View Full Version : GM 5.3L EcoTec3 engine questions
Okay motorheads, need some input. Bought a new 2022 Chevy Silverado with the 5.3L EcoTec3 engine. As is the story of my life I start reading about the engine after I bought it. Seems as though there are two main issues: lifters failing and carbon buildup from the Active Fuel Management system, which shuts off four of the cylinders when demand on the engine allows for it, thereby increasing gas mileage.
Granted, the websites I read these complaints on are no doubt the place where people go who've had these issues, i.e. all you read are about these issues. No one really says "I haven't had any problems". So it might seem like it is a HUGE problem when it is a small vocal minority of buyers.
I am mostly vehicle illiterate; never worked on them, only know the basics, etc. I have a couple of questions:
1) Are these problems widespread, like a majority of buyers over time?
2) What can be done to alleviate these issues? Both the lifter and carbon buildup issues seem to be related to the AFM feature, am I correct?
3) Would shutting off the AFM feature reduce the chances of these two problems occurring? Would doing so otherwise adversely affect engine performance? How do you do it?
***A little recent background information to explain my trepidation: My wife bought a new Jeep Wrangler with the 4-cylinder turbo engine in it last October. In mid-August she and I were out one Sunday with one of our dogs for a drive. "Check electronic throttle control soon" warning light comes on. We're like WTF? Turn around, let's head home. Before long it starts sputtering and then the dash lights up like a Christmas tree. Damn thing dies with smoke rolling out from under the hood. Stranded by the roadside. Turns out the engine completely burned up (like NOTHING re-usable underneath the hood). It had 11,000 miles on it and was 10 months old. Obviously a warranty-covered issue. New in-the-crate engine had to be installed. Not only were we stranded by the roadside with a dog (which royally pisses me off considering what we pay on that damn thing per month) but the dealer had it for 41 days before we got it back a week ago. They him-hawed around about "no loaner cars available, sorry" but I told them they better pull a ride out of their ass so they rented us a car for that time after much prodding. Obviously now I don't trust the damn thing and we will not take it more than an hour or so away, with just over 3 years left to pay on it no less!
I just want too make sure I haven't stumbled onto yet another albatross, but this time a $57K Chevy. Any answers to the questions I posed above would be greatly appreciated.
Sorry, bent push-rods was another issue.....tied into the other two problems somehow?
SomeOtherGuy
10-01-22, 21:16
Short version: don't worry, be happy. This is easily one of the most reliable engines with those features.
Details:
I also own 2022 Chevy Silverado with the 5.3L EcoTec3, in my case with a crew cab and 8-speed auto. In addition I own a 2019 Suburban with the previous generation of the exact same engine. In the past, I owned a 2008 Suburban with the original AFM 5.3L V8 engine.
For extensive details on the current engine, read here:
https://www.motorreviewer.com/engine.php?engine_id=200
My 2022 has the L84 with DFM, and I'm betting yours does too. DFM allows any number of cylinders from 1 through 8 at a time to operate, while AFM is either V4 or V8 only, nothing else or in between. I see better gas mileage AND better smoothness in operation on our 2022 with DFM. With about 9 years of daily driving on this engine across three vehicles, I know it pretty well.
Lifters: does not seem to be a real world significant issue. Do regular oil changes. Synthetic is recommended anyway, use a good one. At the moment, Quaker State (!) is one of the best synthetic oils, believe it or not.
Lifter issues with AFM vs. some sort of defeat: no idea.
Intake valve carbon issues: this is an issue for ALL gasoline direct-injection engines, because the gasoline is no longer able to clean away such buildups. Some cars seem to have a real issue with this.
From what I've read, GM has engineered these engines (and others) to minimize or nearly prevent carbon buildup, by adjusting the timing between intake valve closing and fuel injection. It does not seem to be a significant issue for these GM V8 engines.
AFM defeat and carbon buildup: there is little or no relationship between intake valve carbon issues in GDI engines and AFM. I don't think a defeat would make any difference.
Reality check: virtually any engine design will have some kind of expensive problem at high mileage. Looking at the Ecotec3 family, its volume, GM engineering, installed base and whatever else, I think the odds of trouble-free operation for a long time are MUCH better than with almost any other engine you could choose, particularly including Ford Ecoboost options. You could get unlucky, and you could get the one ABC Corp. junk engine that accidentally runs to 3 million miles, but playing the odds I think the GM V8 is among the best bets.
Thanks. I know that in life in general "one oh-shit outdoes ten attaboys" so that comes into play.
Coal Dragger
10-01-22, 22:18
Okay motorheads, need some input. Bought a new 2022 Chevy Silverado with the 5.3L EcoTec3 engine. As is the story of my life I start reading about the engine after I bought it. Seems as though there are two main issues: lifters failing and carbon buildup from the Active Fuel Management system, which shuts off four of the cylinders when demand on the engine allows for it, thereby increasing gas mileage.
Granted, the websites I read these complaints on are no doubt the place where people go who've had these issues, i.e. all you read are about these issues. No one really says "I haven't had any problems". So it might seem like it is a HUGE problem when it is a small vocal minority of buyers.
