Jump to content

My weekend with a rental 2015 1500


MikeNH

Recommended Posts

I flew back to NH for a long weekend to visit my parents and to burn up some vacation time and sky miles. Among the vehicles I could pick from the National lot was a pretty new (2000 miles I think) 2015 1500. It is a crew cab LT (though with no options beyond 4WD) and the 4.3 V6. These are my impressions over the past few days-

 

The trucks have been out for a while now but beyond some poking around showroom models when I'm at the dealer for service on my 2011 I have not had much experience with the K2 pickups (I've driven 4 or 5 of the SUVs now though). The blocky exterior style does borrow heavily from the 400-series trucks and I do like how it looks, especially from the front with the black accents in the headlamps. GM did do a real good job tightening up body panel and trim gaps- the doors sealing into the cab looks much better and makes a tremendous difference in noise too (more on that in a bit).

 

Inside, the first thing that stuck out at me was how much I missed the power seat and pedals of my 2011 as they really let you get the driving position just perfect- as it is now, I have to be a bit closer to the wheel than I'd normally like for comfortable control of the pedals. Same goes for the lack of control over the lower cushion angle. But, lack of the controls aside, the seats are still pretty comfortable, at least for the hour or less drives I've been making. I also really appreciated some of the small improvements to the storage areas- the flip down armrest and the lower storage bin have much nicer latches than GM has ever used in their trucks previously- On the armrest bin of my 2011, it always feels like it is going to break when you use it because it is actually bending when you open it. The new latches use large, smooth-operating push buttons. I was not able to get the 4.2" radio to recognize my iPhone but this seems to be an ongoing issue with iOS 8 from what I gather. Using it over bluetooth and plugging it in just to charge works fine. One interesting thing to note is the press release from GM stated that in trucks with the bench seat, the USB ports would be moved to the upper glove box- this is not entirely the case. There is one USB port in the upper glovebox but there are still two more in the fold down armrest as well as an SD card slot and an AUX port. The center screen was the higher-level color version and even in a no-option LT trim truck, it does have the "Off Road" screen that shows tilt, inclination, front wheel angle and 4WD status- it even seems to show when Auto 4WD is actively powering the front axle vs just in the "standby" mode.

 

I will admit that I was a bit disappointed when I got into the truck and realized this one had the 4.3 instead of the 5.3 but aside from some somewhat unpleasant sounds above 3000 RPM or so, it is an excellent motor. For the first couple hours I had the truck I was just driving around the city my flight landed in knocking off some errands I needed to do and by the time I headed out the evening traffic was already picking up so I didn't get a chance to give the engine much of a workout on this drive. But what I can say here is that the truck is shockingly quiet. On the highway at speed there is just a slight amount of noise from the tires and that is about it. I have been trying to move my speed around some but I haven't been able to notice the vibration that many have mentioned here (though to be fair I have not been able to run much above 70 MPH so if this occurs at higher speeds, I'll have missed it). The seat also seems to be tight and free of rocking motions or weird noises but it is still of course a very new truck so the issue with the seat may still present itself as time goes on. But back to the power train- Friday night after I met some friends for dinner I finally had some open highway headed back to the hotel and was able to see what the 4.3 can do. Perhaps the biggest surprise wasn't the power of the 4.3 but the calibration of the transmission- it seems to behave near as good as my Blackbear-tuned 2011 does. No hesitation, shifts were quick and reasonably firm under WOT and it did not seem to hunt for gears (though I still use M4 or M5 off the highway to keep the truck from shifting into too high a gear as it chases fuel efficiency). The V6 was able to get the big crew cab up to speed in a hurry and aside from the previously mentioned rough sounds at higher RPMs it has been a good match for the truck. Though the most work it's had to do this weekend was taking 2 friends with me to dinner last night so I can't comment as to if it would tolerate heavy work too. My average MPG has been floating between 20-23 over the past few days and I've used about 7/8s of a tank in probably 50% highway and 50% rural (low speed) roads of driving. I was glad to have a chance to spend some serious time with one since I'm still considering another Silverado or Sierra to replace my 2011 early next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think GM has finally nailed down the shifting points in the 6-speed transmissions. The 2014 Malibu I drove as a loander did a wonderful job as compared to the 6-Speed in my 2013 Impala. The only other 6-speed that drove well was the Allison in my 08 D-Max.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rented a 14 with the v6 and surprisingly it did well. If your talking about just using the truck as a people mover with light towing, I would buy it. Anything more than that you would be disappointed. Most of these trucks are used for soccer dad purposes now and actually would work quite well in that roll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think GM has finally nailed down the shifting points in the 6-speed transmissions. The 2014 Malibu I drove as a loander did a wonderful job as compared to the 6-Speed in my 2013 Impala. The only other 6-speed that drove well was the Allison in my 08 D-Max.

