6.2 liter in 2500 series

[bills]

Can anyone explain why the 6.2 gas engine isn't offered in the 3/4 ton truck. I have a 2014 GMC 1/2 ton crew cab with the 6.2 and tow package and would like to move up to a 3/4 ton. I really like MPG I get now and don't really want to give that up. I've heard that the 6.0 in the 3/4 ton is a real gas hog.

[LongrangeLauber]

Simply put, the current 6.2 is "tuned out" and not ready for the abuse a typical HD goes through. A 1500 isn't meant to tow all the time like an HD is built for, which is why they ca build it like it is. If they put the 6.2 in an HD they would detune it to make it more reliable. It also wouldn't get the fuel mileage it does now simply because 1) the truck would be heavier and 2) it would be detuned to increase reliability. The 6.0 is a hog on gas and lacks the numbers competitors offer on their gas optioned HD's but it sure as hell gets the job done reliably. It's been around for a while because it has proven itself time and time again

[newdude]

Durability/reliability, cheap, runs on 87 octane or E85, iron block/aluminum head, fleets love them is why the 6.0 is still used. Cost effective engine for both GM and end users. 6.2 is all aluminum (note that no HD truck on the market has an aluminum block) and its more suited for performance use. If you want MPG out of an HD truck go diesel.

[michigan2500hd]

I've had several 6.0 2500 trucks from 99-03. Those versions of the 6.0 was a real gas hog besides feeling underpowered. They've since improved both aspects of the engine along with making the power more usable with the addition of a 6 speed trans.

The 6.0 is darn near bulletproof. I've had 2 trucks with the 6.2 and I absolutely love the engine but if I needed a workhorse 2500 truck I would trust the 6.0 over the 6.2 to hold up to harder use.

I know it seems weird that the lighter duty truck has a lot more powerful motor.

 

Sent from my E6810 using Tapatalk

[bills]

Those thoughts make sense. Thanks for the replies.

[ChevyRoofer]

Durability/reliability, cheap, runs on 87 octane or E85, iron block/aluminum head, fleets love them is why the 6.0 is still used. Cost effective engine for both GM and end users. 6.2 is all aluminum (note that no HD truck on the market has an aluminum block) and its more suited for performance use. If you want MPG out of an HD truck go diesel.

 

All of our fleet are 2500 gassers. The 6.0 is a beast.

[tnchevy]

My company also has had quite a few 2500's with the 6.0 and I agree that the engine is damn near bullet proof. You get about 12 mpg unloaded all day long no matter if your in town or on the interstate but that engine will never give you a problem. We just got rid of a 2004 model with 250k miles on it at auction and I thought hard about bidding, it was that good of a truck.

[f8l vnm]

I wish they would tone down the 6.2 for durability and drop it in the HD trucks. I'm with you. I really wanted an HD but the 6.0 is just an old dog. The 6.0 is Dependable, reliable and super durable but really outdated against the market. It's like that old ugly dog that never dies because it's bones are indestructible.

Recent test here http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2017/03/whats-the-best-34-ton-work-truck-for-2017.html

proves it's time for an update. Last in pretty much every category vs others in its class.

[007matman]

I have the 6.2 in my Escalade. Wish I had a 6.0. The thing gets too hot when towing. My old Denali was a beast. This thing.. not so much. Plenty of power (if you're not towing) but I'm pretty sure it's no where near the engine the 6.0 was.

 

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[newdude]

I have the 6.2 in my Escalade. Wish I had a 6.0. The thing gets too hot when towing. My old Denali was a beast. This thing.. not so much. Plenty of power (if you're not towing) but I'm pretty sure it's no where near the engine the 6.0 was.

 

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

Funny that you mention that. The Alpha chassis cars (Camaro, ATS, CTS) performance models use a cast iron rear diff housing vs. aluminum. GM found that the iron diffs could be made stronger, lighter, and have better heat dissipation properties over the aluminum ones on the previous generation cars. My 2012 1/2 ton with the LC9 all aluminum 5.3 def. had higher under hood temps for longer times after shutting it down vs. my 2015 6.0 HD I had after that truck.

[007matman]

I'm not impressed. Supposedly a 7800lb towing capacity with that vehicle. There is absolutely no reason why someone shouldn't be able to run right up to that without issues. If I was going over then well maybe I could see it.

 

I'll be going to a 3/4 ton truck (more than likely something that starts with an F) at some point but this vehicle has been a big disappointment for me.

 

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[L86 All Terrain]

Cast iron is a workhorse block material, aluminum is a weight saving/performance block material. They will never go to an all aluminum block in an HD truck. I can see GM putting new life into the iron block 6L soon, as currently the 6.2L makes it look somewhat lack-luster. 380lb-ft @ 4200 for 6.0L vs. 460lb-ft @ 4100 for the L86. I personally asked GM if I could order and HD with the 6.2L engine before I ordered the last HD for my company in 2013, they told me the 6.2L was not designed as a hard use HD motor and that I could not spec it in that chassis under any circumstance lol.

[grizzlyltz]

I'm not impressed. Supposedly a 7800lb towing capacity with that vehicle. There is absolutely no reason why someone shouldn't be able to run right up to that without issues. If I was going over then well maybe I could see it.

 

I'll be going to a 3/4 ton truck (more than likely something that starts with an F) at some point but this vehicle has been a big disappointment for me.

 

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

 

Ur not impressed with what?

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[michigan2500hd]

I have the 6.2 in my Escalade. Wish I had a 6.0. The thing gets too hot when towing. My old Denali was a beast. This thing.. not so much. Plenty of power (if you're not towing) but I'm pretty sure it's no where near the engine the 6.0 was.

 

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

Wow never heard anyone say they want a 6.0 over a 6.2. I've had both. The 6.0 in a Denali or Escalade would have been a aluminum block ( unless your talking a Denali 2500), same as the 6.2. ( I'm pretty sure anyway)

The 2500 6.0 had a iron block so I would think the iron block would heat up slower and retain heart longer then the aluminum block 6.0 or 6.2.

From my experience the 6.0 is gutless compared to the 6.2.

 

Sent from my E6810 using Tapatalk

[007matman]

Ur not impressed with what?

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If I pushed it I could easily overheat it pulling a 7000 lb trailer.. yes, that's fully loaded. as it is now I can barely do 50 up any incline. 64 is about as fast as I can go on the flats. If I go faster than that I watch the temp gauge climb.

 

I've replaced 2 sets of shocks and oh yeah the transmission too.

 

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk