PDA

View Full Version : 6.0 vs. 5.3



Stevo
11-16-2005, 11:14 AM
Looking into gettin a newer truck. Prob 2000-2002. I want ext cab 4x4 short bed. But i can't decide if i want a 2500hd with the 6.0 liter or a half-ton with the 5.3?

Is there a pretty big power difference between the two? I tow some but no a lot usually just quads and snowmobiles. Anyone ever seen a race between the two? And how is the ride?

SierraMan
11-16-2005, 11:29 AM
I have driven my buddies 6.0 in his 1500HD quadsteer and his 2500HD and i used to have a 5.3. I couldnt tell a huge difference the 5.3 is a great engine i loved it.

97Silverado
11-16-2005, 11:31 AM
I have driven both and I choose the 6.0L hands down.

Atomic
11-16-2005, 06:31 PM
The 6.0 is the more powerful engine but you have to consider the 2500hd will be a good bit heavier than the 1500.

02Z
11-16-2005, 06:52 PM
The 6.0 is the more powerful engine but you have to consider the 2500hd will be a good bit heavier than the 1500.

This is exactly right. Also the 6.0 will consistantly get 3 mpg worse than the 5.3 because of the heavier truck. If you really want the 6.0 and don't need the 2500HD chassis I would look for a 1500HD or a 2500LD. Both have the 6.0 and will pull anything up to about 10K.

Personally if you never plan to pull anything over about 6000 lbs. I would opt for the 1500 with the 5.3L. It has plenty of power.

sabbatical
11-16-2005, 06:55 PM
If I had it to do all over again I'd choose the 5.3 in a 1500. If I was going to get a 2500HD, I'd get the 8.1/Allison vs the 6.0.

Pauly
11-16-2005, 10:43 PM
You could also look at getting a 2wd e cab 1500 with the 6.0L. That option is RPO B4V, then you can get the 345 hp 380 lb/ft of torque LQ9 6.0.

That 2500HD frame is about twice the size of the LD 1500 frame, the HD trucks only come withthe LQ4 engine with 300 hp and 360 lb/ft of torque. The extra 5 hp and 25 lb/ft would certainly be soaked up by the less effecient 4l80e trans of the HD, not even taking into account the much extra weight.

OOps I just realized you want a 4x4m in that case get the Vortec max 6.0 LQ9 1500 4wd withthe 4l65e trans. That truck would be MUCH quicker than a 2500 LQ4. You diont have to sacrifice anymore to get the 6.0, get the Vortec max and get the hi-po 6.0LQ9 AND get the lighter weight 1500 4wd truck, you can have your cake and eat it too. You can thank the wide availability of teh 5.7L hemi in the Dodges for the 6.0 in a lot more 1500's this year.
pauly

Nick
11-16-2005, 11:23 PM
You could also look at getting a 2wd e cab 1500 with the 6.0L. That option is RPO B4V, then you can get the 345 hp 380 lb/ft of torque LQ9 6.0.

That 2500HD frame is about twice the size of the LD 1500 frame, the HD trucks only come withthe LQ4 engine with 300 hp and 360 lb/ft of torque. The extra 5 hp and 25 lb/ft would certainly be soaked up by the less effecient 4l80e trans of the HD, not even taking into account the much extra weight.

OOps I just realized you want a 4x4m in that case get the Vortec max 6.0 LQ9 1500 4wd withthe 4l65e trans. That truck would be MUCH quicker than a 2500 LQ4. You diont have to sacrifice anymore to get the 6.0, get the Vortec max and get the hi-po 6.0LQ9 AND get the lighter weight 1500 4wd truck, you can have your cake and eat it too. You can thank the wide availability of teh 5.7L hemi in the Dodges for the 6.0 in a lot more 1500's this year.
pauly







Prob 2000-2002. :read:

89stroker
11-16-2005, 11:50 PM
my dad has a 6.0 in a 2002 2500hd and its a damn good engine. it has entirely too much TM, but i think i'm gonna buy him a custom tune for xmas. i've ridden in plenty of half tons with the 5.3, and they are quicker, but i think its only because they are in a much lighter pickup. if you hooked the same amount of weight behind each truck, the 6.0 would win hands down. way more torque where you need it for towing.

if i was go get a truck i'd definately opt for the larger truck. if i wanted to get something good on gas i wouldn't get a truck in the first place, so you might as well get the bigger, better looking truck, IMO. 16mpg isn't too bad for a truck that size anyway.

