V6 or small V8 engine, 2000 Silverado1500,2WD Reg Cab, SB

2

Comments

  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    Aluminum allows for better heat flow, which means you can use higher temps, which means you get better thermodynamic efficiency, which means:

    YOU get more work out of smaller space!

    thus, smaller engines, more power with better mileage.

    Material engineering has advanced exponentially in the last 4 years.

    i'd buy all aluminum engine in a heart beat and not worry about it.
  • mgdvhmanmgdvhman Member Posts: 4,157
    ....just that Head warpage is a concern for me...

    - Tim
  • mgdvhmanmgdvhman Member Posts: 4,157
    are one of the reasons they can get More power out of these little things
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    the problem used to be they had a very hard time predicting/controlling the expansion of all these different materials together. with the new material advances, they are able to engineer material matrixes to very precise and predictable expansions.

    Nutshell: Warping should never ever be a problem anymore.

    hell, you can run GMs new motors (w/aluminum heads) without water and not damage the engine! what else do you want?
  • RoclesRocles Member Posts: 982
    cdean,

    The 350 was "always heralded as better than the 5.4" ? Huh? The 330 has been out how long? 3-4 years? Where is this tidbit of fact coming from? The 350 is a fine motor but who would want an older engine over the 5.4?? Tim- maybe?
    It may have been more "endearing" to Chevy guys versus the 351 but "heralded" over the 5.4?
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    Yes, when the 5.4 came out in '97, it was well documented by all mag testers and members around here that 5.4 did NOT have the power of the 5.7. Not until the MY2000 power changes, did the 5.4 actually have a wider broader torque curve than the 5.7.

    people keep saying this, but I argue on how 'old' the 350 and 454 are. In '96, the Vortec year, they changed everything. I compared all specs to the '94 350 i owned. Bore and Stroke were different. all bearing types and lubrication methods changed. total induction and injection change. computers controls became exponentially more powerful and complex.

    Accessories aren't same, don't bolt on the same, exhaust different....

    get my point? nothing "old" about the '96-'00 Vortec 350, which I is ACTUALLY 348 cu. inches.

    same goes for 454.
  • RoclesRocles Member Posts: 982
    Then you further prove my point. It took only three years for Ford to tweak their 5.4 to outperform the "new" 5.7/350. So much so that they changed to the 5.3. The 5.7 couldn't have been too radically different, otherwise they would have stuck with the Vortec.
    I was just trying to figure out why it was so "heralded" by the masses. In any regard, it seems that the 5.3 won't quite match up to the Triton when discussing terms of torque curve and hp. Ford conceded the mpg subject years ago.......
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    Are you a lawyer, Roc, cuz you sure are twisting words now!! I didn't prove any point of yours. what are you talking about?


    Check your timeline. You think Fords intro of the 5.4 FORCED Chevy to make the 5.3? Engines take years to develop. The 5.4 did NOT surpass the 350 until the same year the 5.3 was introduced. co-production with the 350. so strike that comment

    Took for ONLY 3 years to surpass? they basically copied the "96 Vortec design. I don't know how much 'engineer' you have in you, but look at Popular Mechanics archives and they did details of Ford and GM engines back in '96-'97, then again this past year on Ford. The changes Ford made in '00 are EXACTLY the same top end changes GM made back in '96. Major induction and head design changes.

    So actually, it took Ford 3 years to figure out what GM already knew.

    Please delete the word "heralded" from your cache. Delete delete delete. my choice of word had a much greater effect than it should have. Have beer, calm down. what I meant was, it was common 'trucker' knowledge, that the 5.4 didn't have the power or mileage capabilities of the 350.

    You can define better engine however you want to. obviously, to you, the 5.4 is better than the 5.7. You bought one. I didn't.

    The old 5.7, new 5.7, and new 5.3 ARE ALL RADICALLY DIFFERENT.

    5.7--> Vortec 5.7
    Block change
    Bearing/lubrication changes
    reduced internal friction
    cam Change
    accessory changes
    Induction changes
    Head changes
    Injection and combustion changes
    Electronics Advance
    RESULT: +10 ftlb, +45 hp.

    Vortec 5.7-->Vortec 5.3
    Totally different block, different metal
    6 bolt mains
    More bearing/lube changes
    Cam change
    accessories change
    Aluminum heads
    Induction slightly changes
    Ignition Radically changes
    electronics Advance
    RESULT: Very wide powerband, More hp (albeit @ high rpms, greatly improved mileage.
  • RoclesRocles Member Posts: 982
    cdean,

    My only point of disagreement was where the vortec 350 was "heralded" over the 5.4. (I can't delete-LOL!) What knowledge do "truckers" (define?--rigs? or pick-up guys?) have that inherently gives the 350 more power over the 5.4? And with these inherent advantages, does the 5.3 have it over the Triton as well? I think you would have to concede that there is hardly any difference in power between the two.