I am mostly vehicle illiterate; never worked on them, only know the basics, etc. I have a couple of questions:
1) Are these problems widespread, like a majority of buyers over time?
2) What can be done to alleviate these issues? Both the lifter and carbon buildup issues seem to be related to the AFM feature, am I correct?
3) Would shutting off the AFM feature reduce the chances of these two problems occurring? Would doing so otherwise adversely affect engine performance? How do you do it?
***A little recent background information to explain my trepidation: My wife bought a new Jeep Wrangler with the 4-cylinder turbo engine in it last October. In mid-August she and I were out one Sunday with one of our dogs for a drive. "Check electronic throttle control soon" warning light comes on. We're like WTF? Turn around, let's head home. Before long it starts sputtering and then the dash lights up like a Christmas tree. Damn thing dies with smoke rolling out from under the hood. Stranded by the roadside. Turns out the engine completely burned up (like NOTHING re-usable underneath the hood). It had 11,000 miles on it and was 10 months old. Obviously a warranty-covered issue. New in-the-crate engine had to be installed. Not only were we stranded by the roadside with a dog (which royally pisses me off considering what we pay on that damn thing per month) but the dealer had it for 41 days before we got it back a week ago. They him-hawed around about "no loaner cars available, sorry" but I told them they better pull a ride out of their ass so they rented us a car for that time after much prodding. Obviously now I don't trust the damn thing and we will not take it more than an hour or so away, with just over 3 years left to pay on it no less!
I just want too make sure I haven't stumbled onto yet another albatross, but this time a $57K Chevy. Any answers to the questions I posed above would be greatly appreciated.
Sorry, bent push-rods was another issue.....tied into the other two problems somehow?
Stay on top of oil changes. Every 5,000 miles or 6 months. Use a full synthetic oil.
No exceptions.
The oil passages used to control the lifters in variable displacement systems, cam phasing in variable valve timing engines, or lurbricating oil for turbochargers are usually small and last in line for oiling in the pressurized oiling circuit. I just described a features found on every new 1/2 ton pickup sold today, one or more will be on every offering you can find. If your oil is dirty and starting to varnish, coke, or sludge those small passages get blocked eventually. Not to mention your oil control rings on pistons. At which point you get lifters failing, turbos failing, valve timing phasers failing etc, along with excessive oil consumption.
Manufacturers are obsessed with trying to portray their vehicles as needing less maintenance. So they recommend idiotic oil change intervals. You should ignore these and follow the above advice.
Clean oil and frequent changes to keep it clean.
The intake valve carbon build up on direct injection engines is a problem. Toyota and now Ford add port injection to their direct injection engines to solve this issue.
If you want a simple naturally aspirated V8 truck without variable displacement and direct injection trade in your Chevy on a Ford F-250 with the 7.3L “Godzilla” V8. Avoid RAM because as you have discovered Stelantis quality is utter shit. The GM 3/4 ton gasser is also direct injection but no variable displacement.
Gabriel556
10-01-22, 22:46
Like SOG said, the GM engine is actually solid. Change your oil on time (I use 7000 mile intervals with full synthetic), buy quality gas (not the no name gas stations), and drive it, like actually drive. Carbon build up is actually caused by minimal airflow from excessive idling (like police cars) and the lower thermal load on the valves. Oil can also condense in the cylinders on idling engines then cook into carbon when subjected to rapid heating from fast starts as well. Just drive it. I have WAY more confidence in a GM than a Jeep but that is also why you had a warranty. Most engine failures happen very early or long after the expected life cycle.
Stay on top of oil changes. Every 5,000 miles or 6 months. Use a full synthetic oil.
No exceptions.
The oil passages used to control the lifters in variable displacement systems, cam phasing in variable valve timing engines, or lurbricating oil for turbochargers are usually small and last in line for oiling in the pressurized oiling circuit. I just described a features found on every new 1/2 ton pickup sold today, one or more will be on every offering you can find. If your oil is dirty and starting to varnish, coke, or sludge those small passages get blocked eventually. Not to mention your oil control rings on pistons. At which point you get lifters failing, turbos failing, valve timing phasers failing etc, along with excessive oil consumption.
Manufacturers are obsessed with trying to portray their vehicles as needing less maintenance. So they recommend idiotic oil change intervals. You should ignore these and follow the above advice.
Clean oil and frequent changes to keep it clean.
The intake valve carbon build up on direct injection engines is a problem. Toyota and now Ford add port injection to their direct injection engines to solve this issue.
If you want a simple naturally aspirated V8 truck without variable displacement and direct injection trade in your Chevy on a Ford F-250 with the 7.3L “Godzilla” V8. Avoid RAM because as you have discovered Stelantis quality is utter shit. The GM 3/4 ton gasser is also direct injection but no variable displacement.
So keep the oil full synthetic and don't go past 5K miles. I'm good with that, my usual MO anyway. Anything to add or spray occasionally for the carbon on the injectors?
Coal Dragger
10-02-22, 05:06
Nothing I’ve heard works well aside from media blasting the intake runners and valves if excessive carbon does occur.
