Jump to content

Power Numbers


CapitalTruck

Recommended Posts

Posted

I thought I read somewhere that they were going to put a 6.2 iron block in the HDs. Did I just make that up?

  • Replies 35
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted

I too would like to see a smaller diesel on the 1/2 tons.

Posted

I thought I read somewhere that they were going to put a 6.2 iron block in the HDs. Did I just make that up?

I was thinking the same thing. I am pretty sure I saw something about the HDs were getting the 6.2 in 2014. With the direct injection mpg numbers and HP should be up.

Posted

I was thinking the same thing. I am pretty sure I saw something about the HDs were getting the 6.2 in 2014. With the direct injection mpg numbers and HP should be up.

 

Im really hoping that they can get the MPG up there like my old 96 with the Vortec 350. I got 17mpg out of that 3/4 ton, but only ever got 14.5 out of my 06 with the 6.0 gas guzzler. Ide be happy with anything over 15. i havent gotten over 15 mpg out of my last 3 trucks, but one had a 6.0L, and the other two had oversized tires and lifts.

 

 

How awesome would it be to get a 2500 that can get 20mpg.

Posted

Yeah I would like a HD with the 6.2 in it for hauling hay in from the fields and pulling the GN with cattle to the sale barn. My pulling is mostly slow speeds in and out of fields where no engine is going to get good MPG. But if it could get 20 mpg empty on the highway they would sell a ton of them.

Posted

I thought I read somewhere that they were going to put a 6.2 iron block in the HDs. Did I just make that up?

 

I read that somewhere too.

Posted

I read that somewhere too.

 

 

I was thinking the same thing. I am pretty sure I saw something about the HDs were getting the 6.2 in 2014. With the direct injection mpg numbers and HP should be up.

 

 

I knew I wasnt crazy.

Posted

Well that's up for debate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:jester:

 

 

You are probably right.

  • 4 weeks later...
Posted

I hope gm beats the 5.0 with the 5.3 I wanna see about 375hp from it and torque close to that too.

+1

Posted

It would be sweet if they got the V-6 a good amount of power that could dust the 5.0 lol, Ford would be on the panic then, probably would lead them to throw some turbo's on their trucks as a standard. Darn that GM!!!! ;)

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted

I was close on my torque guess, they actually exceed it by 8lb/ft and I was 20hp high on my hopes for the 5.3.

Archived

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

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Sure, but they do have some affordable options like the Trax, Trailblazer, Envista, and Encore. Some of these have a cheaper base price than the Civic, though the fuel economy isn’t as high. The main problem is that people WANT the highest trim with all the goodies and finance for like 7 years. That’s how ppl “afford” the more expensive vehicles. 
    • Holy s**t - not much of a parts thrower you say? You BLASTED that thing with the parts cannon!  You'd have been probably $1,000 ahead if you had just brought it to a competent shop rather than shotgunning a bunch of parts it clearly didn't need.   Just FYI - oil additives are really, REALLY good at ONE thing ... and that's emptying your wallet. They're ALL useless gimmicks.   If that has the L94 or L99, then #7 is an AFM cylinder. I'd suspect a failed lifter in that case.   If you leaned on wiring, sensors, and/or connectors while changing the oil, you'll have to check all that to be sure pins didn't get pulled out, connectors broken, etc.. Old wire loom that was barely adequate when new is certainly brittle by year 19 - make sure wires aren't chaffed and shorting out somewhere where you might have leaned. or supported yourself on it.   If your a mechanic, why didn't you just find out what you were missing and troubleshoot from there??  TIMED spark, fuel PSI / injector pulse, air, compression.  Can't make ANY money going the parts cannon route.
    • LOL! Are you joking?? That wax SUCKS! 100% gimmick made to "look" good.    After just TWO winters I had severe surface rusting in patches over 90% of the frame. Only reason it looks great in the pics is because I SATURATED the frame every single fall with used motor oil for 14 of the 16 years I owned it. Otherwise it would've been sent to the crusher 8 years earlier with the speed it was rusting prior!    I sold that POS 3 years ago. Was a gigantic headache the second it rolled off the showroom floor. Brakes pulsated on the TEST DRIVE. Door trim fell off the 1st week! Interior squeaked and rattled, and the drivetrain clunked after 2k miles. 4x4 switch failed shortly after. Front end - ball joints, struts, hub bearings - all failed between 38k-50k. Engine started burning oil at 50k. Rear and and transmission failed before 100k. Nothing but problems, and frustration with the piss-poor engineering designed to make you give up. Well, it worked! Nothing on that truck was easy to remove ... except the wheels. They haven't figured out how to screw that up yet. Give 'em time ...   I won't make that mistake again. EVER.   Such fond memories ... https://postimg.cc/K1qf23tS  https://postimg.cc/gallery/X02z64J  https://postimg.cc/gallery/mHSRXZv  https://postimg.cc/gallery/D4mMRfL
    • Different monitors do their test only under conditions specific to that monitor.  you MIGHT find the drive cycle conditions for the monitor that isn't ready on this site: https://lemon-manuals.la/   If it's not there, then it should be on alldata.com for your truck, but it requires a paid subscription.   And you need to know which specific monitor isn't ready.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...