2014 Chevy/GMC specs

[buickanddeere]

I think there is a place for a diesel in a 1/2 ton truck. But it means putting one in that is equal in power to the base model V6 engine. Something that's not designed to pull a 14,000k load. A 200 hp diesel would be more than enough and could get a high enough MPG improvement to justify the extra cost.

Ever compare the price of diesel per gallon with gasoline? How much better mileage does the diesel have to make just to break even?
A light duty highway application is much different than an off road HD diesel or a highway tractor diesel.

 

[Peacock]

Person writing the story was way out in left field with the higher octane making more power. Does 't seem to understand the difference between port and direct injection engines.
As for people expecting great improvements in mileage. Just what exactly are you expecting? Some engineer is going to break the laws of physics? It's still a truck on a highway at 55mph burning gasoline . The old 400 four barrel 4X4 in the mid 70's made 4-5mpg on the highway. How much more improvement do you think is left? Still only 114,100btu in a gallon of gasoline. Still an internal combustion engine.

Yeah I know what you are saying, but DI makes better use of those BTU's. It enables more complete combustion.

It's to a point of diminishing returns. The fact that they were able to get that mileage, with that kind of power, with that size of engine, with that kind of capabilities, in that profile of vehicle is pretty amazing.

 

[crazyal]

Does every full sized truck owner need 400hp? I can remember driving an early 80s Chevy C1500 with a 350 (Chevy's bread and butter engine) in it. I bet that engine didn't come close to making 200hp or 300 lb-ft of torque. Yet the truck worked just fine for most people. Mazda has an aluminum block 2.2l low compression direct inject turbo diesel that's putting out as much HP and more torque that those 80's Chevy 350. The engine doesn't need to use DEF. The 180hp 310lb-ft of torque engine will get over 40 mpg in a 4 door sedan, one would expect that it could get over 30, maybe even 35 mpg with a 6~8 speed transmission in a full size truck. Sure it's not going to break land speed records but in the mid 80's buyers had no problem buying full size trucks making that kind of power.

 

[crashz]

I think it's the rest of the people on the road that makes the big difference these days. So if it took a bit longer to get rolling in the 80's, no big deal. But now, everything on the road is faster, bigger and more powerful and Suzie Soccermom in her 400 hp SUV isn't going to wait quietly for your slow butt.

I have a 1987 one ton dump with a 130 hp diesel engine. Even empty it is dangerously slow. At a mountain pass that I have to cross with it, the truck slows to 15 mph from a running start. People just aren't used to seeing that anymore.

 

[buickanddeere]

Does everybody know that the GM,Fiat,Tata,Opal, Jeep , Suzuki, Ford and Saab diesel is the same engine family? Inline 3 or 4 and a V6. Developed by Fiat-GM at VM Motori . It would not be a stretch for GM to dump the Duramax 4.5 and 6.6 . Then go with a DOHC V8 version of the 94mm X 100mm RA428 engine.
It's all the same family and common components with the Cruze diesel 4 150HP and the Jeep V6 250HP. Maybe detuned, those HP numbers are max rated.
A V8 version of the RA428 would displace 338.8cu " and make 354HP at 3800rpm. A power band much more suited to light highway vehicles.
If the diesel 83x92 four and six in the Cruze and jeep work out. They can always offer more power with the 92x94 or 94x100 versions of those engines.

 

[RollingsFarms]

Does everybody know that the GM,Fiat,Tata,Opal, Jeep , Suzuki, Ford and Saab diesel is the same engine family? Inline 3 or 4 and a V6. Developed by Fiat-GM at VM Motori . It would not be a stretch for GM to dump the Duramax 4.5 and 6.6 . Then go with a DOHC V8 version of the 94mm X 100mm RA428 engine.
It's all the same family and common components with the Cruze diesel 4 150HP and the Jeep V6 250HP. Maybe detuned, those HP numbers are max rated.
A V8 version of the RA428 would displace 338.8cu " and make 354HP at 3800rpm. A power band much more suited to light highway vehicles.
If the diesel 83x92 four and six in the Cruze and jeep work out. They can always offer more power with the 92x94 or 94x100 versions of those engines.

If GM dumped the Duramax name they would be in 3rd place overnight in the HD standings.

 

[buickanddeere]

Dodge seems to do alright being 3rd in the HP race with a six cylinder. Just how much power is required anyways? Most people here can remember the Detroit 318 as being a big engine. For semi trucks to haul 40 ton of freight from coast to coast over two mountain ranges.
Is there anybody here who has a small willy and has to compensate with extra HP ?