As mentioned above excessive idling and driving like you’re terrified of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration are good ways to coke up intake valves on a DI engine. Get it out and run it, give it the what for occasionally. Make sure to drive it on the highway for a 1/2 hour a week if you mostly only do short trips. The key is putting it under load so carbon doesn’t build up on the valves, and running it long enough on a regular basis for all the fluids to come up to temp. The oil will get some fuel dilution that breaks down the oil over time, if you get it up to operating temperature for a decent amount of time that fuel will naturally want to evaporate out of the oil and exit via the PCV. Your oil will stay cleaner, and not suffer from a solvent (gasoline) trying to break down the base oil and additive package.
This is common to any engine regardless of make or model, so it’s not a knock on GM just a reality. The higher the cylinder pressure, the more blow by will cause fuel dilution and carbon build up in the oil. High compression high performance engines, and turbocharged engines are all particularly guilty of this and warrant particular attention to frequent oil changes, particularly when you factor in higher heat the oil sees in those applications.
At the end of the day oil is cheap compared to an engine!
If you are doing it yourself, then buy a Fumoto drain valve, and some hose to go over the nipple on the valve body. Makes for easy mess free oil changes that are dare I say it… enjoyable.
One More Time
10-02-22, 09:04
Sucking oil into the air stream from the PCV with no fuel dilution will eventually choke it off.
Installing an oil separator in the PCV hose will stop that.
Like this one, there are cheaper ones.
https://www.addw1.com/products/chevy-gmc-silverado-sierra-truck-4-3l-5-3l-6-2l-baffled-oil-catch-can-kit-v3-2007-2014?variant=31895131062385¤cy=USD&utm_medium=product_sync&utm_source=google&utm_content=sag_organic&utm_campaign=sag_organic
I have been shopping for a new truck and considered a Chevy with 5.3 liter engine. I have been researching information online concerning the lifter issues and the 5.3 liter class action lawsuit pops up every time I conduct a search. I had hoped that Chevrolet resolved the issue with lifter failure, but maybe not.
A few weeks ago, I was having dinner with friends who are outdoorsmen and drive nothing but pickup trucks. They told me of two local cases in which lifters failed in the Chevy Silverado 5.3 liter engine this year. The latest occurred with a brand new vehicle purchased in May of 2022.
Given the way the valve train operates when cylinders are shut down to conserve fuel, I can't help but wonder if the installation of a chip that makes the engine continuously run on all 8 cylinders would resolve this issue.
SomeOtherGuy
10-02-22, 10:30
If you want a simple naturally aspirated V8 truck without variable displacement and direct injection trade in your Chevy on a Ford F-250 with the 7.3L “Godzilla” V8. Avoid RAM because as you have discovered Stelantis quality is utter shit. The GM 3/4 ton gasser is also direct injection but no variable displacement.
No argument on the reliability of those features, but a reminder to consider all-up costs. Our '22 pickup with the 5.3L replaced a '15 Chevy 2500HD with the 6.0L gas. Both trucks get the same use, a mix of farm use (move pallets of feed and heavy stuff, tow a 5k trailer) and daily driver / car use. The '22 is a 1500 but has a high payload, decent tow rating option - I think bed payload is around 2400lbs vs. 2730 in the '15 HD. So not perfect apples-to-apples, but not like a Civic vs. a dually.
The 6.0 returned 10-11mpg average, never better than 15-16 highway, while the 5.3L with identical use returns 19-20 average and 22-24 highway for us. At current gas prices that's about $2000 a year in additional fuel cost on the 6.0 / savings going to the 5.3. Even if you assume that the 5.3L will fail young and the 6.0 would go forever, $10k or so in fuel savings will pay for a lot of engine repairs. And that's before you count the cost of heavier duty tires and brakes on the HD, more suspension joint wear and replacements, etc. Just saying that if the 1/2 ton meets your towing and hauling needs, any repair risks may be offset by the fuel savings.
Coal Dragger
10-02-22, 10:48
I have been shopping for a new truck and considered a Chevy with 5.3 liter engine. I have been researching information online concerning the lifter issues and the 5.3 liter class action lawsuit pops up every time I conduct a search. I had hoped that Chevrolet resolved the issue with lifter failure, but maybe not.
A few weeks ago, I was having dinner with friends who are outdoorsmen and drive nothing but pickup trucks. They told me of two local cases in which lifters failed in the Chevy Silverado 5.3 liter engine this year. The latest occurred with a brand new vehicle purchased in May of 2022.
Given the way the valve train operates when cylinders are shut down to conserve fuel, I can't help but wonder if the installation of a chip that makes the engine continuously run on all 8 cylinders would resolve this issue.
Programming is only 1/2 the solution. The other half is replacing the lifters themselves with non-AFM lifters. While you’re in there you might as well do the cam and unlock some power.
If a guy has a mod budget of around $3K to stab in a new cam, lifters, and tune that will just about bulletproof a GM 5.3L or 6.2L V8 in their 1/2 ton trucks. Sadly it also voids the power train warranty.
