PDA

View Full Version : 99 Tahoe 6.5td: 127 to 171hp (long)



matt-max
09-17-2003, 06:39
Just in case anyboby has been wondering, the power enhancing mod's to the 6.5td Tahoe i picked up out in Oregon earlier this summer have had some good results, thanks to the knowledgeable and helpful folks here at 'the page.'

the L56 is rated at 180/360 with the later year L65's at 195/420. Some sources (like this site)claim the 2000 and 2001 L65 had 215/440. anyway, stock the 'hoe ran ok, feeling pretty peppy ay highway speeds, but definitely lacking from a stop, even unloaded.

g-tech accelerometer testing indicated a staggering 127 shetland ponies with 52k on the odometer. power-braking would occassionally result in a chirp from the passenger-side rear michelin. 0-60 times were in the 12-14 second range, barely enough to stay in front of a loaded semi or athleticly-ridden bicycle. pathetic! after Jim Bigley told me his 94 Yukon 6.5td would run 0-60 in 8.6 seconds or so stock, i knew i had plenty of room for improvement.

for those unfamiliar with the g-tech, it is supposedly very accurate. entering weight (in this case 5800#) and zeroing the accelerometer is all that it takes. testing on my 03 dmax revealed 377hp and 0-60 in 5.98 seconds with a 10# boost 4wd launch. previous dyno testing showed 374hp....just coincidence?

first mod was Kennedy's 3.5" exhaust. big difference in response off the line, great growl and mechanical-whirring noise from the tailpipe that rises and falls in pitch with revs. amazing how much it opened up the exhaust. sound is very v-8 big block, muted 95% of the time with a short span of unannoying resonance. sounds GREAT and i highly recommend this piece to anybody with a 6.5. sounds way better than the BD 4" on my 96 k2500hd.

next up was latest/greatest stock programming. if Kennedy's 6.5td runs on stock ecm, why not? gotta be cheaper than dropping $700+ for an aftermarket program. options...buy an ecm from a junkyard L65 or have stocker reprogrammed? gave the local gmc service manager all the info i'd pulled from posts here regarding program changing and snagged a 2001 3500hd vin from a used truck for sale on autotrader.com. i figured the stock 15000gvw programming for the gm 6.5's last year would be the stoutest whether 215 or 195hp.

$100 later, truck smoked like a tugboat but showed signs of having more pep on occassion. thanks to those who have gone before me and shared their knowledge, some disconnecting of connectors, blocking off of valves and removal of both unnecessary metal and icky black goo resulted in not even a hint of black smoke at any throttle opening and greatly improved pep.

last mod to date, the turbo-master adjustable boost controller thingy set for a peak of 14#.
testing reveals a sucked in airflow check valve that never moved before and a new zest for life. my favorite 'hoe is no longer too shy and impotent to be called a turbodiesel.

g-tech reveals 171 fine arab chargers and a couple complete turns of that passenger-side michelin before traction is gained. (note to self: why isn't G80 working?)

a quick review of the 2000 BD dyno-day puts the little runt comfortably over a couple 93-94 cummins rams and three L65 6.5td's, right there (horsepower-wise anyway)with another cummins and 6.5 and about 30hp off 3 powerstrokes. acceptable.

what's next? a better flowing intake, starting with a freshly cleaned k&n robbed from my 97 or 98, followed by some home-engineered intake/airbox setup later probably.

still need to get the TDC timing set back at the dealer. not sure where it is now. Kennedy says -1.94 or -1.8? is best. any other feedback?

like to get a replacement crossover pipe if they ever become available again or maybe somebody has one used?

is the 6.2 J intake worth adding?

has anybody out there put an intercooler in a tahoe?

i notice a couple guys have port-matched and polished some but i don't really want to get into the motor unless it needs it later.

a great big thanks to all who helped me choose, find, purchase and improve this thing, you know who you are. may we meet sometime and enjoy chilled malt-beverages.

matt :D

[ 09-17-2003, 11:53 AM: Message edited by: matt-max ]

cruzer
09-17-2003, 10:25
Matt-Max, You can port match heads w/o removing hds, by removing the rocker arms to close the valves. When done flush & blow out ports throughly. If the intakes is off it's not much more labor. On the intake side you will remove approx 1/8" of material on each port to match gasket openings. I also did Kennedy tech tips
on upper intake & cut out the center part for the EGR, since mine is an "F" engine and doesn't have a EGR. I did not polish ports figuring there is a positive pressure in intake and fuel is injected into cylinder.

I think it made a big diff. but can't really tell, all mods done at 1 time. The truck has a ton of power thanks to TDP.

jjgmc96
09-17-2003, 12:25
just curious about the latest availible programing of the computer? I bought a computer from a 98 van that didn't work on my 96 1500 truck because of a security code that the computer was looking for? is there a way around this and / or can I take this computer to gm and they will make the latest program work? I sent this computer to some one on this page that said they could get it right as long as I wasn't in a hurry, it's been a year. please advise.

Cowracer
09-17-2003, 12:32
Cruzer,

Am I understanding you right? the "F" or non-EGR intake still has all the material in it for mounting the EGR?