    I'm a pain-in-the-[non-permissible content removed] aren't I? ;) Don't worry....that Miller is flowing down the throat....wasn't really looking for a fight--rather arguing semantics of "heralded"....LOL!
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    I know, you're killing me!!! you've harped on the heralded thing pretty hard.

    Uh oh! I said Harped! what could that mean???

    It just wasn't argued in '97-'98. the numbers showed it, the test drives showed it: the 5.7 had more punch than the 5.4. and it had GM's small block history behind it.

    The 5.3's advantage is OBVIOUSLY, from various forums, very arguable. its been shown, that under load, with the hammer down, the 5.3 outpulls the 5.4 and the 350. but there's been mostly name calling and no real evidence around here of either's advantage. You yourself touted in another string that Chevy people can't argue the 5.4's superiority. Then I in the next sentence say the GM has wider powerband-yadayadayada.

    they are definitely 2 entirely different engines with different engineering theories, and different feel on the pedal. i've pulled with the 5.3, and yes, it pulls better than the vortec 350. People trashing the GM line complain about the high rpm power peaks and I say--just drive one. there is a LOT of power at the low rpms too, it just happens to be a hair under peak.

    The Ford engine seems to be superior in the 'cruising' range. all torque right there at highway speeds. but the GM has more torque at ALL speeds.

    So, what would you like?
  • mgdvhmanmgdvhman Member Posts: 4,157
    ..to take care of all these ranges of power..

    Doh

    Already got it..

    Damn Roc....you get ornary in that old Miller Lite age....don't ya?

    hehehehheee

    - Tim
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    So, how close are we to the original string topic
  • mgdvhmanmgdvhman Member Posts: 4,157
    Topic?....what Topic?

    LOL

    - Tim
  • RoclesRocles Member Posts: 982
    What was I talking about? ...er....something about "heralded" engines and the sort.....;)
  • jeffreyw1jeffreyw1 Member Posts: 145
    Does anyone know how cargo weight the new 2000 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Base 2WD Regular Cab SB pickup can haul? Chevrolet does not list this amount like they used to on the sticker that was applied to the inside of the glove compartment box door in older model Chevrolet pickups. Thanks!
  • richardh45richardh45 Member Posts: 10
    V-6 versus V-8

    The V-6, when it is using less fuel per mile, will be more economical. When it has to work harder and uses more fuel, it may be less economical.

    The V-8, because it doesn't have to work as hard, may achieve greater fuel economy, when carrying or pulling a heavy load.

    Other comments:

    V-6 with a counterbalancer
    V-8 without a counterbalancer

    You can reduce engine vibration caused by power pulses by
    1. increasing the rotational weight (flywheel)
    2. using a counterbalance
    3. increase the number of cylinders to decrease or eliminate the time (in degrees of rotation) without a power stroke.

    Has anyone had the pleasure of driving a V-12? Smooth, very smooth... like an electric motor.
  • richardh45richardh45 Member Posts: 10
    I would like to get a 6.0 liter V-10 in my 2500 Silverado. It could be made using specs for the 4.8 liter V-8.

    Is GM listening? How about FoMoCo?
  • cdeancdean Member Posts: 1,110
    That would be one sweet engine, but you would be getting up in the price range---look to the italians!
  • richardh45richardh45 Member Posts: 10
    I would like to see a 6-speed automatic (or a mini Allison 7-speed) transmission.
    * One gear would be a manually accessible, compound low to get that load moving from a dead stop.
    * Closer gearing to handle the torque curve.
    * Maybe an "extra overdrive" for the best economy when running on the freeway when empty.
    * Conventional automatic operation (with tow/haul switch) with a semi-automatic capability.

    Am I really dreaming? Yeah, probably!
  • gasman1gasman1 Member Posts: 321
    My 1991 4.3L V6 Chevy Ext Cab had 183K+ miles when I sold it. The current owner has about 220K miles on it. Had to replace the water pump at 150K and it needs a valve job now. Other than that, an excellent, trouble-free experience.

    I should mention that it is a propane powered vehicle since I work/own a propane company. Benefits of this fuel source are many, but the clean-burn is amazing. It was also used primarily for commuting with light-duty tow/haul.

    I should also mention that I am shopping for a new '00/'01 Silverado/Sierra and despite my past experience with the V6, I'm torn over the V6/V8 question. There are pro(+)/con(-) to both.

