Flashpaq Tuner on 6.0 GM

ShinerBock wrote:
I will add that if OEM's wanted their transmissions to last longer then they would tune every transmission to shift firmly as quickly as possible instead of these buttery smooth shift that crates more slippage, more clutch wear, and more heat. However, most people would not like a transmission that shifts this way so the OEM's tune them to shift smoother, even though it reduces longevity, to please most consumers.

You mean like Ford's DPS6 that was loved in Europe and absolutely hated in US?

I will add that if OEM's wanted their transmissions to last longer then they would tune every transmission to shift firmly as quickly as possible instead of these buttery smooth shift that crates more slippage, more clutch wear, and more heat. However, most people would not like a transmission that shifts this way so the OEM's tune them to shift smoother, even though it reduces longevity, to please most consumers.

On major reason why the 6.2L is not in the HD trucks is because it has an aluminum block which is not ideal for a gasoline HD truck. Cars like the the ZL1 is meant for the track. Not the one that goes in a strait line, the one that has turns and is constantly shifting up and down gears creating heat.

Going back to GM Authorities 6L90 spec sheet, the "maximum validated GVW" is 15,000 lbs and the max GCVW is 21,000 lbs.

Heat in a transmission is usually generally from slippage and/or constant high line pressure. If the 6L90's torque converter is locked and has enough clamping force to handle the amount of power and weight that a tuned 6.0L is rated for then there will be no slippage. Most transmissions that fail from added power is due to slippage, but as stated in the spec sheet, the 6L90 is rated to handle way more than what just a tune will do to a 6.0L even in a truck application.

The valve body line pressure is depended your right foot and engine load so it will get hot under constant high load with added power or not if the trans cooler cannot keep it in check. Added power has nothing to do with this heat and in fact added power may even help if the engine does not have to be at such a high load as often.

However, this is why tuners have tow tunes and unloaded tunes. Tow tuned generally have lower power numbers and alters shifting to be at optimum rpms with firmer shifts. Firmer shifts are to keep slippage between shifts at a minimum which reduces heat. Unloaded tunes generally have higher power numbers while keeping the buttery smooth shifts(more slippage) from the factory. So you select the tune and customize it based on how you will using your truck instead of being forced to drive a one size fits all tune made for applications/situations you will probably never drive your truck in.

A good analogy and will add...

Why isn't the GM 6.2L all aluminum in +8,600 lb GVWR trucks? Duty cycle...

What is the GVWR and GCWR of the 'cars' with high HP/Torque mated to the 6L90 ? How well would the 6L90E do with a 5,000 lb to 7,000 lb or larger trailer in tow? Duty cycle required to tow for hours in hot conditions and steep incline will kill it...of course stated 'unloaded', but this is a towing/RV forum/application...then again, most TV's will weigh more than those 'cars'...

Worked for and was partners in small firms supplying test stands to automotive industry, military and other industrial markets (and many other markets). Largest disc brake I've designed was a 48" dia at the outer swept area...most others were in the 17"-20" range and all had 100% duty cycle ratings. My designs were much smaller than GE's, Westinghouse's, Reliance's...because they were all designed decades ago and continued to be offered

Biggest test stand was for DOT testing tires and wheels. Locomotive traction motors were the only electric motors that had the duty cycle they spec'd out, which included a 100% duty cycle for the drum at max RPM/Max Load/Max Slip angle/etc. Their old ones used hydraulic's and did NOT have the duty cycle ours did, not the fine controls they required.

All are opinions on these freebie forums...some empirical...others theoretical based on learned knowledge to actual practice. Readers must decide for themselves on the info presented, or not...

If the 6L90 can handle 556 hp and 551 lb-ft in the CTS-V or 580hp and 556 lb-ft in the ZL1 on the track, then I think it can handle what a 6.0L 2500 can put out unloaded. According to GM Authority spec sheets on the 6L90 the max horsepower it can handle in a gas truck is 452 hp and 531 lb-ft which is far from what a 6.0L will be able to achieve with just a tune.

