6.0 vs. 8.1liter engine

ATMINF · March 4, 2013

It's not really a problem. It is just how the motor runs. Remember even the gen 1 & 2 small blocks used about a quart every 3000 miles.

rune · March 4, 2013

I picked up a 06 8.1 in November and have put close to 11k miles on it since then. Drove it from WA to GA, and changed the oil from dino to synthetic. It had burned maybe .5 quart in 4000 miles. I then turned around and drove from GA back to WA. I now have close to 7k on the Mobil 1 and am not even down 1 quart. I really think it's hit or miss on if you get an oil burner. I suspect a lot of it comes from the early years when GM had a lot of slop and is less after they made the changes in 03(?). I did the back and forth on the 6.0 vs 8.1, and ultimately decided the difference in fuel economy was so minimal that I wanted to be able to tow and not know the trailer was back there.

manley · March 4, 2013

For what it's worth, my Dad has an '02 with the 8.1 & the Allison transmission.

It's a strong engine, no doubt. However, the transmission is loud, whiny, and clunky.

I'm not a fan, for that reason. He's carried it to the dealer & to a transmission shop, and they have told him it is "normal."

I don't buy it, and am not a fan...

Just my $0.02.

scott

ATMINF · March 4, 2013

My 4L80 is loud, whiny(straight cut gears),and clunky,but since its a 3/4ton truck and not a Caddy I expected that. What were your Dad's expectations? (this is a question, not trying to be a smart butt). Is this the first HD truck, or is it more hard shifting that other HD trucks that he has owned? I know I have had others that owned 1/2ton trucks comment on the ride & firmness of my truck, but when I explained it they understood.

The reason the Trannys are like that is because the firm shifts = less slipping, reduced wear/heat, and the gear cuts make the overall package more robust. Granted would I like better if it was smoother? Maybe? but part of getting the strenght, is the trade-off of soft shifts. Hope this explians it.

memory1 · March 4, 2013

Thanks for all the help, guys.

Here are the two trucks I am interested in right now. I hope to test drive them in the next day or two.

http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?zip=47172&endYear=2007&modelCode1=CHEVC25&showcaseOwnerId=4672542&startYear=1999&makeCode1=CHEV&sellerTypes=b&searchRadius=10&maxPrice=22000&bodyStyleCodes=TRUCKS&mmt=[CHEV[CHEVC25[]][]]&listingId=339595483&listingIndex=3&Log=0

http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/vehicledetails.xhtml?zip=47172&endYear=2007&modelCode1=CHEVC25&showcaseOwnerId=4672542&startYear=2000&makeCode1=CHEV&sellerTypes=b&numRecords=100&searchRadius=100&maxPrice=20000&bodyStyleCodes=TRUCKS&mmt=[CHEV[CHEVC25[]][]]&listingId=338397459&Log=0

Both of these trucks are close to identical. The first one has the 6.0 and the second one has the 8.1. Both are CCSB and the first truck is 2 years newer with a few more miles.

Edited March 4, 2013 by memory1

dewfpo · March 4, 2013

I picked up a 06 8.1 in November and have put close to 11k miles on it since then. Drove it from WA to GA, and changed the oil from dino to synthetic. It had burned maybe .5 quart in 4000 miles. I then turned around and drove from GA back to WA. I now have close to 7k on the Mobil 1 and am not even down 1 quart. I really think it's hit or miss on if you get an oil burner. I suspect a lot of it comes from the early years when GM had a lot of slop and is less after they made the changes in 03(?). I did the back and forth on the 6.0 vs 8.1, and ultimately decided the difference in fuel economy was so minimal that I wanted to be able to tow and not know the trailer was back there.

I heard they made changes to the intake manifold bolts in the 2004 MY to solve this problem. Mine doesn't use much oil either and it's a '05.

DEWFPO

becker87 · March 5, 2013

I would go with the 2003, soley for the color and fewer miles.

sillywillie07 · March 5, 2013

http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/showthread.php?t=296939 this is some info on the 8.1l

Edited March 5, 2013 by willie 07

memory1 · March 5, 2013

I would go with the 2003, soley for the color and fewer miles.

I was thinking the exact same thing. I don't know what it is but the white color does not do it for me, just to plain.

Hopefully I will go test drive them tomorrow and find out more details.

Edited March 5, 2013 by memory1

ATMINF · March 5, 2013

I would go with the white one, it does have more miles, but it does not look like it was used to tow a gooseneck or 5th wheel. So it probably only towed "medium" heavy loads 6000-10,000. While the 2003 has a gooseneck ball in the bed, and probably used hard to tow heavy loads. Granted that's just a guess, but most bumper towing is max around 10k, where as a gooseneck and 5th wheel goes up to 16,000. Both trucks are capable of towing up to 16K in the gooseneck/5th wheel configuration, and bumper pull up to 12k.

memory1 · March 5, 2013

Hopefully I will get to go tomorrow to look at them and try to find out what these trucks were used for.

Are you sure both trucks can pull the same amount? It looks like the maroon one has a heavy duty trailering package and heavier springs and the white one does not have that according to the specs. The heavy duty trailering package was another thing I liked.

One thing that concerns me is the maroon one was in an accident according to carfax. It looks like it just had damage to the right rear.

One thing I don't understand. Why are some carfax reports free and others you have to pay for?

I found another truck I am interested in. http://louisville.craigslist.org/ctd/3639796374.html

This one does have a few more miles but is also a little cheaper. Is there a big difference between Chevy and GMC?

Edited March 5, 2013 by memory1

kstruckcountry · March 5, 2013

Basically no difference between Chevy and GMC. Most people stay away from vehicles with 5th wheel hitches and overload springs because those are generally trucks that have been used the hardest. However, since the mileage is decent I wouldn't worry about it too much if everything is in order. I've seen babied low mile trucks have tons of issues, and beat to hell work trucks that run fine. A lot is luck.

Edited March 5, 2013 by kstruckcountry

Chris · March 5, 2013

GMC usually runs a little more expansive new. I prefer the look of the GMC. But that particular try l looks like a good deal. Decent miles on it. Doesn't hurt to go look at it and ask questions

Sent from my DROID RAZR MAXX using Xparent Red Tapatalk 2

rune · March 5, 2013

Personally I would try and hold out for an 06 with the 6speed.

becker87 · March 5, 2013

I would go with the white one, it does have more miles, but it does not look like it was used to tow a gooseneck or 5th wheel. So it probably only towed "medium" heavy loads 6000-10,000. While the 2003 has a gooseneck ball in the bed, and probably used hard to tow heavy loads. Granted that's just a guess, but most bumper towing is max around 10k, where as a gooseneck and 5th wheel goes up to 16,000. Both trucks are capable of towing up to 16K in the gooseneck/5th wheel configuration, and bumper pull up to 12k.

Good point, I guess the moral of this thread is go drive them both, get the one that seems to be in better shape.