    V6
    + purchase price is $1,195 less ($695 for the 4.8L plus loss of the $500 V6 discount)
    + proven durability (personal experience)
    - lacks V8 power and durability should medium to heavy tow/haul come into play

    V8
    turn the V6 +/- around

    Bottom line: It's a personal decision for each of us based upon our own needs and knowledge. I appreciate the content of this topic lists and those who contribute to it. Your opinions and experience help educate all of us.
  • nrd525nrd525 Member Posts: 109
    To me,there isn't any thing to decide.I wouldn't even think about the V6,the 48 or 5.3 gets roughly the same milage,and are much more pleasant to drive.I've had a couple of underpowered (for the weight)vehicles,and grew to really hate them after a couple of years.I have ridden in a 99 Chevy standard cab longbed,and drove it once,and it was just a little too slow for me to tolerate.The 4.3 is a decent,but crude engine that was ok in an S10 size truck,but in a full size,it lacks the guts to move it well.
    If you can,drive both setups,long enough to get used to them,and see if you can take it.I got a '00 Sierra 5.3 3.73 4x4 ext cab SB in May,I love it,I never get less than 15 mpg around town,and it runs great.My previous trucks have all been slightly,or very underpowered,and I couldn't wait to start hopping them up,but I don't feel that way with this one....
    Barry
  • tucsonjwttucsonjwt Member Posts: 265
    big attraction for the V6 if you keep your truck a long time. Although the EPA rated mileage is about the same for V6 and V8, I experience better than EPA mileage through careful driving. I recommend that you rent a new Silverado V6 for a weekend and put it through the paces, check actual
    mileage. I also think the V6 is a little more nimble in handling, due to less engine weight, but that is just my impression.
  • gasman1gasman1 Member Posts: 321
    Both of you have good points. I understand both power and economy points. I need to get some time behind the wheel of new trucks with V6 and V8 engines. That will help me decide.

    The $1K+ costs of the V8 over the V6 is still a major point to overcome. I'll check on the '01 model spec sheets. I believe that the 4.8 is required for the new Traction Control option on the 2wd.

    Barry, your truck sounds EXCELLENT. Best to both of you.

    Jim
  • jackbean54jackbean54 Member Posts: 1
    have a 91 also with 4.3 has 392,000 miles on motor never been touched.replaced 2 water pumps, regular oil changes . only thing it always has been a dog here on the pennsylvania hills in 5th gear
  • irvenirven Member Posts: 1
    The 4.8 V/8 is the better motor by far.It's fuel consumption is very close to the 4.3 V/6 . And it is much more powerful when pushed and has all the new stuff ,like 6 bolt mains and aluminum heads .I have this motor in my 1999 silerado 1500 short bed regular cab truck with a 5 speed and 3.42 rear axle ratio .I get 19.6 mpg .And I drive this truck hard. So I know you could get better if you tried.The motor option cost me less than 700 dollars ,And it was well worth it .
  • dannygdannyg Member Posts: 131
    I understand GM has developed a new 4.2L inline-6 engine developing about 250hp for its SUVs and trucks. It is apparently much smoother, more powerful, and better MPG than the current 4.3L V6. Does anyone know if/when this engine be available on the Silverado? Some time in 2001 I hope. Personally, I would definitely consider this engine over the V8 for better MPG. Assuming, of course, you're not towing huge trailers or hauling large loads.
  • joelarmstrongjoelarmstrong Member Posts: 1
    Could someone please tell me what the "SB" and "LB" stand for? This is regards to a Chevy Silverado. Thanks Joel
  • ovalleyovalley Member Posts: 135
    SB = short bed (6.5 ft)
    LB = long bed (8 ft)
  • jmendojmendo Member Posts: 13
    I am responding to the intial question at hand. I own a 1999 4.3 V6 Ext. Cab Silverado, so far the engine has performed pefectly. I have used for hauling tree trunks and cement blocks to a city dump with a dirt road incline up the landfill with no problems at all, the engine was smooth and had plenty of power going up the hill with the Tow/Haul mode selected, also drive 2. I test drove a 4.8 V8 Silverado which had the same options and model but was $2,000.00 dollars more, I didn't notice any difference, I even floored the accelerator on both, no significant difference. Now, I know most people go with the V8, I'm not saying the 4.8 is not a good eingine, but as far as performance, reliability history, price, and economically, the V6 seems to be just as a viable choice or better in those respects than the 4.8 V8. The 4.3l V6 is the best pushrod OHV engine on the market for trucks, so think about this before automatically opting for the V8.
  • dannygdannyg Member Posts: 131
    Glad to hear your positive comments on the 4.3L V6! Just curious, what sort of MPG do you get, city/hwy? I assume you've got the automatic 2WD?