Colby 04
11-16-2005, 11:51 PM
I'm no expert, but I doubt there is a fuel economy difference in the 2500HD and the 2500, both with a 6.0. I think the HD just has the heavier diff and O/L springs:dunno:

Jimmy P
11-17-2005, 12:07 AM
id go for the 5.3 half ton just for gas mileage...if you really want more power you can always do bolt ons to the 5.3 and not lose the mileage

02Z
11-17-2005, 08:40 AM
if i was go get a truck i'd definately opt for the larger truck. if i wanted to get something good on gas i wouldn't get a truck in the first place, so you might as well get the bigger, better looking truck, IMO. 16mpg isn't too bad for a truck that size anyway.

Who gets 16 mpg with a 2500HD with the 6.0L?? Everybody I talk to says between 12-14 unloaded.

Stevo
11-17-2005, 09:00 AM
I've read there is a little bit of lag on low-end with the 6.0. So im guessing the 5.3 would be quicker out of the hole? But once u get moving so kick it down at 55-60 which one would pull on the other.

Im not really too concerned on gas mileage, but i don't really pull that much heavy stuff, nothing that my 5.7 couldn't handle with ease. So maybe the 5.3 would be better for me, but i just love how the hds front's are and always have that extra towing if i need it.

Atomic
11-17-2005, 09:44 AM
I believe of 05 or maybe 06 1500s have the HD front end if you want to wait and get that year...if you do you could also get the LQ9 6.0

Bullwinkle
11-17-2005, 10:13 AM
The 1/2 ton will ride better than the 3/4 ton.

The 3/4 ton is too much truck for the towing you do, so the additional cost of the truck itself, and gas mileage would be a waste.

Bullwinkle
11-17-2005, 10:29 AM
The 1/2 ton will ride better than the 3/4 ton.

The 3/4 ton is too much truck for the towing you do, so the additional cost of the truck itself, and gas mileage would be a waste.

As has been said before, the 6.0 makes more hp than the 5.3, but the 6.0 is in a heavier truck. I've never seen the 2 drag race to know which is quicker; but my money would be on the 1/2 ton since i'm guessing that the 1/2 ton has a better power to weight ratio.

89stroker
11-17-2005, 12:40 PM
Who gets 16 mpg with a 2500HD with the 6.0L?? Everybody I talk to says between 12-14 unloaded.


my dad's truck consistantly gets 16 on the highway. around town its like you said, 12-14, but whatever. its a big heavy truck no matter how you look at it and it will never get the milage of the half ton, but why would anyone get a pickup for milage.

89stroker
11-17-2005, 01:03 PM
Who gets 16 mpg with a 2500HD with the 6.0L?? Everybody I talk to says between 12-14 unloaded.


my dad's truck consistantly gets 16 on the highway. around town its like you said, 12-14, but whatever. its a big heavy truck no matter how you look at it and it will never get the milage of the half ton, but why would anyone get a pickup for milage.

97Silverado
11-17-2005, 01:50 PM
Who gets 16 mpg with a 2500HD with the 6.0L?? Everybody I talk to says between 12-14 unloaded.Mine is almost a rock steady 15 MPG even with my heavy foot.

HP409ss
11-17-2005, 02:30 PM
My uncle has a 2001 2500 4x4 with the 6.0 and he gets about 13. Now that is with lumber racks and truck boxes. And I am sure there is always something loaded on it. Its a work truck. The same year in a 1500 short box 5.3 4x4 gets around 17.

44magnum
11-18-2005, 02:25 PM
Looking into gettin a newer truck. Prob 2000-2002. I want ext cab 4x4 short bed. But i can't decide if i want a 2500hd with the 6.0 liter or a half-ton with the 5.3?

Is there a pretty big power difference between the two? I tow some but no a lot usually just quads and snowmobiles. Anyone ever seen a race between the two? And how is the ride?


I owned an '03 Z-71 w/5.3L for about 18 months and now have an '04 2500HD w/6.0L. (We bought a 9500 lb fifth-wheel camper and the Z I had was only rated @ 8800 lbs.) I consistantly got 17.5 out of the 5.3 and occasionally 19 mpg. Part of that is the weight, part less cubes and part 3.73 gears. That motor is great man. Even if you didn't do anything to it, it still has great accelleration.

My 2500HD 4X4 6.0L has 4.10's in the rear-end and is heeeeeaaaaavvy! I did a Westers tune on it and now it's back to being respectable. Without it, I wasn't impressed at all. Not to mention, my mileage went to 15 if I really work at it, 13 if I don't. It too is a great motor but I miss the mileage. But alas, I do like camping! By the way, the only difference in the two trucks was color and what we've already stated. Both were LT's, both were short bed ext cab.

To conclude, if you're not towing very often, get you a 5.3 and trick the motor out bro. You'll be very happy with the 5.3L.