 

[Lt CHEG]

If GM dumped the Duramax name they would be in 3rd place overnight in the HD standings.

I agree. The DMax has earned a good reputation in the HD pickup world and deservedly so. It is a good engine, a medium duty truck engine, that makes good power, has been pretty reliable and delivers good economy. Just as it was a mistake for Ford to dump Internationl for their Diesel engines in my opinion, it would be bad for GM to dump DMax even though they own a majority stake in the company now. For a lot of people the ability to have a true medium duty truck engine that was made by an engine builder instead of in house is a huge selling point. I know after my experience with GM's 6.2 liter diesel I will never own a diesel truck whose engine was not designed by a dedicated Diesel engine producer.

 

[sd455dan]

Ever compare the price of diesel per gallon with gasoline? How much better mileage does the diesel have to make just to break even?
A light duty highway application is much different than an off road HD diesel or a highway tractor diesel.

Works out to around 12 percent more expensive where I live , diesel to gas, soo to my 03 dodge 3500 HO cummins which averages 22 highway empty/= 22-2.64mpg=19.36 mpg in a gas same fuel cost ... Sounds like there is no compelling reason to purchase a new diesel 1/2 ton (when available) till they can get close to 28 hiway ??? Cummins powered truck,- towing mileage still is far enough a head of a gas powered truck .. imo

 

[sd455dan]

I agree. The DMax has earned a good reputation in the HD pickup world and deservedly so. It is a good engine, a medium duty truck engine, that makes good power, has been pretty reliable and delivers good economy. Just as it was a mistake for Ford to dump Internationl for their Diesel engines in my opinion, it would be bad for GM to dump DMax even though they own a majority stake in the company now. For a lot of people the ability to have a true medium duty truck engine that was made by an engine builder instead of in house is a huge selling point. I know after my experience with GM's 6.2 liter diesel I will never own a diesel truck whose engine was not designed by a dedicated Diesel engine producer.

Sounds like they've got the bugs out of the 6.2 ?, Don't believe Ford and the 6.0 are there yet ... Hopefully they will get a solid fix.. Also I was under the impression the only engine ranked as medium heavy duty was the Cummins with a 350,000 to average rebuild?

 

[Diamondpilot]

If GM dumped the Duramax name they would be in 3rd place overnight in the HD standings.

I thought they were already there?

Chris

 

[Diamondpilot]

I agree. The DMax has earned a good reputation in the HD pickup world and deservedly so. It is a good engine, a medium duty truck engine, that makes good power, has been pretty reliable and delivers good economy. Just as it was a mistake for Ford to dump Internationl for their Diesel engines in my opinion, it would be bad for GM to dump DMax even though they own a majority stake in the company now. For a lot of people the ability to have a true medium duty truck engine that was made by an engine builder instead of in house is a huge selling point. I know after my experience with GM's 6.2 liter diesel I will never own a diesel truck whose engine was not designed by a dedicated Diesel engine producer.

In house may have been a bad thing for GM in the 80's its the right move for Ford to part ways from International. The new Ford diesel is hands down better.

Chris

 

[94BULLITT]

Sounds like they've got the bugs out of the 6.2 ?, Don't believe Ford and the 6.0 are there yet ... Hopefully they will get a solid fix.. Also I was under the impression the only engine ranked as medium heavy duty was the Cummins with a 350,000 to average rebuild?

I know a guy that got 475, 000 out of a 7.3 in a rollback.

 

[aczlan]

Also I was under the impression the only engine ranked as medium heavy duty was the Cummins with a 350,000 to average rebuild?

The Navistar "MaxxForce7" series (aka the Powerstroke 6.4) was also a MD engine (as was the 7.3), but in that config, the 6.4 had a single VVT vs sequential turbos.
Navistar VT engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aaron Z

 

[sd455dan]

I know a guy that got 475, 000 out of a 7.3 in a rollback.

Yeah- the wife and I got a ride back in one of those (ride of shame ) trips when the water pump puked its seal at 103,000 on the (Dodge -it was on the roll back) got to say, I liked the sound of that engine, guy said they really like the 7.3 and spec out all their new trucks identically, no major problems to report... In the dodges defense, I did hear a change in the sound of the serpentine belt about a week before it broke, and it was the only disabling event since new.. Also only $55 water pump plus antifreeze. I stand corrected on the medium duty, but are any of the new diesels ,used in GM, or Ford products medium heavy duty ?