Coal Dragger
10-02-22, 11:06
No argument on the reliability of those features, but a reminder to consider all-up costs. Our '22 pickup with the 5.3L replaced a '15 Chevy 2500HD with the 6.0L gas. Both trucks get the same use, a mix of farm use (move pallets of feed and heavy stuff, tow a 5k trailer) and daily driver / car use. The '22 is a 1500 but has a high payload, decent tow rating option - I think bed payload is around 2400lbs vs. 2730 in the '15 HD. So not perfect apples-to-apples, but not like a Civic vs. a dually.
The 6.0 returned 10-11mpg average, never better than 15-16 highway, while the 5.3L with identical use returns 19-20 average and 22-24 highway for us. At current gas prices that's about $2000 a year in additional fuel cost on the 6.0 / savings going to the 5.3. Even if you assume that the 5.3L will fail young and the 6.0 would go forever, $10k or so in fuel savings will pay for a lot of engine repairs. And that's before you count the cost of heavier duty tires and brakes on the HD, more suspension joint wear and replacements, etc. Just saying that if the 1/2 ton meets your towing and hauling needs, any repair risks may be offset by the fuel savings.
No doubt the HD truck, especially with old 6.0L in front of the 6 speed would return much worse fuel economy. Normally I would concede the point about fuel savings making up for possible engine repairs, but from what I have read and observed with lifter failures that’s not the case. When those lifters fail they wipe out the cam, filling the oil pan with “forbidden glitter” as one YouTuber puts it. Then it often trashes the whole engine.
The 3rd party contractor BNSF uses to haul crews around runs a mixed fleet of GM Suburban variants, Ford Expeditions, and Ford Explorers in my area. They all have issues because they see a lot of idle time and are driven by muppets in many cases. The GM’s used to be much more reliable, often going 400K or more. That’s no longer the case with AFM or DOD V8’s. They’re in the shop just as often as the Fords. I know both of the Cadillac Escalades they have are each on their second engines with under 200K on them. At least when turbos fail on an EcoBoost it’s usually just a turbo that needs to be replaced, not an entire engine.
So in the current 1/2 ton world I will grudgingly take a turbocharged gas engine over a V8 with any kind of variable displacement.
As for the current crop of 3/4 ton gassers the Ram is a non starter because their QC is and always has been trash. The GM and Ford though are now both putting big V8’s in front of a 10 speed automatic as of the next model year. So you can get a 6.6L GM gas V8 with the 10 speed. A quick look at Fuelly shows some of the Ford 7.3L’s pulling high 15’s low 16’s on the highway, but I’m sure that requires conservative driving.
Ill talk to our mechanic tomorrow at work. He is responsible for about 80 or so patrol Tahoes with the 5.3. The majority of them are 2017-2020s.
We idle the cars a shitload and they can really go from idling at a scene for a few hours to bring in a high speed chase directly after, so it's not like we are ready on these motors.
I'm not seeing a widespread issue of these motors crapping out, but I'll see what he has to say tomorrow. From my experience, I'd buy a Silverado with the 5.3 and I'm not a big GM guy.
P2Vaircrewman
10-02-22, 14:18
Personal experience. I have an 07 Suburban with the 5.3, the first year of active fuel management. At about 60,000 miles it started having high oil consumption. It was a known issue to GM and was cured with a revised left side valve cover. Although the the design of the oil baffling in the cover was the problem the operation of the AFM dumped extra oil into the valve cover that the original cover couldn't control allowing oil to be sucked into the intake manifold through the PCV valve.
I have not had lifter the problem but I know it existed before the AFM system was available in 07, not just on 5.3 but also the older design 5.7.
I have 150,000 miles on it, changed oil only when the computer said it should be changed which varies with the type of driving, short trips, more frequent, long trips less frequent. I average between 7000 and 8000 miles between changes and I only use Mobile 1. I have had very few issues with the vehicle.
Stay on top of oil changes. Every 5,000 miles or 6 months. Use a full synthetic oil.
No exceptions.
This, my I change my oil around the 50% percent mark, and always use full synthetic, I've had other problems with my truck but the engine has been solid
5k oil changes and you'll probably be good. I only saw maybe 5 fail in the 10 years I worked at an Indy shop.
Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
Programming is only 1/2 the solution. The other half is replacing the lifters themselves with non-AFM lifters. While you’re in there you might as well do the cam and unlock some power.
If a guy has a mod budget of around $3K to stab in a new cam, lifters, and tune that will just about bulletproof a GM 5.3L or 6.2L V8 in their 1/2 ton trucks. Sadly it also voids the power train warranty.
I want to buy a new pickup truck that I can drive without performing internal modifications to the engine. I would like to see at least 100,000 miles before any major engine work, which is what I have seen from vehicles I owned in the past.
Coal Dragger
10-02-22, 22:56
If I had to bet on any brand of truck to not go in the shop for any engine related issues it would be a Toyota.
As for the current crop of 3/4 ton gassers the Ram is a non starter because their QC is and always has been trash. The GM and Ford though are now both putting big V8’s in front of a 10 speed automatic as of the next model year. So you can get a 6.6L GM gas V8 with the 10 speed. A quick look at Fuelly shows some of the Ford 7.3L’s pulling high 15’s low 16’s on the highway, but I’m sure that requires conservative driving.