    Thanks.
  • dannygdannyg Member Posts: 131
    To answer my own question, it looks like we won't get the new 4.2L I6 in the Silverado until MY2005 (!):

    http://www.autonews.com/html/main/stories/gmfutureproduct814.htm

    I would've liked to see the MPG numbers on a 4.2L Silverado. I'd definitely consider buying one vs. a V6 S10 or the 2001 4.0L SOHC Ranger. Oh well.
  • jmendojmendo Member Posts: 13
    I get around 18-20 in the city, 20-23 on the highway, I do have the V6 2wd. The engine is clean and has the same improvements that the new V8's got, SFI, Roller Rocker Arms, transmissions bell attached straight to the oil pan, Vortec engine, etc... Great Engine
  • jed1894jed1894 Member Posts: 337
    I'm thinking about buying the v6 5 spd reg. cab. version....heard any horror stories?
  • ikenoikeno Member Posts: 13
    anybody can tell me how V-6 will operate (power & milage) towing a fifth wheel RV with a 1/2 ton Silverado ext.cab (total traveling of RV = 5000 #)
    especially in eastern mountains

    Ken-o
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    Not very well as it's not designed to do so.
  • jed1894jed1894 Member Posts: 337
    I agree with obyone....I based my answer on my 91 V6 5spd. It towed lawn mowers, hay, and a 2 horse trailer okay, but I live in the flat lands. I did notice when I hauled my 2 horses that going up hills was harder and had to shift to fourth and third gear at times. But all-in-all I was satisfied with the towing, etc. of what I was towing. Furthermore, it seems that my 91 V6 was stronger than the current version (or at least the V6 that I drove the other day). The 2001 did not seem as pepy/powerful as my 91 truck. It could have been my imagination....

    Sounds like you need V8 version....I wouldn't think the V6 would tow a 5th wheel (or anything else) in the mountains very well. It may tow them, but it may harm the truck in the long run......just my 02 cents......I'm in no way a truck expert!

    John
  • ikenoikeno Member Posts: 13
    havethe V-8 (360) and no problms but thought I better find out about the V-6 in case I was missing something
    Ken-o
  • jmendojmendo Member Posts: 13
    I have not heard anything but good things about these Vortec V6 engines, the current version has been improved but is based on the 4.3L V6 engines that have been used for some years now, most of the stories I've heard is the engines last well into the 150,000 mile with no major engine repairs, alternator, water pump, etc... Although I agree with everyone else, it probably should not be used to tow a fifth wheel, it can do it but it would put a tremendous strain on the engine causing premature engine life later on. jed1894, There are no horror stories that I've heard, but I'm sure there is someone who has had an incident in the past with this engine, but the majority says it's the best OHV pushrod large liter V6 engine out there, so go with it.
  • jed1894jed1894 Member Posts: 337
    Thanks for info....I'm working out the price with the dealer now. Probably wait for a few months and see if GM puts rebate, etc. on 01 models. Right now there is no rebate on 01 models....think I've made decision though.....V6 5spd. Just hope the dreaded vibration doesn't affect the reg. cab. V6 5spd as much as ext. cab. models.

    I test drove a 01 V6 5spd the other day and it rode great. The ride was alot better than my 00 ext cab. I didn't feel the road vibration and sensitivity in the steering wheel. It was real tight, like I want. Hope the feel will last.

    Thanks again.

    John
  • jed1894jed1894 Member Posts: 337
    What you'll think are the pros and cons of each. With the exception of having to shift the gears (which doesn't bother me), what would be the benifits to each....(other the $1000 difference in price)?

    John
  • dannygdannyg Member Posts: 131
    It looks like the difference between the 5sp and the auto is actually around $1500...at least at http://www.carsdirect.com. There's an extra $500 "manual transmission discount" listed at the bottom of their page. There's also an extra $500 V6 discount. So the price difference between a V6 5sp and a V8 auto is actually around $2500!

    According to carsdirect.com, a Base Silverado V6 5sp 8ft box (no options) invoices for $14,472. The same truck with 4.8L V8 and auto invoices for
    $16,915.

    I'd certainly consider a V6 5sp in the regular cab 4x2s. They are the lightest Silverados at about 3900lb versus 4200+ for Ext Cabs 4x2s and 4600lb and up for Ext Cab 4x4s. The V6 5sp also has slightly better EPA MPG numbers at 17/23. (That's almost identical to V6 compacts like the S10 or Ranger which come in at around 18/23.)

