm not arguing a v6 or 8 boosted should beat a n/a v8...that's common sense. I was just replying to his comment that I needed to spend 3k to go turbo and in reality I could spend 6k on mine and be at the msrp of a stock e-boost. I was going to buy a ford but didn't like the sound of a 6. I'm well aware I could buy a 13 year old truck and turbo it and be faster...been there, done that. Yes, the e-boost is fast, and it should be, but at the end of the day it's just a tiny engine with limits well below an LS. Stock v/s stock the 6.2 nht truck wins. Throw a turbo on the 6.2....end of story. When someone turns a 9 second time 1/4 mile with an e-boost I will retract all statements other than they sound like poo.

garner

Wait since when is an ecoboost $3k more than a silverado/Sierra 6.2?

silverado6.2

When I got my 6.2, it was less than ford would sell the e-boost for. actually about 5k difference

svtlightning02

my 2012 FX4 4door ecoboost sticker price was $42k and some change. i bought mine used and saved about $9k with taxes. sticker was in glove box. no doubt turbo 6.2 vs ecoboost the 6.2 would win thats a no brainer. stock 4x4 ecoboost run 9.4s and same nite guy intsalled a livernoise programer and cai on stock tires ran 8.76. just wait chevy and dodge will be soon to follow with a ecoboost version

silverado6.2

X2. Gotta love competition. If it weren't for the big 3 trying to post the big number we wouldn't have trucks as quick as they are now.

05GMC4.8

Shoot, GM already has a twin turbo V6 in a sedan, rated at 410hp/369tq. i bet it wont be too long before GM gets on this bandwagon in the trucks and offers a "tweaked" truck version of this engine

mikesanto70

It was only 50 hp shy of the LS2 6,0 , that was still a stout mill