I agree. My '07 6sp was really bad, my '11 6sp was better but I still didn't like it at all. My '14 6sp is a pleasure that it finally shifts they way you would expect it too. I'm guessing that CAFE forced GM hands to short-shift, and not allow good downshifts in the 7-13 6sp trucks. Now with the DI engines, they probably had more leeway to make it right.

Does the 14 Malibu have DI, how about the '13 Impala? Maybe that's the difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if the base 2.5 Malibu is GDI. The 2013 Impala is as are the new models of it. Guess now its time to see how the end of year bonus and taxes are and see what I end up with. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. My '07 6sp was really bad, my '11 6sp was better but I still didn't like it at all. My '14 6sp is a pleasure that it finally shifts they way you would expect it too. I'm guessing that CAFE forced GM hands to short-shift, and not allow good downshifts in the 7-13 6sp trucks. Now with the DI engines, they probably had more leeway to make it right.

Does the 14 Malibu have DI, how about the '13 Impala? Maybe that's the difference?

Really? I think the shifting is atrocious. I'd like to get a custom tune, but no tuners in my area that I know of mess w/ trucks, only performance cars.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really? I think the shifting is atrocious. I'd like to get a custom tune, but no tuners in my area that I know of mess w/ trucks, only performance cars.

I tend to agree specially when in tow haul mode. My last truck an 11 F150 was worse. At times I dont know if its just the territory with a 6spd or its programmed wrong. At times it takes way to long to shift specially on the highway, and at other at lower speeds shifts to quick.

 

 

You sure an 07 was a 6spd, I beleive they were 4s or 5s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if the base 2.5 Malibu is GDI. The 2013 Impala is as are the new models of it. Guess now its time to see how the end of year bonus and taxes are and see what I end up with. :lol:

It is GDI.

 

Taken from Wikipedia:

First appearing in the 2013 Chevrolet Malibu and 2013 Cadillac ATS, the 2.5 L Gen III block has been reworked to reduce engine noise and vibrations, while improving fuel economy and low-end torque.[19][20][21] LCV is scheduled to replace the direct-injected 2.4 L throughout North American GM products within a year.[22] Engine production started in April 2012 at GM's Tonawanda, New York plant.

The new combustion system developed with GM's proprietary computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis software features a higher compression ratio which helps improve fuel efficiency and has improved knock resistance. The engine features dual overhead camshafts with continuously variable valve timing and increased-authority cam phasing (increased phase rotation angle), a high-pressure returnless direct-injection fuel system with camshaft-driven fuel pump delivering 750 psi at idle and 2250 psi at full load, higher-flowing intake and exhaust ports in the cylinder head, electronic throttle control and pistons with jet-spray oil cooling. The engine redline is 7000 rpm.

The balance shafts are relocated from the cylinder block to oil pan module. The two-piece steel-aluminum oil pan features in-pan integrated oil-pump assembly driven by the balance shaft with a shorter inverted-tooth chain. Other improvements include inverted-tooth chain driving the camshaft, forged steel crankshaft, cast aluminum bedplate with main bearing cap inserts made of iron, high-pressure fuel rail with rubber-isolated assembly, acoustically shielded plastic cover for the intake manifold, and structurally enhanced aluminum camshaft cover and front cover. These improvements helped reduce noise intensity by 40% compared to the 2.4 L engine and change the noise signature into a higher frequency above 2,000 Hz. The engine also uses a variable-displacement oil pump and an actively controlled thermostat. Direct injection reduces emissions by 25%, while continuous cam phasing eliminates the need for an EGR system.

Displacement for the 2.5 L engine is 2,457 cc (149.9 cu in) with an 88.0 millimetres (3.46 in) bore and 100.8 millimetres (3.97 in) stroke. Compression ratio is 11.3:1.

Year(s) Model Power Torque Dyno Chart 2013–present Cadillac ATS 202 hp (150.69 kW) @ 6300 rpm 191 lbf·ft (259 N·m) @ 4400 rpm link 2013 Chevrolet Malibu 197 hp (146.96 kW) @ 6300 rpm 191 lbf·ft (259 N·m) @ 4400 rpm
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. My '07 6sp was really bad, my '11 6sp was better but I still didn't like it at all. My '14 6sp is a pleasure that it finally shifts they way you would expect it too. I'm guessing that CAFE forced GM hands to short-shift, and not allow good downshifts in the 7-13 6sp trucks. Now with the DI engines, they probably had more leeway to make it right.

