Jump to content

test drove a 2013 6.0 2500 the other day


Recommended Posts

I have a boat that ways 6500-6800lbs lake ready. I was curious if I wanted to upgrade to a 2500, but I dont feel that I want a diesel. i was curious if moving to gas 2500 would make a difference so I decided to drive and see if it would be worth the change. My truck doesn't struggle with the load of hte boat at all. I am just looking for more capacity and lets face it, I just needed an excuse to look at something new. Short answer: heck no.

 

I have a 2011 with 6.2L and wanted to see how the 6.0L in the 2500 would compare. My truck has the 3.42 rear. The 2500 had 3.73 rear. Both are z71 4x4.

 

I liked the low end grunt of the 6.0, but I think it was due to the gearing and not the engine. At highway speeds, the 6.2 was the obvious winner here. Acceleration was nothing like the 6.2L. The 6.0 seemed to hunt in and out of OD as well. This hunting could be becuase the transmission hasn't adapted to my driving style. The 6.0 has some power, but it wasn't as effortless as the 6.2. I think the added weight of the truck just kindof takes the life out of the engine.

 

I really like the taller stance, the beefier suspension, and the brakes were awesome. Brakes were much better than my current truck (I have 4 wheel disc, standard with the 6.2).

 

The cabin was quieter on the 2500. I have not had the cabin vent TSB applied to my truck yet, but I will now after hearing how much difference it makes.

 

Overall, i liked the 2500, but for my needs I feel that the 1500 with 6.2 is just too good for my needs and it wouldn't be worth trading at this time. Your needs may vary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Took a 2500 Denali on a 3000 mile round trip pulling a 16x20 enclosed trailer with 2 Harley s, road king and a street glide Did the trip last year in my 1500 6.2. I expected a lot more from the 2500. Mine pulled just as good and actually got better MPG's! The 2500 did fell a little more sure footed tho. Unloaded its night and day difference tho. I'm not looking to upgrade to a 2500 any time soon.Interior in my SLT was just as comfortable as the Denali.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I order trucks for a dealership in Alabama. I always order the gas HDs with the 4.10 ratio. It raises the towing capacity to 13,000 lbs., while the 3.73 is only rated for about 9,500 lbs. I bet you would get more satisfaction from the performance of the 4.10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish the GMT900's were higher up like a 2500.. I personally would rather have the beefier suspension and taller ride height and a 6.0 then a 1500 with a 6.2 because of that

 

i have driven and been in many GMT900 1500's and they feel small and really low to me. IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally would rather have the beefier suspension and taller ride height and a 6.0 then a 1500 with a 6.2

One of my deciding factors to get a 2500. Sturdy ride, nice height, great frame strength.

 

Couldn't see spending same money and still be in a 1500

 

Matt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of my deciding factors to get a 2500. Sturdy ride, nice height, great frame strength.

 

Couldn't see spending same money and still be in a 1500

 

Matt

 

I'd be curious if that's true. From what I've read, the daily mpg of the 1500/6.2 is much better than the HD/6.0. If ownership cost is the same, then I'd agree that the HD is much more truck for the $$... but I've made the assumption that that there's a significant difference between them, mostly due to fuel economy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I was gonna get a 2500, I'd go with the Duramax.

i would too, but the premium cost of the dmax over a gasser is crazy. not to mention the cost of fuel.

 

 

After having 3 1/2 ton series trucks and driving them all to 140,000+ miles, I feel that a 2500 would have a lower cost of ownership in the long run due to the fact that the trannys and front end parts are a lot stronger. IMO

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure how significant especially if you factor in the need for premium in the 6.2. I know many guys don't but it does call for it

 

Matt

 

i agree with that.. i dont know why they would make the engine require premium.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i agree with that.. i dont know why they would make the engine require premium.

 

I have run 87 a few times in the past.... didn't like it. Gas mileage drops and it feels sluggish. I run only 91 or 93 and have more fun and better gas mileage. I couldn't imagine running it with e85.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    246.7k
    Total Topics
    2.6m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    334,634
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    CRAZY FRANK 79
    Newest Member
    CRAZY FRANK 79
    Joined
  • Who's Online   3 Members, 0 Anonymous, 426 Guests (See full list)



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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