+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: 4.8 to 6.2

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,581
    Quote Originally Posted by RedHeartbeat View Post
    Newer technology is there for a reason. GM didn't spend millions in engineering to build an inferior engine. Just because you don't think its better doesn't mean it isn't. You're comparing 10 year old technology that everyone and their brother has been working to make better vs. an engine thats only been available for two years. I'll bet in 8 years you'll be singing a different tune.
    not everything GM has put money into has been successful. the heads just dont have good velocity for the size of runners. that isnt new technology thats just basic theory
    2002 Lightning - GT headed 5.5Litre w/ Twin 7665s
    2002 Silverado - 427Lsx w/ Twin gt4202s
    2010 Silverado crewcab Z71 - 5.3litre w/ procharger
    2000 Wrangler - 5.3litre with some stance
    2014 Xsport- 3.5 Eco boost
    412 Motorsports

    it ain't that I'm too big to listen to the rumors, It's just that I'm too damn big to pay attention to 'em..That's the difference

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,031
    someone needs to update the LSX CONVERSION TITLE and add 6.2 lol

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    12,078
    Quote Originally Posted by MidnightRider View Post
    stay with the 4 speed auto heard to many horror stories about that 6 speed auto
    There were only scant troubles with the 6L trans in a longitudinal configuration right at the onset of the early 07 GMT900. This trans is a monster and is NOT failure prone. The trouble is it is not directly swapable into a half ton that came with the old school 4L as the wiring is completely different, the TCM is internal, and the PCM's are not interchangeable.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    11,038
    Doing an ls3 would be a lot easier and swap over with little issues.

    Just do an LT1 swap.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    12,078
    Quote Originally Posted by farmtruc View Post
    Just do an LT1 swap.

    I hate you.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    12,078
    BTW he'd be better off with the orginal LT-1 carbureted swap with solid lifters than an LT1.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    8,031
    lt1 lol speaking of lt1's my buddy with a 94z keeps asking me if you can tune it haha,,ive already told him like 10 times no

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    11,038
    Quote Originally Posted by STUNNA View Post
    lt1 lol speaking of lt1's my buddy with a 94z keeps asking me if you can tune it haha,,ive already told him like 10 times no
    lol, sure can't, i had the tuning stuff at one time, but someone stole it lol, lent it to a magazine editor and he still hasn't returned it, been like 4 years hahah.
    not that i like tuning those anyway.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    12,078
    Bet I can guess who then since I've been reading 4 year old magazines with NP references....

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Birmingham, AL
    Posts
    3,626
    saw this and thought it might interest you.... FS: Various L92 Components, 6L80E - PerformanceTrucks.net Forums
    01 Silverado

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts