Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-24-2013, 07:27 AM   #31
Mod free 5er
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Concord, NC
Posts: 24,215
Enough about the stinking D's, this is a gasser thread.
__________________

__________________
OldCoot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2013, 07:35 AM   #32
Camper Less Camping
 
Cajun Po-Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NW
Posts: 3,642
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super 8 View Post
That's good news...I've always complained about the 6.0 being undersized for the GM pickup truck line, glad to hear the new 6.2 is going to offer some brute in the 1/2 ton truck line
I do miss the 1/2 ton's ride when unloaded...this new engine tech would get back in a GM 1500 for a DD!
__________________

__________________
2013 Sabre 32RCTS-6 (sold)
Family of 4 whose always on the GEAUX!
Cajun Po-Boy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2013, 08:57 AM   #33
Wanna Be Camper
 
SaskCampers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan
Posts: 2,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by ttrost65 View Post
Did I hear right in the new advertisement, that the new 6.2 gets as good if not better fuel mileage than the eco-boost Ford? I've owned both Chevys and Fords, and have had good luck with both, but that new 1500 has got to take the cake!
Nope you heard wrong The 5.3 supposedly is better not the 6.2. Probably need a fuel tanker in tow with the 6.2.

A 5.3L EcoTec3 V-8 is standard for the 2014 Sierra Denali. It produces 355 horsepower and offers better EPA-estimated fuel economy (23 mpg highway on 2WD models) than any V-8 or turbocharged V-6 pickup on the market.
__________________

John & Deb
2011 F250 Lariat FX4 Crew Cab 6.2
2011 Flagstaff V-Lite 30WRLS
Days Camped 2016: 3 2017: 0
SaskCampers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2013, 10:17 AM   #34
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Long Island N.Y.
Posts: 419
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragin Cajun View Post
If your Tundra rips w/ the toy hauler...then my diesel must be equivalent to the space shuttle towing my 12K 5'ver....sorry but there is a BIG difference, as Old Coot stated we're all having fun either way! ,)
Agreed, wether you like or need a diesel twice the torque at half the rpm is hard to argue with. Head up into elevation and the difference is even more pronounced. Just fact
__________________
2013 Wildcat 323QB
08 Silverado Crew Cab 2500HD Duramax-Allison
Twin Honda 2000 campsite friendly generators
Nights camped in 2014 = 19
(2013 = 36)
(2012 = 42)
JFM-jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2013, 11:19 AM   #35
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 77
I test drove the 6.2 gm before buying the ecoboost. I chose Ford for reasons other than the engine. The 6.2 was by far the most fuel efficient and all the people I know with them say the same. Better than the eco and better than my 5.3. It is a nice engine. The 6.0 is the pig on fuel. I have never heard anyone towing with the 6.2, but it seems to be a beast.
p.s the eco pulls awesome also.
__________________
saskrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2013, 11:19 AM   #36
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Long Island N.Y.
Posts: 419
BTW Dodge is stepping up the gasser game in 2014 as well 6.4 litre Hemi is standard .
__________________
2013 Wildcat 323QB
08 Silverado Crew Cab 2500HD Duramax-Allison
Twin Honda 2000 campsite friendly generators
Nights camped in 2014 = 19
(2013 = 36)
(2012 = 42)
JFM-jr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2013, 12:53 PM   #37
Wanna Be Camper
 
SaskCampers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan
Posts: 2,370
Quote:
Originally Posted by JFM-jr View Post
BTW Dodge is stepping up the gasser game in 2014 as well 6.4 litre Hemi is standard .
Actually it is an option over the std 5.7 Hemi.

The Ram truck brand will introduce what it says will be the largest displacement V-8 engine in the heavy-duty truck segment in its 2014 Ram 2500 HD. The new pickup, which has a starting MSRP of $30,695, including destination charge, can be equipped with an optional all-new, 6.4-liter Hemi V-8 that offers more power and torque than the current Ram 5.7-liter Hemi engine and adds $1,495 to the sticker price.
__________________

John & Deb
2011 F250 Lariat FX4 Crew Cab 6.2
2011 Flagstaff V-Lite 30WRLS
Days Camped 2016: 3 2017: 0
SaskCampers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2013, 08:08 AM   #38
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 119
Quote:
Originally Posted by JFM-jr View Post
Peak numbers dont tell the whole story its where it occurs. Ill take 385ft lbs at 3600rpms all day over 400 ft lbs at 4400 as an example.
Here is a map of the Ford engines with the silver GM 5.3 grafted in, which is Not bad- 355 hp/383 ft lbs/ 23 mpg hwy
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	ford_zpsaa19ea86-1_zpsae4c918b.jpg
Views:	93
Size:	29.4 KB
ID:	36156  
__________________
Super 8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2013, 10:15 AM   #39
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 77
these graphs are good info. They were a big part of my decisionin in chosing the eco. It doesn't necessarily have the biggest numbers, but I wanted the power at low revs for pulling. And I have to say it does that. I towed my trailer with a combined truck and trailer of around 15000 lbs last week. I set the cruise at 100 km, 5th gear which was 2100 rpm and it just kept right on going without any downshifts. My 97 5.4 struggled to get 80-90 km last time I went there.
To the original question though, the GM 6.2 has an almost identical torque curve to the ford 6.2, so I think you will tow your trailer with no probs. You may need a few more revs though in the tough spots. If you have a six speed auto, you might need 4th gear, which I'm guessing might take you close to 2800-3000rpm. Still not an issue I don't think.
__________________

__________________
saskrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



» Virginia Campgrounds

Reviews provided by




ForestRiverForums.com is not in any way associated with Forest River, Inc. or its associated RV manufacturing divisions.


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:47 PM.