Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Cosby
If you say so.
For 2012...
The 5.3 is rated at 15/21/17.
The 6.2 is rated at 13/18/14.
Pretty significant difference in ratings for your 6.2 to do better than your 5.3....assuming they were about the same year truck. However, if you had say a 2005 5.3, that one is rated at 14/19/16....very similar to a 2012 6.2. Then again, kinda silly to compare a 2005 5.3 to a 2012 6.2, but I digress.
Source: www.fueleconomy.gov |
my 5.3 i was comparing it to was an 09. 5.3 6 speed. if you think you can go by claimed mpg that's pretty funny. in canada my 5.3 was rated for 29 mpg highway. you think it got that? no. it got 20-21 most times. my 6.2 is rated for 26 mpg but it has been consistantly getting at least 22 mpg on the highway. very pleased with it. and WAY more power. have even got over 23.5 mpg a couple times.
i still have a 2010 5.3 but it's just hard on fuel. i have bigger than stock tires on it though so i can't blame the truck too much.