    I'm looking to trade in my old V6 Ranger 4x4, but I'm concerned about MPG. So I'm considering the V6 5sp regular cab Silverado.

    Of course, this isn't the Silverado to get if you do lots of heavy hauling or towing.
  • obyoneobyone Member Posts: 7,841
    Just so that you are aware, I'd figure I post the two TSB's regarding the 4.3l V6.

    They are 99063 and 99363A regarding the mismachined crankshafts on these engines. The fix is to r/r the motor. Evidently, these chopped 350's have a tendency to vibrate. You can find this on the nhtsa website under 2000 Silverado.

    If the seats vibrate, there is now a fix for it. Has to do with replacing the seat rails to eliminate that seat "shake". Boy, after awhile I begin to wonder about these trucks.

    Good luck!!
  • jed1894jed1894 Member Posts: 337
    Really! I agree..... Got rid of my ext. cab. V8 because of rough ride. Thought I'd give the V6 a try. I should have known there was some catch!

    If I buy and V6 and it vibrates, I'm finished with GM for good! One thing for sure: I'll drive that baby for about 50-100 miles before signing. Haaaa

    I think I'm going back to my orginal plan: used 98 or older Z71.

    Thanks for info....

    John
  • ovalleyovalley Member Posts: 135
    I had a 2wd Ranger 4.0L V6 ext cab. The 2000 GMC 2wd 5.3L gets about 1 to 1.5 mpg less than the Ranger did and has way more power. The Ranger used to get about 19.5 mpg and the GMC gets 18 to 18.5 mpg regularly.
  • yankeeboy1yankeeboy1 Member Posts: 1
    If your getting that kind of mileage on you 5.3l,
    overall thats pretty good. What do you normally get for mileage on straight highway driving. I have a chance to get a holdover 2000 at a good price but the 5.3 scares me a bit. I don't tow or haul at all so I really don't need the power of a 5.3l.
    ED
  • chevyinfo1chevyinfo1 Member Posts: 4
    We sell a large number og the 5.3 units to major construction companies to be used as foreman's trucks. The milage has been the key to these companies because their formen are always on the road. The tow haul gives you an added advantage for mileage because it smooths out the continual vasilation usually seen in automatics under tow usage on hills.
  • fortopfortop Member Posts: 239
    bed for about one year and 7K miles - with a V6
    auto. Only problem has been rough idle which the dealer said was dirty injectors - dealer flushed injectors under warranty. Idle is "normal" but not perfect - I am the anal type - most people wouldn't notice any problem. Starts, runs, accelerated perfectly - just that slight rough idle.
    Still no shakes. Have velvets and Edelbrock IAS -smoother ride/better handling - but still a truck-like, not car-like ride.
    Worst mileage has been about 18 MPG - all in town - careful driving gets me 20 MPG in town. Highway mileage is much better, but I rarely drive highway. Good truck - but thinking of getting new Tahoe/Yukon with LPG bifuel for tax breaks.
    Good luck - I know you went through a bad experience with your previous ado. My 2K was my first new vehicle purchase and it confirmed what I already knew - no vehicle, even a new one, is perfect. I just expect that I will have less repair cost over time with a new vehicle.
    Why not rent a 2K V6 ado from Uhaul for a weekend and see how it performs? Those trucks really take a beating, so if it performs well it might indicate what you could expect on a new one.
  • jed1894jed1894 Member Posts: 337
    Thanks for information. I think I've decided (I said that last week too) on the V6 ext. cab. for now. I'm going to drive one this week and see.

    Thanks again.

    John
  • mbatchelormbatchelor Member Posts: 27
    I have a Chevy ext-cab with the 4.3, auto and
    3.42 RE. It's a good motor but don't expect to
    win any stoplight to stoplight drag races. If you
    are dead set on getting this setup do get the
    option 3.73 RE. My next project is to swapout the
    RE to a 3.73.

    Good luck
  • hihosilverhihosilver Member Posts: 1
    I am thinking about installing a Cat-Back Exhaust system on my 2000 silverado PU. I kind of have my been looking at the Gibson exhaust system with the Dual Sport Look, with both pipes coming out the side, since I tow a camper (pop-up). Does anyone know of any other exhaust system that they have used. I am looking mainly for a good sound. I don't think the horsepower advantage will be all that much. I hear the exhaust on the camaros and the corvettes and they sound so good. Basically with the same V-8, I think I could sound almost as good. Anybody out there who has made the switch? And if so did you have any problems? I have heard that with an 02 sensor now after the cat, that maybe with a freer flowing exhaust, it might not work quite as well and will mess up the emissions. Can anybody give a real life experience?
This discussion has been closed.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.