Any body have any dealings with the chevy 6.2 liter at the track?

[Sigman]

Originally Posted by THUNDERA

I highly doubt a 5.3L with just cams, heads and a tune is going to run 12's. I need some proof here...If you're talking daily drivers, 12's are usually reserved for diesels - and they have to have a decent amount of money in them to even run that time consistantly.

Remember, Motor Trend tested the TRD S/C RCSB Tundra at 13 flat in the quarter mile - The only performance goodies it had were the supercharger and the exhaust.

I think it would be hard too unless its a RCSB version. They dont have as good a gearing either. But remember what HP they do have they can get it to lock up to the pavement better than ours.

[THUNDERA]

Let's think about this:

What is the most power that heads/tune/cams could possibly get you? 80 HP? 100 HP? That gets you to a MAX of 450 HP out of the 5.3L engine. Our RCSB's run low 14's stock with 380 HP, and run high 13's with bolt-on's call it 410 HP.

How is two less gears and 40 more horsepower going to buy you an extra second in the quarter mile? Maybe extreme weight reduction - but then it loses its driveability and becomes essentially a race car. The 5.3 chevy's would need to have well over 500 HP and I have a feeling its going to have to have more than just heads/cams/tune to do so - not to mention transmission work. I'm not saying it can't be done, I just don't think it can be done with only those mods...

Like I said before - I need some proof here...

[RIjon]

Until we get a LSD/locker & tuning.... you will not see accurate repeatable times (consistent). Once we can get a grip on the Torque management and then put the power to the ground, you will see times drop substantially.

All things considered between the two platforms being discussed here, the Tundra is fairing pretty well....... but it's still apples to oranges till the above is dealt with.