The 6.6 and 7.3 are excellent, but high 15s - 16mpg is not realistic.
I own both and they average about 13.
1_click_off
10-03-22, 08:09
If I had to bet on any brand of truck to not go in the shop for any engine related issues it would be a Toyota.
2007 5.7 liter
Air injection pump. Covered under warranty. 187k miles on it and the only thing changed besides valve cover gaskets and plugs has been filters and fluids. (Still in the family)
2014 5.7 liter
Threw every light on the dash and traction control shut off. Dealer said it was because of low pressure from the fuel pump. Changed fuel pump and then it was just filters and fluids. Traded it in on the 2017 with 87k. No issues, just needed the crew max cab for passengers.
2017 5.7 liter
130k miles with just fluids and filters so far.
5k oil changes on each of them.
Gone are the days of 5.7 engines and gone are the days of me getting another tundra. 2017 is paid for and I will drive it until the wheels fall off.
Don't Tread On Me
10-03-22, 11:48
As others have stated, oil changes on GM 5.3l engines with AFM are key. Anecdotally, had an '09 Silverado that I got rid of at about 210k, was still going strong. Wife's 2011 Yukon has 177k. Aside from chewing through brakes due to how she drives, mechanically sound and engine is very solid. I drive a '15 Silverado with about 130k on it.
Coal Dragger
10-03-22, 12:12
2007 5.7 liter
Air injection pump. Covered under warranty. 187k miles on it and the only thing changed besides valve cover gaskets and plugs has been filters and fluids. (Still in the family)
2014 5.7 liter
Threw every light on the dash and traction control shut off. Dealer said it was because of low pressure from the fuel pump. Changed fuel pump and then it was just filters and fluids. Traded it in on the 2017 with 87k. No issues, just needed the crew max cab for passengers.
2017 5.7 liter
130k miles with just fluids and filters so far.
5k oil changes on each of them.
Gone are the days of 5.7 engines and gone are the days of me getting another tundra. 2017 is paid for and I will drive it until the wheels fall off.
I have a 2007 Tundra with the 5.7L that I bought in December of 2007. That engine has been bulletproof for me up until a few months ago it finally burned out the drivers side catalytic converter. After 15 years of service that catalytic converter doesn’t owe me shit.
As of 2022 Toyota stopped offering V8's in the Tundra lineup due to, as I read somewhere, "concerns for the planet's future" or other such tripe. Now you can have a twin turbo V6. Yippee! :rolleyes:
Coal Dragger
10-03-22, 18:45
The old 5.7L 3UR-FE was many things but fuel efficient, and low emissions weren’t among those things.
In order to meet EPA emissions standards in the GVWR class below 3/4 ton and larger payload vehicles the relatively simple non variable displacement V8 is largely going away in mass volume vehicles. The way the EPA assessment used to work, and I think still does, it’s based on a fleet average. So there will still be low volume expensive sports cars, or niche vehicles with fire breathing V8’s because the rest of the product portfolio and sales volume makes up for them.
So beyond the next couple of years your choices in regular volume production 1/2 ton engines people actually buy will be:
1.) GM 5.3L V8 with variable displacement and direct injection, there are known issues with this system. Ruins engines typically if the lifters fail.
2.) GM 6.2L V8 with variable displacement and direct injection. Same issues as above but also requires 91 octane or higher fuel. Aside from that a sweetheart of an engine.
3.) GM 2.7L I4 turbocharged direct injected engine. I’m not sure anyone buys these but they do make 430ft-lbs of torque, and will run on 87 octane if memory serves.
4.) GM 3.0L I6 turbodiesel. Gets good reviews, makes a bit over 300hp for 2023 and 495ft-lbs of torque. Fuel economy reports are usually positive, and it’s supposedly turbine smooth like most inline 6’s. Downside is diesel costs more than gas, can be a pain in the ass in cold climates, and there’s many thousands of $$$ in emissions equipment waiting to fail and bankrupt you if it happens out of warranty.
5.) Ford 2.7L V6 EcoBoost. Using both direct injection and port injection. This is Ford’s volume engine in the F-150 and seems to get good reviews. Requires 91 octane for full power.
6.) Ford 5.0L “Coyote” V8 with direct and port injection, and variable displacement. Once again if a V8 is offered you have to deal with the variable displacement horseshit.
7.) Ford 3.5L EcoBoost/PowerBoost. Twin turbo direct and port injected V6’s. One also has an electric motor integrated into the transmission bell housing to make an absurd amount of torque. The hybrid is a rocket with all the extra power. The 3.5L calls for 91 octane to achieve full power. Larger bore than stroke so it likes to rev. Both have done well in abusive towing tests at altitude.
8.) Ram 5.7 HEMI port fuel injection engine with MDS variable displacement. Not long for this world, being replaced by #9 as time goes by. When MDS lifters fail in these the motor is usually a total loss.
9.) Ram 3.0L twin turbo direct injected and port injected I6 “Hurricane”. Should make very good power, one standard output that runs on 87 octane, and a high output that will require 91 octane. It’s a Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep/Ram product so expect it to catch on fire and not work right for the first 7 years of production.
