Chevy Colorado & GMC Canyon banner
  • Hey Everyone! Enter your ride HERE to be a part of this months Ride of the Month Challenge!
1 - 20 of 25 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
662 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
I decided to split this off into its own thread.
I compared the trifecta dynos on the stock 15-16 vs the 17


2017


2016



At first I just wanted to chalk it up to differences in the dyno but once I saw the difference in the shape of the torque curve beween 15-16 and 17, it became really obvious what happened. The stock 2017 v6 had very substantial torque gains in the 4500 - 7000 region. Up until 4,500 rpms the motors are virtually identical. Above 4,500 rpms this new motor breathes phenomenally well! And anyone who has driven the 2017 will understand, it just keeps pulling harder and harder up to just before the redline. It does not feel like a motor that belongs in a truck. This isn't just a difference in transmission, even if it were only a change in drive-train loss, it wouldn't change the shape of the curve. The combination of more high rpm torque and the ability to get in that torque with the 8 speed is what makes the 2017 so much faster. And of course the lower 1st gear total ratio for launching.

It doesn't surprise me much that trifecta was able to pick up so much low end torque out of the 2017 v6. It almost seems like GM intentionally limited it in the lower rpms. The trifecta tuned torque curve is much closer to what I expect to see in an NA engine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,627 Posts
I decided to split this off into its own thread.
I compared the trifecta dynos on the stock 15-16 vs the 17


2017


2016



At first I just wanted to chalk it up to differences in the dyno but once I saw the difference in the shape of the torque curve beween 15-16 and 17, it became really obvious what happened. The stock 2017 v6 had very substantial torque gains in the 4500 - 7000 region. Up until 4,500 rpms the motors are virtually identical. Above 4,500 rpms this new motor breathes phenomenally well! And anyone who has driven the 2017 will understand, it just keeps pulling harder and harder up to just before the redline. It does not feel like a motor that belongs in a truck. This isn't just a difference in transmission, even if it were only a change in drive-train loss, it wouldn't change the shape of the curve. The combination of more high rpm torque and the ability to get in that torque with the 8 speed is what makes the 2017 so much faster. And of course the lower 1st gear total ratio for launching.

It doesn't surprise me much that trifecta was able to pick up so much low end torque out of the 2017 v6. It almost seems like GM intentionally limited it in the lower rpms. The trifecta tuned torque curve is much closer to what I expect to see in an NA engine.
sorry but I'm callin BS, even GM itself says the 17 is only 3 hp more than the 15 and 16 and 6 lb.ft in torque. After seeing this I was thinking get a Trifecta tune!, well I think I'll research a bit more....... I don't know what the difference is in your dyno chart, I guess just like anything else, too many variables.......so there you go.....my opinion......:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
I just put their tune in my 2017 last night, its badass. I'm really loving the Eco portion, the extra low-end and cleaned up shifting is very noticeable and smooth. Sport mode just flat rips.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
662 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
All the lfx dynos I have looked up all show a similar curve to the trifecta stock curve. What I really need to see is more lgz dynos to be certain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,627 Posts
I just put their tune in my 2017 last night, its badass. I'm really loving the Eco portion, the extra low-end and cleaned up shifting is very noticeable and smooth. Sport mode just flat rips.
Please don't take this personal. Its not that I don't trust you but....I don't trust anyone. Sorry but you sound like a pedal commander user....Makes me wonder if the Trifecta is just a gas pedal "tune". Not interested in that nonsense.....I'm really considering a Mallet supercharger, just scared it will make my truck unreliable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: boborc

