Engine Opinions

[Dcraw]

Any opinions pro or con on 6.2 engine vs. the 5.3 in Yukons?

 

[swathdiver]

6.2 is the way to go! 5.3 is more efficient in town, the 6.2 is better towing, putting a smile on your face and out on the highway.

 

[Marky Dissod]

Anything a 5.3L can do, a 6.2L can do better.
With the correct axle gear(s) & tires, so long as you're willing to pay for 91 octane, you won't lose much if any miles per gallon, and you'll gain quite a few smiles per gallon.

 

[Joseph Garcia]

If the cost of gas is not an issue for you, get the 6.2. It is truly a fun motor. If you don't get enjoyment out of driving (in other words, if you just use the truck to get from point A to point B), then the 5.3 would probably be fine for you.

 

[WalleyeMikeIII]

Honestly, if you are doing any towing/hauling, I'd get the 6.2; I actually think the fuel economy towing is better w/ the 6.2 than the 5.3 (assuming you are north of towing 3500lbs).
Its a much better driving experience w/ the 6.2. And, I even think Highway the MPG's may be equivalent or even better w/ the 6.2 than the 5.3 in similar conditions...esp on interstate at say 70MPH+.

I don't think the 5.3 at 355 HP is a bad choice...but the torque in the 6.2 and the additional HP is awesome. The down side is running premium...which is a true cost delta.

Don't sleep on the 3.0 Duramax either...that is turning out to be a fine powertrain...

Suggest driving all 3 of them...even if it is in a Pickup...then judge for yourself.

You will spend more in Fuel in the 6.2, due to the upcharge in premium fuel.

 

[Geotrash]

Any opinions pro or con on 6.2 engine vs. the 5.3 in Yukons?

I loved my first 6.2 so much, I bought another one. This, after owning a Suburban with the 5.3. I don't mind paying the price of premium fuel, so for me it's worth it. Best towing rigs I've ever owned. The 6.2 turns the truck into a beast!

 

[R32driver]

We had a 5.3 in our '11 suburban and now have one in our '21 yukon and both have been more than adequate. Don't really tow with them, although I have towed quite a few cars on a flatbed trailer and they both did fine, but mostly bought pretty much just as people haulers. The biggest difference between them I think is the 10 speed transmission on the new one makes for a much better driving experience.

 

[tdebacker]

I have the 5.3L V8 in my '17 Suburban and I wish I had the 6.2L. I've heard the highway/towing MPG between the two is negligent.

My 5.3L pulled my ~7000 pound trailer ('82 K10 on a 20' flatbed) just fine, but it didn't have as much pulling power up a hill as I'd have liked.

Maybe it needs a tune up (~91k) but I wish I had more power.

 

[ZKWBQD]

Any opinions pro or con on 6.2 engine vs. the 5.3 in Yukons?

Go with gasoline, not diesel.

 

[Zoomer]

Any opinions pro or con on 6.2 engine vs. the 5.3 in Yukons?

I’ve had both. 6.2 is a lot more fun, especially after adding a Borla exhaust. My 2004 5.3 is rock solid engine, but poor MPG with a 4 speed transmission. I don’t drive much and don’t mind paying for 93 octane now. 6.2 maybe the last V8 we’re able to buy, go big and go loud.

 

[Marky Dissod]

Anything a 5.3L can do, a 6.2L can do better.
With the correct axle gear(s) & tires, so long as you're willing to pay for 91 octane, you won't lose much if any miles per gallon -
and you'll gain quite a few smiles per gallon.

I'll try not to quote myself too often; sorry - but I said it pretty well.

Think about it:
Only hypermilers would prefer a 5.3L, UNTIL they need to do 'trucky stuff'.
The rest of each and every one of us would be better served by a 6.0L or 6.2L, if only because a 6.0L or 6.2L would nearly always be more relaxed than a 5.3L that'd be trying harder in every possible case.

 

[R32driver]

I'll try not to quote myself too often; sorry - but I said it pretty well.

Think about it:
Only hypermilers would prefer a 5.3L, UNTIL they need to do 'trucky stuff'.
The rest of each and every one of us would be better served by a 6.0L or 6.2L, if only because a 6.0L or 6.2L would nearly always be more relaxed than a 5.3L that'd be trying harder in every possible case.

I don't feel that's the case at all. I don't hypermile or even give a shit about fuel mileage but I do know my 6.0 silverado stops at that gas station about twice as often as the 5.3 yukon and doesn't feel like it has that much more power to give. If you give it the beans in the 5.3 it shoots to life. The 6.0 tows well but so does the 5.3 both of them in trailer mode while towing a loaded car trailer. Only difference is the silverado tows like a rough truck and the yukon tows like a plush yukon. Everyone has their own preference but to say everyone is better served by the bigger motor just isn't true. I've never once in ten years of driving a 5.3 wished it had the bigger motor.

 

[Doubeleive]

depends on how much you like to drive
if you like to drive get the 6.2
if are one of those people that gets on the highway at 35mph and could care less if the semi coming doing 70 rips you to bits & pieces then by all means get a 5.3 and get the hell out of the way of the rest of us.

 

[R32driver]

depends on how much you like to drive
if you like to drive get the 6.2
if are one of those people that gets on the highway at 35mph and could care less if the semi coming doing 70 rips you to bits & pieces then by all means get a 5.3 and get the hell out of the way of the rest of us.

That's the thing though if you actually push down on the throttle pedal in the 5.3 they do get up and go pretty good. It's not the slouch y'all make it out to be. Sure it doesn't rip like a 6.2 but it's not a total dog

 

[Marky Dissod]

I do know my 6.0L silverado stops at that gas station about twice as often as the 5.3 yukon and doesn't feel like it has that much more power to give.