10.) Toyota 3.4L twin turbo direct and port injected V6 and hybrid variant of said V6. Long stroke, small bore, liquid cooled exhaust manifolds, big cooling package for the engine. Runs on 87 octane for full rated power. Kind of overbuilt in typical Toyota fashion and seems conservatively tuned. Doesn’t want to rev much beyond 5200 RPM, made to give a lot of grunt at low/midrange. Toyota doesn’t care how much the truck weighs so not a rocket sled in either configuration even though the hybrid makes 437hp and 583ft-lbs of torque. This engine family showed strong towing prowess for TFLTruck, towing an 8500lb trailer up a 7% grade to the Eisenhower tunnel. Never needed to downshift lower than whatever gear equated to 3000rpm, and did most of it at 2400rpm. For comparison naturally aspirated V8’s on that same test are usually screaming along at 4500-5000rpm, and still don’t maintain the speed limit.
Going away soon:
1.) 5.6L Nissan V8. Along with the Titan. Nissan is giving up. Your last chance to buy a naturally aspirated V8 with no variable displacement bullshit in a 1/2 ton. Get it while you can.
2.) Ram 3.0L V6 turbodiesel. After all the cheating Ram engaged in to make it “pass” emissions and the EPA response of massive fines Ram is throwing in the towel after 2023 on the VM Motori sourced EcoDiesel.
The engines no one buys:
1.) Any of the base bitch naturally aspirated V6’s, who cares about the poverty spec motors?
I know a few folks with the 5.3L GM with no issues.
My company truck has the 5.0L Ford 190k. Oil/filter changes, one set of plugs, and coil packs. That's it.
Toy V-6 runs long, gets V8 mpg.
Just my (including friends/family) experience.
Talked with our mechanic at work. He has a fleet of around 80 vehicles, probably 70 of those being 2015+ Tahoes.
He said the main thing yo watch out for is the lifters. They are a big issue. That being said he told me all of our new 2021 and 2022 vehicles are getting the lifters replaced at the dealer before they come to us. He said a 2022 Silverado should have the replacement lifters but double check.
Be said the carbon buildup hadn't been a real issue for us and we idle the trucks significantly more than a normal user.
Other thing he said was to upgrade or delete the stock transmission oil bypass. Those are failing.
This thread settled it for me. I was seriously thinking about buying a new full size pickup truck. I believe I'll keep driving my 4Runner and use the trailer when I need to pick up something big from the home improvement store.
Hopefully, the automotive industry will have all these issues worked out within the next couple of years.
P2Vaircrewman
10-05-22, 09:40
This thread settled it for me. I was seriously thinking about buying a new full size pickup truck. I believe I'll keep driving my 4Runner and use the trailer when I need to pick up something big from the home improvement store.
Hopefully, the automotive industry will have all these issues worked out within the next couple of years.
The 5.3 AFM has been around since 2007, if GM hasn't figured it out yet they never will. That said at 150,000 miles mine still runs like new, kind of luck of the draw or maintenance.
Okay, just discovered that my new Chevy is NOT equipped with DFM. I assume that is a good thing, correct? It's an 8-cylinder all the time.
Okay, just discovered that my new Chevy is NOT equipped with DFM. I assume that is a good thing, correct? It's an 8-cylinder all the time.
That would be ideal, I don't know what that does to your MPG, but I'd assume reliability will be fine
That would be ideal, I don't know what that does to your MPG, but I'd assume reliability will be fine
From what I've read it still has the components (i.e. same lifters and such) just not activated because of a "chip shortage". Uh huh. Methinks GM is trying to test the waters since the AFM/DFM hasn't exactly been a hit.
Now for you engine guys, this should in theory noticeably decrease the numbers of failures, correct? I mean it has the same mechanical parts but since it isn't constantly shutting down cylinders that might help alleviate the problem to a significant degree? (fingers crossed)
From what I've read it still has the components (i.e. same lifters and such) just not activated because of a "chip shortage". Uh huh. Methinks GM is trying to test the waters since the AFM/DFM hasn't exactly been a hit.
Now for you engine guys, this should in theory noticeably decrease the numbers of failures, correct? I mean it has the same mechanical parts but since it isn't constantly shutting down cylinders that might help alleviate the problem to a significant degree? (fingers crossed)
I should say, I'm not an engine guy, but I've got 105k on my 17" Sierra, and had over 125k on my "12 Tahoe before that and they both (both 5.3l) had no issues whatso ever, but again, I take care of my stuff and keep on top of regular maintenance. I seriously thought about buying the new Toyota Tundra, but hate that it isn't as useable to me as my current GMC, or the newer Silverado/Sierras, and as long as I have a warranty, I'm not going to go back to Toyota anytime soon (unless I can find a 20 or newer Land Cruiser at a decent price, but I know that isn't going to happen
SomeOtherGuy
10-05-22, 12:10
Okay, just discovered that my new Chevy is NOT equipped with DFM. I assume that is a good thing, correct? It's an 8-cylinder all the time.