Does the 14 Malibu have DI, how about the '13 Impala? Maybe that's the difference?

07s didnty have 6spds?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rented a 14 with the v6 and surprisingly it did well. If your talking about just using the truck as a people mover with light towing, I would buy it. Anything more than that you would be disappointed. Most of these trucks are used for soccer dad purposes now and actually would work quite well in that roll.

 

http://www.thecarconnection.com/review/1093790_2015-chevrolet-silverado_performance_3

 

 

 

We towed a 4,700-pound camper-trailer with the V-6 and had no problem merging into highway moving traffic or maintaining speed up rather steep hills.

 

Have to disagree with you. My 2010 5.3l had 315hp/335lbs torque, my 2014 4.3l has 285hp/305lbs torque at the same RPMs. (and the 2013 5.3l had 315/335 as well)

 

So you're either saying that the extra 10% hp/torque was the "magic number" for bare minimum satisfaction with a truck, or that all pre-2014 5.3l owners were "disappointed" with the towing of their 5.3l Silverados. (and I guess by extension all 4.8l owners, although that one produced it's 305lbs torque at 4600 RPMs vs 3900 RPMs for the current 4.3l, so you would have to rev the 4.8l a good deal higher to get the same torque)

 

Dry weight on my boat and motor is 2000lbs, and the whole package probably under 3000lbs, the 4.3l tows that no problem. Unless you're pulling a big boat/camper/construction equipment, I don't think most people would notice the difference between the 4.3l and the last gen 5.3l. (and even the current 5.3l has a lower towing capacity with the 3.08 gears they put on a lot of them for gas mileage than the 4.3l with the default 3.42 gears you get with 4wd)

 

My $.02

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tend to agree specially when in tow haul mode. My last truck an 11 F150 was worse. At times I dont know if its just the territory with a 6spd or its programmed wrong. At times it takes way to long to shift specially on the highway, and at other at lower speeds shifts to quick.

 

 

You sure an 07 was a 6spd, I beleive they were 4s or 5s.

It is all in the programming, I had a 2008 G8 GT that essentially had the same tranny as what we currently have in our trucks and it too performed poorly (though not as bad as the truck) prior to getting a custom tune. It was night and day after that though, and I still say my G8 GT w/ the custom tune on it was the best shifting automatic car I've ever driven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

07s didnty have 6spds?

2007 and 2008 Denali came with 6 speed. 2009 was first year 5.3 and 6.0 non Denali trims had 6 speeds. The 4.3 and 4.8 had 4 speed standard until it was discontinued

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I rented a 14 with the v6 and surprisingly it did well. If your talking about just using the truck as a people mover with light towing, I would buy it. Anything more than that you would be disappointed. Most of these trucks are used for soccer dad purposes now and actually would work quite well in that roll.

 

I'm in my 50s, so I remember the 90s:

 

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f22/discontiuation-5-7l-vortec-right-move-16854/

 

 

 

The 5.3L was the motor which replaced it. Was this the right move, in 1999 the 5.3L was claimed to have 270horsepower and 315 lb-fts of torque, and the old 5.7L had 255hp, and 325lb-fts of torque.

 

In 1999, we were all towing with engines that were pretty equivalent to the current 4.3l. ( 5-11% more horsepower, 3-6% less torque for the 4.3l)

 

We didn't all sit around the bar saying, "Cripes, we need a 400lb torque truck" to pull our boats and snowmobiles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm in my 50s, so I remember the 90s:

 

http://www.gminsidenews.com/forums/f22/discontiuation-5-7l-vortec-right-move-16854/

 

 

 

 

In 1999, we were all towing with engines that were pretty equivalent to the current 4.3l. ( 5-11% more horsepower, 3-6% less torque for the 4.3l)

 

We didn't all sit around the bar saying, "Cripes, we need a 400lb torque truck" to pull our boats and snowmobiles.

Back in the old days vehicles sucked gas and were underpowered. the new v6 is more than adequate for the normal use such as driving and lighter loads. Which soccer dads do. Which is fine, nothing wrong with that. If I had to guess more guys on here doing that sort of stuff than they would like to admit.

 

Not to mention in the ole days these trucks werent able to do a lot of things they are today safely, and the smart ones had to bump up to 3/4 and 1 tons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    245.8k
    Total Topics
    2.6m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    333,236
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Lightning123
    Newest Member
    Lightning123
    Joined
  • Who's Online   3 Members, 0 Anonymous, 744 Guests (See full list)



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.