Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Chevy 5.3L


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 eyemgh

eyemgh

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 312 posts

Posted 29 July 2020 - 12:32 AM

Anyone running a late 2000s Chevy 5.3L? Any known disastrous issues? 

 

I know there are some all time classic bullet proof motors, and some avoid at all cost motors. I just want to make sure this isn't in the later category. 

 

Thanks!


  • 0

#2 fish more

fish more

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 795 posts
  • LocationSierra Foothills

Posted 29 July 2020 - 02:55 AM

We have had several camshaft and roller lifter issues, hardening on both cause excessive wear. Not cheap to repair


  • 0

#3 PokyBro

PokyBro

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 467 posts
  • LocationLas Vegas, Nevada

Posted 29 July 2020 - 04:01 AM

I got All the way up to 250K on a 2002 Chevy Suburban with a 5.3. Ran pretty problem free from when we acquired it at 79K. I ran Walmart brand synthetic oil most of the time, then for some unknown reason at the end before I sold it, I thought I’d try regular oil. That’s when it developed a stuck lifter. I did oil flushes and all sorts of things including returning to synthetic oil, but it continued to have a stuck lifter. Then my wife took a long trip from Colorado to Las Vegas and back, and it resolved. So, all in all I had very good luck with the 5.3, except for my bad decision to switch from synthetic oil.

 

i also had minimal issues with the auto trans, outside of fluid changes, again through to 250K miles.


  • 0

1999 F250 crew cab SRW, 7.3 Powerstroke TD

1981 Grandby shortened to a Hawk

Build thread / https://www.wanderth...by-into-a-hawk/

 


#4 eyemgh

eyemgh

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 312 posts

Posted 29 July 2020 - 05:13 AM

The lifter issues are apparently related to the eco mode. Essentially, under lighter loads fewer cylinders fire improving economy. Why it causes lifter issues is beyond my pay grade. Apparently it was fixed in ‘11 and can be disabled on the rebuild with a different cam and lifters if they start to fail. It would make no sense to put it right back to stock with the design flaw. I’ve read that there might be a way to program it not to go into that mode. Any insight anyone?


Edited by eyemgh, 29 July 2020 - 05:13 AM.

  • 0

#5 Mighty Dodge Ram

Mighty Dodge Ram

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 1,003 posts
  • LocationClose to the edge...

Posted 29 July 2020 - 02:18 PM

Our 2010 Suburban has the 5.3 with the cylinder deactivation, 160k on the odometer. So far so good. 🤞 It’s a spunky little engine that gives pretty good mpg considering the weight of the Burb, I get on it and it goes. 👍


  • 0
Richard
1996 Dodge Ram 1500 4x4, lightly lifted, ARB bumper/Warn winch, BFG AT/KO2, Snugtop shell. SOLD! But not forgotten!
2002 Chevy 2500HD XC LB 6.0L 4X4, Leer Hi-Rise shell, completely stock...for now!

#6 Zoomad

Zoomad

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 289 posts
  • LocationColorado

Posted 12 August 2020 - 03:36 AM

5.3's do just fine when maintained correctly.  Later ones with cylinder deactivation are more critical to proper maintenance.  Most of the problems I see at the shop with them come back to crappy maintenance.  Following the oil life monitor that may let you go 8k or more on an oil change is not proper.  I don't care what engineer tries to sell that it's ok.  The small little filters they have only have so much capacity for crap to catch.  Once it's full, it bypasses and the cruddy oil gets recirculated back into the engine.  

 

The cylinder deactivation and variable valve timing systems use oil pressure and volume to change cam timing and shut lifters off by redirecting the oil.  Crap built up in those small passages block the flow and cause the systems to not function correctly. Usually setting codes and causing the check engine light to come on. 

 

I just pulled the 5.3 out of my Blazer I swapped in 4 years ago.  It had 205k on the clock when we installed it.  I knew the guy that had it, he bought the truck new, changed the oil every 3k like clockwork with Mobil1 synthetic.  I put another 25k on it and did the same for oil changes.  Didn't use a drop of oil between changes nor did it leak a drop.  If I didn't have an 8.1L big block to swap in I'd still have it in there.  

 

My only complaint with it, was that it lacked the power I needed for a heavy truck with the aerodynamics of a barn door.  On flat ground with no wind I was fine.  Pulling uphill grades like are near me in the Colorado Rockies had it struggling, requiring a lot of 2nd gear action revving to the moon to get the power needed to maintain speed.  It could have been geared better (4.10's with 35" tires).  Plus all that flogging had it getting fuel mileage like a big block, so I figured if I'm going to get that kind of mileage I might as well have the power of a big block too.  So the 5.3 got sold to another guy with a Blazer and FWC camper and the big block swap is in the works as we speak.  


  • 0

#7 firemen7

firemen7

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 163 posts
  • LocationEscondido, CA

Posted 13 August 2020 - 01:11 AM

I bought my first one in 2002 and ran it for 380,000 trouble free miles, however the intank fuel pump failed at 125,000, traded it for a 2009 and reluctantly sold it in 2018, it only had 180,000 miles on it. The people that purchased my 05 hawk talked me into selling them the truck also. They have taken it throughout Mexico, Canada and the Northwest only to be halted by the COVID-19 thing. My 2018 has 60,000 on it and I have had no issues with it other then the Transmission thermostat which Chevrolet repaired in a day.

 

have had several other Chevys with only minor issues.


  • 0

2009 Single cab Silverado Z71 & 2005 Hawk
2018 Crew cab Silverado 4X4 & 2018 Hawk

2020 RAM 2500 Crew Cab 4X4 & 2018 Hawk

 

 





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users