It's a half-ton / 1500 model? That's really surprising if no AFM/DFM.
From what I've read it still has the components (i.e. same lifters and such) just not activated because of a "chip shortage". Uh huh. Methinks GM is trying to test the waters since the AFM/DFM hasn't exactly been a hit.
I'm thinking chip shortage too. Skeptical that GM has another supply line of non-DFM lifters for a handful of 1500's without that feature.
I've had AFM on two Chevy's and DFM on a third. I love it. In my personal experience (not a fleet, not 200k miles per vehicle) it has had no issues and the gas mileage is much higher than I'd get without it.
I had one AFM 5.3L Suburban, then had a Nissan Armada 5.6L (DOHC, always V-8 operation) and back to another AFM 5.3L Suburban. The 2008 Suburban did 17-18mpg with rated 305hp, occasionally 20mpg highway. The Nissan did 15-15.5mpg with rated 315hp, never better than 17-18mpg highway. The 2019 Suburban does 18-19mpg with rated ~325hp (can't remember exactly), and I regularly get 22-24mpg on long highway trips. All three of those are around 6000lbs and driven by me.
The long term reliability reports are a concern, but if you don't keep the vehicle past 80k or so I'm seeing only upside.
P2Vaircrewman
10-05-22, 13:13
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkly7XmMsOs
It's a half-ton / 1500 model? That's really surprising if no AFM/DFM.
I'm thinking chip shortage too. Skeptical that GM has another supply line of non-DFM lifters for a handful of 1500's without that feature.
Yes, 1500 model. And no, I don't think they have any stock of non-DFM lifters either.
I looked at the specs for just about all the 1500 5.3L trucks my dealership had on the lot today on their website and they all were non-DFM. Must be something to GM testing the waters.
SomeOtherGuy
10-05-22, 13:49
I looked at the specs for just about all the 1500 5.3L trucks my dealership had on the lot today on their website and they all were non-DFM. Must be something to GM testing the waters.
Other than pandemic part shortages - does anyone follow CAFE requirements closely? I know that the Big 3 were making tons of "Flex fuel" vehicles 10-15 years ago when that got them CAFE points, and most or all of them quietly disappeared as soon as it didn't have a benefit. Just speculating, but maybe the improved gas mileage with DFM stopped being important to corporate profits (via CAFE fines/taxes) and then they dropped it because it costs $5 more per vehicle or something.
SomeOtherGuy
10-05-22, 15:16
Looks like this was dropped mid-year on 2021 model year production due to chip shortages. It must have come back for at least some 2022 model year trucks.
https://www.gm-trucks.com/chevy-gmc-will-temporarily-drop-afm-dfm-fuel-saving-tech-silverado-sierra-1500/
Heck, GM can have the AFM/DFM chip from mine, as long as they swap the cam, lifters, etc while they are at it.
I went from a 1999 7.4 L K2500 to a 2018 5.3 K1500 - the mileage bump (and all the modern conveniences) was pretty nice.
I am very curious what the 5.3 mileage is like with the AFM turned off.
Andy
Checked my sticker when I got home tonight and sure enough the DFM is NOT included. I am slightly relieved although the parts are still there.
Would the same parts minus the DFM be at least somewhat beneficial to engine longevity? Sure, not an optimal situation, but better than with DFM activated?
LOL I got $50 off my sticker price for not having DFM!
The 6.0 returned 10-11mpg average, never better than 15-16 highway
Bought a brand new 2003 Silverado LT 2500HD when I graduated High School in 2003(already had full time good paying factory job). I had that truck until winter of 2019 when I sold it with only 96,000 miles on.
That 6.0lt motor was the biggst let down ever. I kept that truck so long because I relgated it to farm use and had a couple other half ton trucks in between there. I had more power and towing capability with the 5.3lt Vortec and then the 5.3lt Ecotec's in half tons than I ever did with that 6.0 2500.
I've got a 2016 Silverado LT with the 5.3 Ecotec now. One of the best trucks I've ever had.
Coal Dragger
10-05-22, 20:15
The old 6.0L Vortec sure wasn’t much to write home about power wise. Not much more grunt than a 5.3L in a heavier truck.
SomeOtherGuy
10-05-22, 20:25
The old 6.0L Vortec sure wasn’t much to write home about power wise. Not much more grunt than a 5.3L in a heavier truck.
Yup.
That 6.0lt motor was the biggst let down ever. I kept that truck so long because I relgated it to farm use and had a couple other half ton trucks in between there. I had more power and towing capability with the 5.3lt Vortec and then the 5.3lt Ecotec's in half tons than I ever did with that 6.0 2500.
Yup.
We bought the 2500HD to replace a '06 Dodge 3/4 ton for towing our (then) gooseneck horse trailer, 5k empty and up to 11k loaded. The Dodge had a lot of faults, but 325hp of pre-DPF 2006 turbodiesel worked magic for towing, freeway speeds, 7% grades, whatever it was no biggie. We went up and down Black Mountain, NC with the big trailer in tow and no drama, for those familiar with that grade. With the Chevy, the 6.0L gas was... adequate, but not impressive in any way. 9-11mpg highway towing, minor struggle with the same trailer going up gentle hills at 70. This was OK because by then we weren't towing the big trailer as much or fully loaded, and thought the $9k lower purchase price PLUS lower operating cost of gas made sense, in 2014.
