I know we all feel trucks are getting worse and worse yada yada, but please give the engineers some credit for thinking through that very same question and beefing up the starter + battery appropriately. That is literally the easiest problem to solve in the whole start/stop feature.
I have Cooper AT3's on my Jeep GC. They are _loud_. Like really bad, around 65 km/h they hit a certain frequency where the drone just gets in my ears (like a dump truck going buy) and sits there and magnifies until I speed up or slow down. They have decent traction off road, are really bad in the slimy snow even though they're winter rated. When the temperature gets to just above freezing, and then below (Canadian cold!) they hit bumps hard, like the rubber has turned into hard plastic. The first 20K was ok, no real noise, but as they wear the sound just gets worse and worse. I'm counting the days until I either trade my Jeep for a 1500 or replace the tires. I give them 2 out of 5; 2 points for the offroad traction and the looks, everything else about them sucks in every way. Just my opinion.
Why? Every car and truck out there has tons of electrical components. I'm happy to hear well reasoned arguments, but just throwing that out there like you did without any proof or elaboration is not helpful.
I've test driven two 1500's that were new, and each time I got out I smelled that sort of smell; might just be left over grease/oil that comes from new parts getting hot and burning it off. Same thing when buying a new oven or microwave etc.
I know lots of people think that this engine is stressed 100% all the time; but there was that video some comments back where the engineer talks about how they strengthened the motor just like they would a diesel; ie, if you're not concerned about stressing a diesel (which they all have turbos) then don't stress about this one either. I dunno. Just too new for me I think. Would love to drive one pulling a 6000 pound trailer just to know what it can do.
I suspect that little 2.7 gets better MPG than EPA. TFL Truck tested it and got like 25MPG on their Highway loop. I'm seriously considering it, but the reports of turbo lag at highway speeds does not bode well. I plan on pulling a trailer, nothing more than 5 to 6 thousand pounds so it would work there, but I don't know. My gut tells me to let them work out the hiccups in the motor first, and fix that lag issue before I'd consider owning one in a truck I hope to keep 10 years. The 5.3 is not that powerful compared to competition, but it's bullet proof for the most part.
I don't own a 1500 (yet?!) but from what I've read, it's not max tow vs z71, it's tire vs tire. The 18's are a better ride than the 22 which can feel harsh at times and cause suspension jiggles.
I'm looking into a 2019; and believe me, I'd purchase the 6.2 in a heartbeat and I'm decades away from retirement. My problem with GM (and they are very stupid in this since it pushes me towards RAM instead) is that I can't put the 6.2 in "my" truck. You need LTZ trim, and/or some huge expensive package first, before they allow you to drop the 6.2. As an example; the truck I want with a 5.3, is about 48K (Canadian), both silverado and sierra come to roughly this price with my features (using "build and price on the website). If I switch to a 6.2, it bumps me up to low 60's somewhere. So why does that push me towards RAM? Because the RAM with equivalent feature set is only 45K CAD, and that comes with the 5.7, and after test driving both back to back, there is no doubt that the RAM has a very noticeable gain in power over the 5.3. I have no doubt the 6.2 will be even more improvement over the hemi, but I'm just not paying that, sorry GM. Just my 2 cents.
lol, every fanboy likes to accuse a reviewer of being "biased" just because they don't pick "your" truck. Here's the thing, Andre personally drives a Hummer (GMC), Nathan is really into RAM power wagons ("powerwagon don't care") and loves the Tacoma (Toyota), Roman just bought a company Rebel (RAM), Tommy is into Jeeps and Land Rovers (and they own both in the company). Kent and Andre have been on record so often reviewing and liking features (engines) of the new trucks. So. I'm not seeing the Ford bias here, maverick. Don't be so sensitive.
That's not how it works. The fuel FILTER filters out any sediment that might accumulate in your tank. It never gets to your engine regardless of how dirty your tank is. That's the whole purpose of the filter. Once the sediment is in your tank, it doesn't come out unless you vacum it out or flush it with the filter off.
Back up the truck there Grumpy. Here is a link to your first post which I originally responded to: The guy you responded to said MT was getting their butt kicked by youtube channels like TFL Truck, which you then outright dismissed (read that post again) as useless. A little snippet from that: I'm simply telling you, that MANY people value TFL truck MORE than a tech paper, by far, because for a start tech papers are very hard to digest if your not into specs (like most people) and capable of understanding them, and secondly specs really tell you shit; it's the experience that matters, whether it's driving a loaded truck up a hill, or purchasing your next computer (CPU is irrelevant in most use cases) etc etc. Specs require a LOT of education and knowledge to make an informed choice, and they can also be fudged (EPA and/or tow ratings anyone?) A review (youtube or other) which does a ton of comparison, in real world conditions, is infinitely more valuable to the vast majority of people. This will be my last post on this because I feel you're going in circles.
I get your point about too many fake reviewers, I really do. But that doesn't take away from the fact that there are a number of high quality reviewers as well. At the end of the day, specs and papers are meaningless to me. They really are. You can read all the tech papers you want, but the proof is in the pudding. How does it actually drive. Case in point, TFL Truck did a comparison on youtube with the big three 1 ton trucks. The chevy had the lowest tow rating and engine torque, so they used a trailer set to the Chevy's max, then drove the 3 trucks with the same trailer, up the Eisenhower Tunnel and back down again. This is a strenuous test, it takes about 8 mins one way at highway speeds, uphill the whole way at a good slope. Guess which truck performed best, and was the most stable ride? The chevy. The specs would have you believe the Ford or Ram should have won, but when they actually drove all 3, the result proved otherwise. Another example; the ram 1500 v8 is supposed to get like 21 MPG hyw or something like that; they (TFL Truck) tested it several times (rebel) and got around 17 or so. Third example; the chevy 2.7 turbo is supposed to get 22 or 23 MPG hyw, TFL tested it (exact same loop as they always use) and got 25 MPG. That's real world testing. That means more to me then all the specs and details you can possibly find in some tech paper. At the end of the day, you and I will not agree because we value different approaches. I'm just saying you should not discard a youtube review simply because it's not a tech paper. There is very high quality content there, and it's not that hard to figure out which sources are good and which are blowing hot air in an echo chamber.
Most OnlineNewest Member
Who's Online 148 Members, 2 Anonymous, 895 Guests (See full list)
- SILVER SLED
- Andy Chabot
- mn camper guy
- Mike GMC
- CAE AT4
- All Terrain
- L86 All Terrain
- C/K Man
- Ed S
- f8l vnm
- @[email protected]
- Kade McGinn
- Ben Lawson
- kickass audio