jmj85

iTrader: (2)

I'm planning my lq4 build for my 6.0/4l80 swap into my 4x4 tahoe. This is a DD so I'd like to see good fuel economy as well as performance, but no plans on taking it to the strip. Also it needs to be able to tow my boat and jeep.

After hours of searching here is what I am thinking: a nelson tune, CAI, pacesetter LT, cam, and heads

TR220 or TR224: I think the 220 will give me better economy but a lot of people switch to a 224. How big is the difference for my application?

As for the head Stock lq4 317 or Higher compression with the 862 w/ 6.0L valve. lower compression means I don't have to run 93 but higher compression means more efficent. how big of a difference will it make?
Thanks for the help.

Dewey

iTrader: (1)

FWIW you won't see what i'd consider to be good fuel economy with a 6.0... however, it should work nicely for towing. i'd get the TR220 personally, but it depends on what kind of stall you're willing to run.

mando313

x2 a 6.0 will not give you good mpg especially with all those mods. but then again what exactly is good mpg to you?

jmj85

iTrader: (2)

i know I'm not going to see 20+ but 15+ would be nice. Also I wasn't planning on doing anything to the tranny. I've been told if your going to tow stick with the stock tc

dlt76028

iTrader: (13)

Stay with the stock converter and a 220 and get the 317 heads milled 30 thousands. Have nelson tune it for 87 if you want.

1slow01Z71

iTrader: (36)

In the heavier vehicles generally see a gain with the 6.0 swap, Id go with dlt on this.

jmj85

iTrader: (2)

Thanks for the feed back. I think i'll be going with the 220 and the milled 317's. so the total build will be cheaper and less down time.

jmj85

iTrader: (2)

I've been doing some more researching and Comp is recommending a 212/218 but i've notice alot people here run 220/220 or 224/224. what are the benifits equal valve duration vs have and exhaust valve open longer then the intake? alson what is the difference between 112 and 114 lsa

MPFD

iTrader: (5)

Before my gear swap (3.73 to 4.56) my 6.0 with a 225/229 cam made 20 mpg on interstate trips, but it was in a RCSB and it is 11-1 on a 91 tune....

My 5.3 best ever was 24 mpg, and the power difference was well worth the loss.

TrickyTransAm

Apparently the 224 in the 6.0 will act more like the 220, just because of the displacement difference. There isn't all that much difference in horsepower between the two. Guessing 5hp.
Generally speaking - 112 will have more lope.
114 is more for driveability and will have a closer to stock idle, but you'll still hear it.
I was advised by one of the cam manufacturers to use the 224 in the 6.0 to go to the max performance, without having to run a converter, and other modifications, and to maintain decent driveability.

The 220 is supposed to be "THE" 5.3L cam.