The 2500HD with the 6.0 also accelerated like a dog. I'm not sure 0-60 was even 10 seconds, much less anything sporty. Just not impressive as an engine. A bummer too because every other aspect of the truck was good to great. We had no complaints other than gas mileage, but we sold that big gooseneck trailer c. 2019, and getting just 11mpg or so average became a big deal when we stopped needing the heavy towing capability. We still tow smaller trailers (heaviest is 3500 empty, c. 6500 full) and carry >2k in the bed, but the half ton with the 5.3L works fine for all that.
gunrunner505
10-05-22, 20:40
I have a 2011 suburban with the 5.3. The displacement on demand, AFM, whatever you want to call it is junk. It causes high oil consumption and it’s very hard on your transmission. Which is very expensive to repair. Ask me how I know.
You can defeat the AFM with a ranger module from Amazon that plugs into the OBD port, or you can have a guy with a tuner go in and turn it off. Either way, you want to defeat that feature and just be in V8 mode the whole time.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Coal Dragger
10-06-22, 01:36
That is why if the choice is between turbos on a V6, and multi-displacement systems on a V8 I will put up with turbos and an engine that sounds like a vacuum cleaner. Plus I live at about 3500ft so the naturally aspirated V8 will be down 10% on power, the turbocharged engines will easily make full rated stock manifold pressure and give me all the power.
That is why if the choice is between turbos on a V6, and multi-displacement systems on a V8 I will put up with turbos and an engine that sounds like a vacuum cleaner. Plus I live at about 3500ft so the naturally aspirated V8 will be down 10% on power, the turbocharged engines will easily make full rated stock manifold pressure and give me all the power.
Do you have to run premium gasoline with the turbocharged engines?
Depends on the motor. The new Tundra was made ro run 87.
Depends on the motor. The new Tundra was made ro run 87.
I looked at a new Tundra with twin turbos. I read that Toyota was having issues with the turbos and replacement required the removal of the truck cab or engine removal.
Coal Dragger
10-06-22, 16:25
On the new Tundra and the V35A-FTS 3.4L twin turbo ‘21 variant a few things to note that I have gathered with my limited ability to research:
1.) Turbocharger failures.
When this issue appeared I started a stickied thread on tundras.com to track failures. Posters who had the issue could post the build date, in service date, mileage of failure and date of failure; and once fixed the date of resolution.
The first couple of months there were guys and gals reporting failed turbochargers. Not every truck is affected and admittedly this is a small subset of owners who are active automotive forum users.
Specifically the computer controlled electronically actuated wastegate on the turbo was throwing an error code and putting the engine into limp mode. So on the plus side the self protective programming in the ECU was protecting the engine from potential damage from over boost, part throttle full boost and other conditions that cook pistons, valves, or bend connecting rods and destroy engines. I haven’t seen any catastrophic engine failures listed in that thread.
On the downside the early failures were occurring before parts were readily available, so guys and gals with broken down trucks were waiting for weeks to get replacement parts. Also as noticed by some affected individuals the cab was being taken off to do the repair if the driver’s side turbo needed to be replaced, because of the steering shaft. Passenger side can be done through the wheel well on that side. In my opinion it’s not a big deal to have cab come off, that’s how most dealers doing work on hard to reach parts of an engine do it. Modern trucks are made to be worked on that way, and frankly I’d rather the mechanic have easy access to what he’s working on because I want him to be able to do a good job.
After this initial wave of reports within a few months it just stopped. Towards the end the parts were also readily available in the event of an actual failure, and in some cases programming the permissible voltage draw on the actuator motor solved the issue.
I won’t say it’s a non issue at this point, but it doesn’t appear to be widespread. Toyota must have had a come to Jesus meeting with Borg Warner, IMI, or whoever their turbo supplier is.
2.) Toyota has gone to great lengths to control exhaust gas temperatures the turbos are subjected to. The V35A-FTS has exhaust manifolds cast into the cylinder head, and they’re surrounded by a water jacket. The turbo assembly bolts directly to the cylinder head, and it’s being fed combustion gasses that have passed through an integral manifold that is cooled. Excessive heat kills turbos, and Toyota does have an interesting solution to mitigating that.
The turbos and intercoolers also have their own dedicated cooling loop with a radiator for each turbo, and shared air to liquid intercooler. This cooling circuit has an independent electric water pump that can circulate coolant even after shutdown to prevent excessive temps in the turbos from coking the oil.
3.) The V35A-FTS was made from the beginning as a forced induction engine, and the components reflect that. It’s a very stoutly constructed engine.
4.) Toyota does rate it for full power on 87 Octane cat piss. Now if it’s my truck and I’m towing a heavy trailer hither and yon up mountain passes on a hot July day, I’m feeding it 91 octane or better just to hedge my bets against knock. But I would do the same for a naturally aspirated V8 just to hopefully save myself some grief.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.