The 6.0L ...

6.0L, as in LQ4?
Yes, an OE Gen3 (or Gen4) 5.3L makes nearly as much power and torque as an LQ4 in its OE configuration.
If some tend to settle for OE configurations, some of those might prefer a Gen3 or Gen4 5.3L over an LQ4, sure.

Especially since the LQ4 and the 5.3Litres don't all share the same axle gearing, which muddles the comparison.

Gear the LQ4 vs a 5.3L similarly, then test both under similar constraints.
The fuel economy penalty diminishes considerably.

Speaking of not settling for the OE configuration:
A TUNED Gen3 LQ4 or LQ9 is capable of Lean Cruise ... moreso than a TUNED 5.3L, which would further diminish the 6.0L's fuel economy penalty.

You'd appreciate that 6.0L a lot more than you think you would, with a proper tune.
Admittedly, the same goes for the 5.3L

 

[Doubeleive]

That's the thing though if you actually push down on the throttle pedal in the 5.3 they do get up and go pretty good. It's not the slouch y'all make it out to be. Sure it doesn't rip like a 6.2 but it's not a total dog

it's not a total dog no, but it's mostly the behavior of the person behind the wheel this goes for even a little 4 banger
if there is no desire to get at least some "performance" out of the vehicle then may as well settle for whatever is "good enough"
if you want to gauge the difference go test drive both because there is a difference and it is noticeable.
that's the bottom line, if you have no desire to get any kind of extra power out of the vehicle then just don't bother even asking the question.
1. will it go 0-60 faster: yes by a hair
2. will it have a smidge more towing power: yes it will
3. will it get less gas mileage: yes a smidge 1-3mpg less (even if driven easily)
3. seat of the pants difference: yes
4. does it require any extra maintenance or parts costing more than a 5.3: no, not in general a new engine block or intake replacement may cost extra, otherwise any "extra" cost is completely negligble.
the caveat's? well gm tends to package more bells & whistles with the 6.2 generally, driving the initial purchase price up by an avewrage of $10,000 and unless you are looking at used vehicles there is little to nothing you can do about it.

 

[Marky Dissod]

1. will it go 0-60 faster: yes by a hair
2. will it have a smidge more towing power: yes it will
3. will it get less gas mileage: yes a smidge 1-3MpG less (even if driven easily)
4. seat of the pants difference: yes
5. does it require any extra maintenance or parts costing more than a 5.3: no, not in general a new engine block or intake replacement may cost extra, otherwise any "extra" cost is completely negligible.

the caveat's? well gm tends to package more bells & whistles with the 6.2 generally, driving the initial purchase price up by an average of $10,000 and unless you are looking at used vehicles there is little to nothing you can do about it.

1. Any 6.0L would be more than a hair quicker, but for GM trying to minimize its inherent CAFE MpG penalty with weaker gearing.
2. Any 6.0L has more than a smidge useful towing strength / power, some of which is sacrificed by gearing to minimize its inherent CAFE MpG penalty when not towing / hauling.
3. Yes, any 6.0L will cost a few MpG. Careful selection of axle gearing would either improve metro / urban MpG at the cost of highway MpG, or vice versa. (Did GM ever allow customers to do this?)
4. If the 5.3L had 4.10 and the 6.0L had 3.42, the 6.0L would still have superior seat of the pants response ... unless GM also hampered the 6.0L's shift tables to try to improve the 6.0L's MpG.
5. Don't see how any 6.0L would cost more to maintain, though it would cost a bit more to operate, and definitely more to repair.

If only GM had been so kind as to allow 6.0L V8s with barebones options kits, and buyer's choice of gearing.

 

[Doubeleive]

1. Any 6.0L would be more than a hair quicker, but for GM trying to minimize its inherent CAFE MpG penalty with weaker gearing.
2. Any 6.0L has more than a smidge useful towing strength / power, some of which is sacrificed by gearing to minimize its inherent CAFE MpG penalty when not towing / hauling.
3. Yes, any 6.0L will cost a few MpG. Careful selection of axle gearing would either improve metro / urban MpG at the cost of highway MpG, or vice versa. (Did GM ever allow customers to do this?)
4. If the 5.3L had 4.10 and the 6.0L had 3.42, the 6.0L would still have superior seat of the pants response ... unless GM also hampered the 6.0L's shift tables to try to improve the 6.0L's MpG.
5. Don't see how any 6.0L would cost more to maintain, though it would cost a bit more to operate, and definitely more to repair.

If only GM had been so kind as to allow 6.0L V8s with barebones options kits, and buyer's choice of gearing.

repair to an engine be it 4.8, 5.3, 6.0, 6.2 should not be inherently any more than another aside from the "block" or "intake" other internal parts, heads etc should not be off the scale different cost wise. based on standard performance engine & parts.
when you start shopping performance parts there are all kind of differences in price
labor cost is the same no matter what engine.
a shop doesn't go oh ya were going to charge you $150 an hour to work on this 4.8 but $250 an hour to work on the 6.2

 

[Marky Dissod]

a shop doesn't go
oh ya we're going to charge you $150 an hour to work on this 4.8L, but $250 an hour to work on the 6.2L

I should hope labor rates don't discriminate against engine size.
Parts specific to 6.0L or 6.2L engines, however; I'd be surprised if GM didn't try to take advantage and charge more.

 

[Doubeleive]

I should hope labor rates don't discriminate against engine size.
Parts specific to 6.0L or 6.2L engines, however; I'd be surprised if GM didn't try to take advantage and charge more.

of course they charge more that's why they make a "design change" on purpose, that way they can charge more for the new part, they are the only source for the part. After it has been around a bit then the copycats come along and the remanufactures.