Having worked for engine/auto manufacturers and being involved in testing, I can say the public assumption/perception of why things are the way that are, and the real reason as to why things are the way they are often are not the same. Also, what may have been the case decades ago may not still be today.

kw/00 wrote:
Since I have a GM 6.0 I recommend the black bear auto tune. Really wakes up this engine, reduces TQ management

This is really the big issue on the GM 6.0L. These engines make really nice HP and torque, but to add longevity of the transmission they used torque management to choke off the engine so it didn't kill the tranny. As BenK stated, it's all about duty cycles and there is quite likely more torque the transmission can handle. By reducing the torque management you get more of the power the engine makes delivered to the transmission.

Since I have a GM 6.0 I recommend the black bear auto tune. Really wakes up this engine, reduces TQ management and does provide better economy if u keep your foot out of it. I like my tune, it solved a few issues for me, most noticeable was the pedal lag and lazy tranny shift. I paid 600.00 for mine. It’s simple, he sends you a handheld scanner, plug it in, drive and download. Afterwards email him the downloaded scan and he ask you what you want from you tune. He then emails you back the new tune, you then download it on to the auto cal handheld unit, plug it into the truck and download. GM 6.0 will gain 35-40 horse with 50 TQ on the performance tune and 91 octane. I use the normal tune at 87 octane. If towing I use the 89 tune. I have used the 91 tune after a few tankfuls and was able to burn the rear tires.... of course not my style but non the less it will do it. Anyway the normal 87 tune removes most TQ management and you will gain some HP and TQ. Overall I like it and have been using the tune for a few years with zero issues. Blackbear never tunes your truck to exceed where it should be, there no crazy blow you engine up within a short distance tune, Justin is the guy who owns it and really is a knowledgeable guy and keeps everything in check. So that’s my take, I zero issues with it and it has given me a noticeable performance with increased mileage and corrected a few GM quirks... let me know if you have questions.

Grit dog wrote:
" Then there was the EPA mandated cylinder fuel cutoff if the engine has more than one misfire in a certain amount of time. The Ecoboost intercoolers were not allowed to have weep holes like many older turbo charged cars used to have since the EPA does not allow unfiltered air to escape the engine. This caused moisture to pool at the lowest point of the intercooler and would sometimes get ingested by the engine. Not enough to harm it, but enough to cause a few misfires which would then cause the truck to shut off all fuel going to those injectors for 30 seconds causing a dangerous bucking situation with low power. Why? Because un-burned fuel will damage a catalytic converter so the EPA forced automakers to have this in their programming. "

Is this what the early Eco intercooler problems were? Something that could be solved with a 1/16" drill bit in 5 minutes? Sounds about right. I work almost exclusively for public agencies and am astounded daily with ignorance, bureaucracy, and just plain lack of comprehension whether hereditary or programmed...lol.

Yeah, mine did it several times in hot humid weather within the first year I got it. Dang near scared the **** out of me the first time it happened. After doing some research on what was causing it, I drilled a 1/32 hole at the lowest point of the intercooler and it never did it again in the several years I owned the truck. It also fixed the issue for many others in the forums as well.

I was able obtain a PDF copy of Ford's response to the NHTSA investigation on the cause of the issue. I figured that was why there was never a recall on it since the cause of it was due to EPA mandated programming and not allowing a weep hole.

The only tuner I recommend for GM is Black Bear. While I agree that you will not get much more power in the rpm range you want to drive (<3000rpm), the most benefits come from improved throttle response, transmission shifts and set points, as well as removing GM's "Torque Management".

" Then there was the EPA mandated cylinder fuel cutoff if the engine has more than one misfire in a certain amount of time. The Ecoboost intercoolers were not allowed to have weep holes like many older turbo charged cars used to have since the EPA does not allow unfiltered air to escape the engine. This caused moisture to pool at the lowest point of the intercooler and would sometimes get ingested by the engine. Not enough to harm it, but enough to cause a few misfires which would then cause the truck to shut off all fuel going to those injectors for 30 seconds causing a dangerous bucking situation with low power. Why? Because un-burned fuel will damage a catalytic converter so the EPA forced automakers to have this in their programming. "

Is this what the early Eco intercooler problems were? Something that could be solved with a 1/16" drill bit in 5 minutes? Sounds about right. I work almost exclusively for public agencies and am astounded daily with ignorance, bureaucracy, and just plain lack of comprehension whether hereditary or programmed...lol.