Jump to content

Bryant_Olson

Member
  • Content Count

    67
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

49 Good

About Bryant_Olson

  • Rank
    Enthusiast
  • Birthday 01/01/1970

Recent Profile Visitors

1,117 profile views
  1. I tow a 4000lb boat with coolers of beer and weekend supplies all the time and towing mileage is as good or better than my 2017 5.3 was. Usually in the 15mpg range towing that. The thing is great, I'm averaging over 19mpg lifetime, only had it since February but I'm WFH so my driving is about as inefficient as can be. 3 mile round trips to menards and the grocery store. My last pickup averaged 16.5 lifetime. Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk
  2. I had a 2017 ltz 5.3 and the transmission in that was super clunky, would clunk and lunge all the damn time. This one has been substantially better. Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk
  3. Lol okay. Based on hitting peak torque at 1400 rpms? That's so archaic. Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk
  4. The diesel weighs less than the 2.7 even? That's interesting, I know that was one of the reasons mentioned for the 2.7 having so much less towing than the 5.3 given similar-ish power output. It weighs a lot less. Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk
  5. I'm super impressed with mine. Honestly drives a lot like a baby diesel with the low end torque but with the benefits of gas. And yea, I was thinking the same thing. My '17 LTZ had the max towing package but there's no way I'd feel comfortable towing 11k pounds or whatever that was rated at. Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk
  6. Not really, it's similar torque to the 5.3. Why does it matter how many cylinders it has if it's putting out similar torque? I have the 2020 and that thing can definitely tow more than it's rated at Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk
  7. Yea I always wanted one but by the time I was gainfully employed enough to afford a pickup they were out of production and a little more wear and tear than I was looking for. Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
  8. Agreed, I wish they still made them. The mid-gate and lockable hard top was fantastic. I just think it probably cost more to churn them out compared to a CC, and they're pretty similar. Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
  9. Depends on the engine but probably not gonna happen in the GMC. GMCs seem to run a tad higher than Chevrolet. I got my RST with leather and the 2.7 for about $39k. Cloth drops it a bit more. Going from the 5.3 to the 2.7 saves a fair bit. Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
  10. @ullose272 That's a damn sharp truck though.
  11. I've had a soft cover for years and never had any issues. I figure people are less likely to break into something they can't see than something they can. Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
  12. I have leather in my RST btw, it's an option. Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
  13. I'm of the same opinion of[mention=132182]msaul37[/mention], I went from a 2017 LTZ to an rst. Lost a moon roof and cooled seats but the biggest things I use are still there. Heated steering wheel, seats, remote start, backup cam etc. Gained blind spot detection and push button start. Imo the RSTs have enough features that they pushed me out of an LTZ. I also love the 2.7 and the body colored bumpers. Way too much chrome for my tastes in the LTZ. Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
  14. I stand corrected Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
  15. Pretty good watch, his EPA numbers on the 5.3 are a little skewed I think, I'm assuming the only version rated at 24mpg hwy is probably a single or double cab 2wd and I'm pretty sure you can't get a 2.7 in that low of a trim level. Really cool technology.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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