 

[Lt CHEG]

In house may have been a bad thing for GM in the 80's its the right move for Ford to part ways from International. The new Ford diesel is hands down better.

Chris

Based on my experience I would disagree that in house is better for HD diesel pickups. Although I am starting to think that many of the problems Ford has had with their diesels has been the fault of Ford and not International. In my recent search for a new diesel pickup I've test driven all the big 3 and spent a bunch of time on the forums associated with each brand. While by and large most people are happy with their Powerstrokes there is a growing number of people having catastrophic failure with their 6.7 Powerstrokes. Apparently the CP4 common rail injector pump is even more sensitive to water than the CP3 used in the previous generation LMM Duramax as well as the current and previous Cummins. Ford's water separation system is apparently not doing a good enough job and a lot of CP4 pumps are biting the dust resulting in $12000+ worth of repairs that Ford will not honor under warranty. There is enough of a problem that people are getting a class action lawsuit together.

The solution seems to be additional water separation, fuel filtration installed prior to Ford's setup. Apparently dieselsite is selling so many of their setups that they are perpetually out of stock. These systems aren't terribly expensive but seem to work very well and this reportedly may be THE fix. I know if I had gone with a Ford, I would have waited to take delivery until the dieselsite upgraded filtration system was in stock so that it would never have to depend solely upon Ford's system.

I'm sure lots of people are happy with their Powerstrokes, heck I really liked my 6.4 for the short period of time I had it. But for me old habits die hard and I swore after the last time that I was stuck on the side if the road with my 6.2 liter diesel that I would never own another in house diesel. While I have at least considered Ford's in house diesel I do consider it a major competitive disadvantage to GM and Ram. Fortunately Ford builds a great truck and has advantages over other brands in other areas so they will not have any problem selling trucks. The same goes for the other brands too, they each offer a combo that appeals to someone.

 

[Lt CHEG]

I know a guy that got 475, 000 out of a 7.3 in a rollback.

I had a 7.3 Powerstroke and I would happily own another. It was a great engine that I would likely still buy if it was available today. It may very well be looked upon as one of International's all time most successful engines.

 

[Lt CHEG]

The Navistar "MaxxForce7" series (aka the Powerstroke 6.4) was also a MD engine (as was the 7.3), but in that config, the 6.4 had a single VVT vs sequential turbos.
Navistar VT engine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Aaron Z

This kind of supports some of my other opinions. Even the dreaded 6.0 was a decent engine when International used it outside of Ford trucks. It was designed to run around 225 to 250 horsepower if I remember correctly. If you look at the most common 6.0 problems, outside of emissions related stuff, a lot of the head problems resulted from people running hot tunes, way over stressing the head bolts which were already supporting 325 horsepower in stock Ford form instead of the 225 to 250 horsepower which International intended.

The same goes for the 6.4 Powerstroke. It is often considered to have insufficient water separation which can cause the high pressure common rail injection pump to fail. There were also a lot of problems with radiators. These are not really International's design problems, as their engines worked well in other applications.

I really believe that International builds a perfectly fine diesel, but think Ford may have asked the engines that they picked for their trucks to do too much.

 

[aczlan]

QUOTE=Lt CHEG;3262015]This kind of supports some of my other opinions. Even the dreaded 6.0 was a decent engine when International used it outside of Ford trucks. It was designed to run around 225 to 250 horsepower if I remember correctly. If you look at the most common 6.0 problems, outside of emissions related stuff, a lot of the head problems resulted from people running hot tunes, way over stressing the head bolts which were already supporting 325 horsepower in stock Ford form instead of the 225 to 250 horsepower which International intended.

The same goes for the 6.4 Powerstroke. It is often considered to have insufficient water separation which can cause the high pressure common rail injection pump to fail. There were also a lot of problems with radiators. These are not really International's design problems, as their engines worked well in other applications.

I really believe that International builds a perfectly fine diesel, but think Ford may have asked the engines that they picked for their trucks to do too much.[/QUOTE]
IMO International should have said "no you cant get that much power out of that engine" (in the case of the 6.0) and they should have specified how much water separation was needed on the 6.4 if that was the case. If they didn't, they are as much at fault as Ford.

Aaron Z

 

[94BULLITT]

I had a 7.3 Powerstroke and I would happily own another. It was a great engine that I would likely still buy if it was available today. It may very well be looked upon as one of International's all time most successful engines.

#5 best diesel of all time according to diesel power mag.

10 Best Diesel Engines Ever - Diesel Power Magazine