·
Registered
Joined
·
662 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
I think a part of the problem is that tuners are just too opaque with their data. I have no idea how close to MBT the stock strategy can get in the absence of knock. I don't know what modifications to the ignition and fuel tables the tuners are making. It's all a giant black box when we don't get to see the changes made and yes, changing throttle mapping can make the car feel faster to the laymen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
I would only believe a stock comparison of the 3 on the same dyno , same conditions .
Hopefully GM would have this data somewhere .
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
Please don't take this personal. Its not that I don't trust you but....I don't trust anyone. Sorry but you sound like a pedal commander user....Makes me wonder if the Trifecta is just a gas pedal "tune". Not interested in that nonsense.....I'm really considering a Mallet supercharger, just scared it will make my truck unreliable.
Don't take it personal, but "you sound like a pedal commander user"? You're backhand is sloppy, work on that. First, PC wont change a dyno chart, just feedback and perception. Tuners wouldn't be in business if they couldn't prove gains. Blowers are cool, two pals have/had them on silverados and tahoes, but they cost ten times as much, and require supporting parts. I've seen a ton of tunes done in person, without that, I'd be a little more skeptical about them as well. But what can be done, especially on a boosted motor, is crazy. So for my stock, N/A motor, they exceeded my expectations. And its only been 2 days, so I still got a hard-on. I'm happy when things work as advertised, I HATE getting let down if it doesn't. If it exceeds expectations, I'm stoked and will spread the word for the vendor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,627 Posts
Don't take it personal, but "you sound like a pedal commander user"? You're backhand is sloppy, work on that. First, PC wont change a dyno chart, just feedback and perception. Tuners wouldn't be in business if they couldn't prove gains. Blowers are cool, two pals have/had them on silverados and tahoes, but they cost ten times as much, and require supporting parts. I've seen a ton of tunes done in person, without that, I'd be a little more skeptical about them as well. But what can be done, especially on a boosted motor, is crazy. So for my stock, N/A motor, they exceeded my expectations. And its only been 2 days, so I still got a hard-on. I'm happy when things work as advertised, I HATE getting let down if it doesn't. If it exceeds expectations, I'm stoked and will spread the word for the vendor.
Well its good to know you know what you're talking about. Did you get a good boost in low rpm torque? Thats what I'm after. I guess you think the chart is right, considering the way it drives now. Thats very cool. Maybe I'll try one. Do they give you any guarantee I wonder?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
65 Posts
I don't recall if there is a guarantee, but I read that they had a one-week trial program in the past. The low-end torque is the biggest difference along with the shifting. Sport carries the low gears a little far, like having a loose converter. For normal driving its a little excessive, so I've barely played with that so far. The Eco mode feels like a bunch more low-end torque as well, but doesn't pull the low gears as high. Eco is like having a bigger motor, and shifting like it should, I'm loving it. I haven't really stood on it yet in Eco mode, like I did in Sport, but I'm betting it still runs hard up top. Keep in mind I have a 2017, and I don't have dyno access to verify like I did in the past, but the gains they show are similar, so a 2016 should really "wake up" as well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
I decided to split this off into its own thread.
I compared the trifecta dynos on the stock 15-16 vs the 17


2017


2016



At first I just wanted to chalk it up to differences in the dyno but once I saw the difference in the shape of the torque curve beween 15-16 and 17, it became really obvious what happened. The stock 2017 v6 had very substantial torque gains in the 4500 - 7000 region. Up until 4,500 rpms the motors are virtually identical. Above 4,500 rpms this new motor breathes phenomenally well! And anyone who has driven the 2017 will understand, it just keeps pulling harder and harder up to just before the redline. It does not feel like a motor that belongs in a truck. This isn't just a difference in transmission, even if it were only a change in drive-train loss, it wouldn't change the shape of the curve. The combination of more high rpm torque and the ability to get in that torque with the 8 speed is what makes the 2017 so much faster. And of course the lower 1st gear total ratio for launching.

It doesn't surprise me much that trifecta was able to pick up so much low end torque out of the 2017 v6. It almost seems like GM intentionally limited it in the lower rpms. The trifecta tuned torque curve is much closer to what I expect to see in an NA engine.
Thanks for sharing. I haven't driven a 15-16 , I am very surprised by how much get up and go my 17 v 6 has. Your charts seem to explain why.,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
263 Posts
sorry but I'm callin BS, even GM itself says the 17 is only 3 hp more than the 15 and 16 and 6 lb.ft in torque.
Peak torque and available torque are two different things. While peak torque on the 17 may have only increased 6 ft/lbs, they were also able to increase available torque over a broader RPM range.

Even if the 2017 had the same peak HP and torque numbers, increasing the torque over the rest of the bandwidth improves performance also.

Here is a good example... Buick Regal Turbo and Regal GS. Both have same peak HP and torque rating. Which one is faster and why? Answer... GS. They have the same peak torque rating but the GS has that same peak torque available over a broader RPM range so it puts down power earlier and longer. Same thing with the 17+ 3.6 in the twins.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
Yes more area under the curve is always a better thing then just a peak number increase.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
662 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 · (Edited)
What is this? I almost feel like this deserves it's own thread, Is this right? The LFX was only SAE certified for 275 hp?
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
380 Posts
Doesn't surprise me. Yes, the transmission helps a lot, but that engine just rips at over 4500 rpm. Like previously stated, it doesn't feel like it belongs in a truck. The 8 speed makes the truck much more drivable in normal driving, but it's so much fun to flat foot it. It's hard not to do it more often. I'm so glad I waited to get a 2017.

Hell, I was messing around at a stoplight the other day with my friend in a new GTI and he didn't even beat me by a car length. Those are rated at 5.9 0-60. We were both super impressed.
 
1 - 20 of 25 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top