If so, well HELL! I'll damn-for-sure get the old grinder out this weekend!

I always thought that the non egr intake was pretty wide open.

Tim

JoeyD
09-17-2003, 12:38
Matt, My truck put down 167 rwhp on the dyno and is equiped with the 4inch exhaust and a boost contol. Stock ECM. Sounds right to me.

cruzer
09-17-2003, 12:47
Cowracer, When I pulled my upper intake off there
was a tube casted in it. As far as I could tell it was for the EGR. My truck does not have an EGR,but the tube was there.It went no where. When I looked on Kennedy's "tech tips" he shows an upper intake without the tube,so I cut it out.The lower intake was wide open & smooth. I also tapered the edges on the inlet of the upper intake, like kennedy shows. Figure every little bit helps.

When was the 1st yr GM used the EGR? I would have thought my upper intake would have been wide open since 92 was the 1st yr for the 6.5td? When did they offer the "S" engine? Just curious.

[ 09-17-2003, 01:08 PM: Message edited by: cruzer ]

Cowracer
09-17-2003, 13:44
Cruzer...

HHMmmm. That does not sound right. IIRC and according to Kennedy's site, only the EGR trucks would have this. I'll yank mine and see what I have. Any chance somebody put the wrong part on the truck in the past?

While we are on the subject, that whole upper intake assy looks rather restrictive. Has anyone ever tried making something from scratch that would flow better and bolt up to the intake?

ucdavis
09-17-2003, 17:34
Cowracer,
Mine is non-egr. The boss on top of upper intake is there along w/a tube extension down into the lower intake gallery space (tube doesn't appear to bottom out against lower intake surface). I believe I recall several posts here disussing removal of tube; it's an easy thing to remove.
Biggest intake restrictions IMO are the intake/port offsets, turbo-to-intake diameter change form turbo housing to neoprene tube to upper intake (increase then decrease in diameter @ 185mph air speed will cause mucho friction; other incongruities occur @ dramatically lower air speed, so lower drag by corners & offsets), and airbox-to-turbo pipe connections. I took the later apart & was surprised to find a 3"+ projection of 3" thinwall al tube into the airflow; that had to be causing some good turbulence. Airbox isn't big enough IMO either.

Kennedy
09-17-2003, 19:35
But how long can you HOLD high boost w/o setting a defuel? 15 seconds or so is it. My preference is to use an electronic Boost control, hold the wastegate shut TIGHT so it won't flash open on a sharp stab of the pedal and go.

You are absolutely right about the stock programming on the late models. Some day, we may hit something better, but for now, the stock '99 program I run is much smater than the race reflash I have. Only thing is, I sometimes have a little trouble hiding enough of the 20+psi boost from the PCM...

triggerman
09-18-2003, 06:02
Matt
I guess got your curiosity up with the J manifold pic. ! I think it was Greg Mead that said the J split plane manifold is the best to build HP with. I don't know about that since flow rate is primarily tied to boost. Maybe at hi RPM the J distrbutes the flow more evenly. The reason I like the J is the non webed middle runers(no EGR ports) and the bottom of the plenum is about an inch higher off the block. Both of which act to keep head heat from being transfered to the aluminum manifold in general. with this manifold you can clearly see most of the injector lines on the back of the IP. So, there must be alot more air movement in and around the back of the I pump.... I'm probably pickyer? than I ought to be $$, just born that way I suppose :rolleyes:

cruzer
09-18-2003, 06:59
On naturally aspirated engines dual plane intakes create low to mid range torque but hurts top end HP. Single plane intakes are for high end HP and hurts torque.Higher rpms/HP use less restrictive air flow on single planes. I would think w/ positive pressure in the intake there would be little benefits, if any, from a dual plane intake, other than what Triggerman mentioned about heat.

Wouldn't a dual plane add restrictions in the air flow when using boost to feed cylds? I haven't seen a "J" intake ,but I would guess each plane feeds 4clyndrs-2 on each bank. Everything I read on this page, about this subject, relates to increasing air or creating less restrictive air flow.That's why I port matched intake to heads. Think about it, approx 1/8" in each port=approx 1" of material removed.

Uncle Wally
09-19-2003, 15:45
My 94 3500 has no EGR but it also had the upper intake piece with the EGR casting. I'm wondering if GM just made one part to start with. It would be interesting to find out what the run number is on a few trucks to see if that is the case.

I removed the webbing and EGR boss with a grinder. Also did the knife edging on the upper intake inlet. It seamed to make a difference. Almost as if there was more throttle response (that would make sense).

I would be interested in one of those G-Tech deals. Where do ya get one?

Waldo

matt-max
09-22-2003, 19:29
cruzer-i may go the port/polish routine someday when i decide to lose the stock intake for the 6.2J, and its great to hear it can be done wthout major parts removal.

jjgmc96-the security feature on later (98 up?) trucks/eproms require a song and dance routine to get the new ecm accepted. not sure exactly whst it is but service guys know it.

uncle wally-g-tech is availble all over the internet as well as ads in car mags. it is cheap and accurate and fun to use

btw, fuel economy has increased as well, probably because truck only requires slight throttle openings to get to speed

more as it happens

matt