GLE vs. GL4

[Dave01]

I went with the GLE at Bill's suggestion. In my case I don't tow heavy, only around 4,500 lbs., and don't plan to open up my exhaust right now. With stock exhaust the GLE is a better choice, gives smoke free running under all conditions, a bit more power. Another thing I noticed was smoother shift points, not sure why but it was a very solid improvement.

Both the GLE and GL4 have the same extended glow cycles.

Ian, best of luck. I think its great that you're willing to help out with email and forum posts.

 

[Monarkman]

He told me for how much I tow I should stay with the GLE. I should have mine by middle of next week. If you can wait that long I'll let you know how it is. I can't compare it to the GL4, but I can at least tell you if there is an improvement over stock.

Have you had a chance to run it with the GLE yet? How does it compare to the stock slightly hotter 99 programming? Did you use the turbomaster or stick with ecm boost control since you already have the Kennedy boost controller? Sorry to throw so many questions at you, but I looking at the GLE reflash for towing. Since you already had the intercooler to keep from defueling, I was hoping you could give me insight to how much this flash helps with towing.
Don

 

[Goldsburg]

Have you had a chance to run it with the GLE yet? How does it compare to the stock slightly hotter 99 programming?...

What is your source for this apparent fact? The information that I have was that GM was flirting a higher output program for the 2001 MY, should the Duramax be delayed. But that calibration never went to production...

Regards,

 

[mfgguru]

Have you had a chance to run it with the GLE yet? How does it compare to the stock slightly hotter 99 programming? Did you use the turbomaster or stick with ecm boost control since you already have the Kennedy boost controller? Sorry to throw so many questions at you, but I looking at the GLE reflash for towing. Since you already had the intercooler to keep from defueling, I was hoping you could give me insight to how much this flash helps with towing.
Don

The GLE and GL4 don't have the defueling issues. They are set up to avoid this situation. That is why it is important to have gauges when you install the upgraded ecm. Trust me, you'll want to have the T/M for this program. Even with stock programming, it is a vast improvement.

 

[1999gmc]

I haven't towed with it yet. Around town empty it feels maybe a little better than stock. I am hoping they are right about it being a lot better when towing. Yeah, I kept the boost fooler for now. I'll let you know after Thanksgiving how much better it is.

Have you had a chance to run it with the GLE yet? How does it compare to the stock slightly hotter 99 programming? Did you use the turbomaster or stick with ecm boost control since you already have the Kennedy boost controller? Sorry to throw so many questions at you, but I looking at the GLE reflash for towing. Since you already had the intercooler to keep from defueling, I was hoping you could give me insight to how much this flash helps with towing.
Don

 

[Monarkman]

What is your source for this apparent fact? The information that I have was that GM was flirting a higher output program for the 2001 MY, should the Duramax be delayed. But that calibration never went to production...

Regards,

You can ask Kennedy or go and search on the page or place. Bill would probably tell you the same thing. Just ask 1999GMC what his max fuel rate was with stock programming.:thumbsup:

 

[Goldsburg]

You can ask Kennedy or go and search on the page or place. Bill would probably tell you the same thing. Just ask 1999GMC what his max fuel rate was with stock programming.:thumbsup:

Well...I did what you suggested and it appears that you are perpetuating an Internet myth:

Found Here


See Post #5 by Ron Schoolcraft (and later confirmation by 99GMCCrew in Post #7) that this "hot ECU" never made it to production.

Regards,

 

[Monarkman]

OK, now I understand what you were asking in your first post. I was not referring to the mythical 215 HP/440 TQ program. I simply meant the 98+ programming with the higher midrange fuel rate. Kennedy talks about it in the link below to the Page(post 4). 1999gmc made a post on the place (post 1)about seeing this bulge in fuel rate with a scan tool. Turbinedoc also ran the latest L65 program on his truck at one time and noted a similar fuel rate.
On a side note we are all on the same team here. Everyone here is trying to make their trucks reliable and do the work they need them to do. Whether it be get down the drag strip faster, pull a bigger trailer or simply get a few more mpg getting back and forth to work. There is no need to be condescending.
http://www.thedieselpageforums.com/tdpforum/showthread.php?t=1747&highlight=improvements+programming
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/showthread.php?t=186533

 

[Goldsburg]

OK, now I understand what you were asking in your first post. I was not referring to the mythical 215 HP/440 TQ program. I simply meant the 98+ programming with the higher midrange fuel rate. Kennedy talks about it in the link below to the Page(post 4). 1999gmc made a post on the place (post 1)about seeing this bulge in fuel rate with a scan tool. Turbinedoc also ran the latest L65 program on his truck at one time and noted a similar fuel rate.
On a side note we are all on the same team here. Everyone here is trying to make their trucks reliable and do the work they need them to do. Whether it be get down the drag strip faster, pull a bigger trailer or simply get a few more mpg getting back and forth to work. There is no need to be condescending.
http://www.thedieselpageforums.com/tdpforum/showthread.php?t=1747&highlight=improvements+programming
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/showthread.php?t=186533

Sorry that you took my previous response as condescending. You're right we are all on the same team and that is EXACTLY one should throw the BS flag when ever the smell is about (to help the rest of us that may not know any better).

This is the first hint I have ever read of a "fuel rate bulge" in the 98+ programming. I had a 1998 model and a Tech 2 and never saw more that 72mm^3 at WOT (near 2600 RPM). So I wouldn't refer to this as a "hot" program since is does defuel at the upper end of the RPM range.

Regards,

 

[Turbine Doc]

the L65 "hot program" I ran was an early Z Ind tune, to 76mm IIRC, the difference in it vs stock L65 63 mm tune as all it did was add boost and some fuel, was not worth the $600 price tag then, as when I was looking for a core vs paying the core charge I tried stock L65. L65 stock 63mm, was better than stock L56 S tune, it wasn't until my 1st Heath reflash that I was really happy, I have GL4 at current time and am very pleased with it, when I went to Heath reflash I removed my Kennedy fooler, and have never looked back, ran the Heath & TM, now run Heath & ATT non W/G turbo, that has been best fit for me thus far, have even pulled IC out of the loop, no longer running IC'd.

 

[Monarkman]

The below link (post 6 tbogemirep) is what I read and thought was Turbine Doc talking about the increased fuel rate in the L65. I saw the Mitsubishi turbo in the signature and assumed it was him and you know what happens when you assume except its all on me this time. I apologize Turbine Doc.

http://www.thedieselpageforums.com/tdpforum/showthread.php?t=12&highlight=l65+programming

 

[Turbine Doc]

That was me, and I did make the post I had forgotten it, same scanner then as now so must have had the increased fuel as I posted, I'll have to read up on what I was doing back then, it's been a while since I was posting there. I've run a couple more PCMs that vintage and not seen that high a fuel rate, I was told (and don't remember now who told it) that it never made it into production except in some 6.5 powerd RV's, when I went to Heath reflash I dropped finding out the truth/fiction of it from my "need to know"/ memory bank.

I sort of remember the genesis of the thought process, the 99 stock PCM was showing peaks to 76mm, the Z IND was showing sustained to 76mm and difference between the 2 wasn't worth paying to keep the Z Ind, after I finished playing with Z Ind PCM I sent it to RATDOC, and he came to same conclusion, I'll have to ping him to see if he remembers fuel rates with his, he had GM tech2 scanner, & I have snap-on and have found the snap-on doesn't always correlate to what the tech 2 does.

 

[Extremesounds13]

So how was the GLE for towing, Bill just reccomended that I change out my chip(SSdiesel) for his GLE for towing, EGT's will stay down and it will have better useable power.