The Amazing 5.3 L83 V8

[scottie350]

Anyway I'm getting worked up needlessly, so I do apologize.

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[SlavO]

5.3 ftw and waste cash on higher octane gas

[SlavO]

I just didn't get why u posted a picture of your cluster with mpg on it. Considering the topic of conversation.

 

There's plenty, search around, I found several threads containing it all last night alone

 

I just have no idea wtf u are getting at with any of ur pics. The mpg bit was a joke on my part. As we were talking about the effects of 87 octane on these engine and u post ur gauge cluster and ur truck on a jack...I just don't know what ur getting at

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

On a jack? My truck has never been on a Jack

[scottie350]

5.3 ftw and waste cash on higher octane gas

*sigh* sometimes there just is no hope

 

Guess I may as well go put 87 octane in my built engine for the car running at 12:1 CR

 

BAH **** ignition and detonation mechanics...may not run right, but I'll save a couple bucks a tank

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

On a jack? My truck has never been on a Jack

Baha at closer inspection...it's a leaf blower :-p

Literally laughing right now

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[4x4LJB]

Sooooo....I'm the guy who started this mess.

 

What I get from all this is that upon registering vibration due to knock the engine instantly retards ignition, but takes it's time (over @200 miles of driving) before it starts advancing it again.

 

The next logical question, given these events, is: How much more lead and total advance will it allow if we run higher than recommended octane? Enough to produce MORE HP and Torque than stock? If running 89 will trigger more advance over time, will 93 trigger even more of it?

 

Thanks.

[scottie350]

Sooooo....I'm the guy who started this mess.

 

What I get from all this is that upon registering vibration due to knock the engine instantly retards ignition, but takes it's time (over @200 miles of driving) before it starts advancing it again.

 

The next logical question, given these events, is: How much more lead and total advance will it allow if we run higher than recommended octane? Enough to produce MORE HP and Torque than stock? If running 89 will trigger more advance over time, will 93 trigger even more of it?

 

Thanks.

Well versus running 87, logically speaking, you SHOULD see higher power numbers from a better quality fuel given that these trucks are being found to run like shit

 

( given knock, timing retard ect, advancing the timing more on the same shitty fuel would only increase knock,I don't see the ecu ending up just advancing the timing again on its own, as it retards to try and protect itself)

 

I've seen this when I had a shitty tuner tune my Mazda, went over the data logs and each adjustment file they sent and you could see them advancing timing and the amount of knock constantly increaseing, and too much knock from pre detonation can cause pitting in pistons, further screwing up your firing, causing more knock, causing more damage ect ect, the reason this happened, I assumed what they were doing was fixing stock fuel maps on regular fuel and then after that was all done, bump it up to premium fuels and repeat, and they didn't say otherwise, so I was running 87 octane, they were "tuning" for 91 ( I say it like that as a good tuner tunes to knock, not to what fuel is being used, you don't just keep advancing timing to try and get rid of knock ect). I ended up getting pitted pistons ect, which lead me to rebuild the engine and go the route I have with it.

 

Anyways, you can see the similarity in the scenario. Between my experience and what these trucks are doing.

 

 

So yes logically with better fuel, the timing readvancing due to less knock being present, you should in fact get better power , and a smoother running engine.just out of the fueling

 

As for confirmation and for how much, I contacted Jennabear to ask what they may have found in this regard, but so far no answer back

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[Imcrazy]

I ran a whole tank of 89 and got probably 2-3 mpg more than 87, the motor runs smoother etc. For .20 per gallon more I don't give a crap about .20 a gallon if it makes the truck run better plus gets me more mpg to offset the cost.

[scottie350]

Yup that sounds right.

NORMALLY when a vehicle is properly tuned from factory for say 87 octane, you wouldn't see any difference running a high octane, nothing real noticeable anyway as its tuned to run on 87 and it'll adjust itself.

 

In the case with these trucks it can be noticed that they are not tuned properly, 11:1 shouldn't run 87 octane, my guess is these are either tuned for 89-91 or they just tuned them for a shitty running 87 octane vehicle.

 

I'm home from work in a couple weeks so I intend to hook up my obd 2 scanner and run some real tests, have about 3

/4 tank 87 to burn off so I'll try and log it all, Then I'll fill up with 91 and relog everything and see what I get

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[HondaHawkGT]

I wouldn't say that GM's tune is shitty so much as I would argue that regular 87 octane is shitty fuel. It incredibly inconsistent, even among brands that sell "Top Tier" fuel. GM's method of using knock sensors to optimize engine performance is pretty much the standard approach today. The Hemi 5.7 requires 89 and Ford recommends premium for the EB when being driven aggressively or towing.

[scottie350]

Most vehicles use knock sensors these days, like I said above, most tuners tune to knock, for example , speaking to a race companu about their tuning, they tune their cars to "zero" knock. This is essentially putting you at your ultimate fuel map table if this is achieved.

The fact that these trucks run 11:1 CR they just shouldn't be ran with 87 octane, it's a shitty fuel as you said to begin with, it just is not high enough octane to smoothly run that sort of CR properly

 

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[scottie350]

And their tune ( at least how they setup the TCM is complete shit lol)

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[HondaHawkGT]

The TCM tune is 100% garbage lol

[scottie350]

The TCM tune is 100% garbage lol

*sigh* the inner struggle and debate of void an 8 year extended warranty and "do I plan to KEEP the truck for 8 years?" "wonder the chances of a hard engine failure in the year or 2 that I do keep my truck" but be less than happy with how it feels to drive

 

Or to say **** it, have it tuned, enjoy the shit out of it, trade it in 2 years for a new model hope nothing goes wrong in those 2 years lol.

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[HondaHawkGT]

I held out for a year and a half haha. I figured at 15k miles, if it hasn't blown up by that point I'm probably safe enough to tune it. The engine tune is decent but the TCM tune makes it a whole new truck. My gas pedal is responsive and my 5.3 actually feels nice & torquey.

[scottie350]

Ya I'm only at 4800 KM after almost 7 months haha ( I work out if province for 3 weeks a month) and I have a project zoom zoom I tend to drive when I'm home unless I need the truck.

 

This summer will put the miles on it when I'm home, camping and hiking season ect ( I live in BC Canada so)

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

I've been saying the same " after x kms I should be good" but Ya I don't put a lot on it so it may take awhile lol

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk