Choice of rear axle ratio would you pick?

[Joe_K]

Honestly learn how to read or do better at skimming. My trucks are 3/4 tons... and all run 6 liters. A 1500hd has a 6 liter... and a 4l80e and 8 lug axles lol. I don't work all of mine either... but having a truck that's actually legally useful is kinda nice.... and then I have a car which quite frankly is terrible on fuel anyway. Everything serves a purpose down to the 6 cylinder trucks.... like fleet parts haulers. That never was up for debate here...

 

Sorry bout that, didn't realize you had 3/4 tons. I kinda look at 1500's as cars with a bed. If I ever get a big travel trailer or toy hauler I'd step up to a 2500. As mentioned before, everybody has different uses for a truck, that's why there is so many different options.

[Badass69]

 

Sorry bout that, didn't realize you had 3/4 tons. I kinda look at 1500's as cars with a bed. If I ever get a big travel trailer or toy hauler I'd step up to a 2500. As mentioned before, everybody has different uses for a truck, that's why there is so many different options.

 

Agreed

[Chris]

Honestly learn how to read or do better at skimming. My trucks are 3/4 tons... and all run 6 liters. A 1500hd has a 6 liter... and a 4l80e and 8 lug axles lol. I don't work all of mine either... but having a truck that's actually legally useful is kinda nice.... and then I have a car which quite frankly is terrible on fuel anyway. Everything serves a purpose down to the 6 cylinder trucks.... like fleet parts haulers. That never was up for debate here...

 

Sorry bout that, didn't realize you had 3/4 tons. I kinda look at 1500's as cars with a bed. If I ever get a big travel trailer or toy hauler I'd step up to a 2500. As mentioned before, everybody has different uses for a truck, that's why there is so many different options.

 

My 1500 tows the 26' toy hauler

 

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S4 using Tapatalk 4

 

 

[Prokopchuk_9]

According to some nobody on a Gm truck site... yeah... like the 6.2 is such a screamer... 15 second turd like any other. How many Tundras have you lined up against 6.2s exactly. .. oh that's right... none. Cool story bud.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL

[blckthree]

I test drove two Silverados today, one 3.08 and the other 3.42, both truck performed well, neither of them was shifting on the hills in the road like my Avalanche did. That said, I liked the 3.42 better. It had a better feel accelerating from a dead stop and had a better feel when accelerating from 60-80mph. I decided on the 3.42 and will take delviery late next week!

 

Thanks to all who have given their thoughts and opinions on the gear ratio.

 

Mike

[yukon25008.1]

3:73 or 4:10 with stock tires, And 4:56,s with 33-35" tires!

[BringTheRain403]

Who says 3.08's don't hurt the truck...

 

 

[jtenney]

Thread is pretty much dead but I found it interesting. On the original topic I did this analysis to see how the 6spd/3.08 compares to the 4spd/4.10. I also put the 6spd/3.42 in there for comparison. (For all you engineers out there, yes there are a bunch of assumptions in here, nothing crazy.)

 

The downshift case looks a little bit different. The transmission won't downshift into an engine speed of 5500 rpm. Maybe into 5000 rpm max. Actually, if somebody knows the max rpm after downshift let me know I will make another graph as a reference.

Jeff

[DanielAcosta]

Short answer: I drove a dozen trucks before buying and found the shift feel at lower speeds to be better with the 3.42 than the 3.08. I also knew I would be running 34" tires, so my 3.42 actually feels like 31.56/34.07*3.42=3.17. Finally, supposedly the GM engineers making presentations at the dealers stated the 3.42 was the best combination for power/hauling/towing/fuel economy of the three rear ends available, which makes sense if you look at the specifications: there is a big jump in payload and towing capacity going from the 3.08 to the 3.42, and a smaller incremental jump going to the 3.73.

 

So all things considered I bought a 3.42, I'm running 34" tires which effectively gives me a 3.17, and it drives fine. Overall average after 9,000 miles is 20. The best I've seen on a trip is 22 cruising at 78 from Albuquerque to Phoenix. Since the EPA for the 5.3 4x4 is 16/22, I'm happy. And yes, I've seen the big numbers on the DIC for 25 and even 50 mile stretches, but the number that really counts is the rolling average and max for 400 miles, and for that mine sits at 20/22. I'm also filling up each tank at about 460 miles with 3 gallons left, which I think is fabulous range. My 07 Tundra only went about 330 miles on a tank.

 

Conclusion: if you're keeping stock tires and don't plan on big loads, the 3.08 should be fine and will give you the best mileage.

If you're going oversize on the tires, you should probably step up to at least the 3.42.

If you're looking for max payload or are going to do a lot of towing, then by all means the 3.73.

 

It's nice to have a choice. My 07 Tundra with the 5.7 had a hair trigger throttle and felt like a rocket off the line, and there was no choice on the rear end. Yes, it was fun, but in the long run I probably would have been happy with a little less sensitive throttle and better economy (15 overall after 85K miles). The 14 Sierra's throttle felt way too soft at first coming from the Tundra, but I'm used to it now and definitely enjoying the 33% better fuel economy. The Sierra still moves when you put your foot into it and rides much more smoothly than the Tundra.

[rippinit]

Agreed

 

The 2500 would be nice for towing...if you get the Duramax. But putting down $65K for a '15 2500 isn't in the cards. I tow a 7000 lb toy hauler about 10 -12 times a year with a half-ton (Tundra) and it does fine (except for having to fill up every 175 miles). I don't see the need - personally - for a 3/4-ton truck if the other 350 days a year I have zero need for it. I would look at a '15 2500 if they were going to put the 6.2 engine in it, but apparently they are sticking with the old 6-liter and wont offer the new 6.2. That old 6-liter actually has less hp and torque than my 07' Tundra. Yeah, you can get the 4.10 gears to up the towing capacity, but not having the 6.2 as an option was a deal breaker. Still hoping to see a '14 Silverado with the 6.2 and 3.73 rear end, but my dealer has no idea when they will see a single truck with the 6.2. He guessed the end of the year.

[rippinit]

Short answer: I drove a dozen trucks before buying and found the shift feel at lower speeds to be better with the 3.42 than the 3.08. I also knew I would be running 34" tires, so my 3.42 actually feels like 31.56/34.07*3.42=3.17. Finally, supposedly the GM engineers making presentations at the dealers stated the 3.42 was the best combination for power/hauling/towing/fuel economy of the three rear ends available, which makes sense if you look at the specifications: there is a big jump in payload and towing capacity going from the 3.08 to the 3.42, and a smaller incremental jump going to the 3.73.

 

So all things considered I bought a 3.42, I'm running 34" tires which effectively gives me a 3.17, and it drives fine. Overall average after 9,000 miles is 20. The best I've seen on a trip is 22 cruising at 78 from Albuquerque to Phoenix. Since the EPA for the 5.3 4x4 is 16/22, I'm happy. And yes, I've seen the big numbers on the DIC for 25 and even 50 mile stretches, but the number that really counts is the rolling average and max for 400 miles, and for that mine sits at 20/22. I'm also filling up each tank at about 460 miles with 3 gallons left, which I think is fabulous range. My 07 Tundra only went about 330 miles on a tank.

 

Conclusion: if you're keeping stock tires and don't plan on big loads, the 3.08 should be fine and will give you the best mileage.

If you're going oversize on the tires, you should probably step up to at least the 3.42.

If you're looking for max payload or are going to do a lot of towing, then by all means the 3.73.

 

It's nice to have a choice. My 07 Tundra with the 5.7 had a hair trigger throttle and felt like a rocket off the line, and there was no choice on the rear end. Yes, it was fun, but in the long run I probably would have been happy with a little less sensitive throttle and better economy (15 overall after 85K miles). The 14 Sierra's throttle felt way too soft at first coming from the Tundra, but I'm used to it now and definitely enjoying the 33% better fuel economy. The Sierra still moves when you put your foot into it and rides much more smoothly than the Tundra.

 

Yeah, the "soft" throttle on the '14 I drove last weekend was hard to get used to. The 5.3 felt weak off the line (it had the 3.08 rear end). I will definitely agree that it drives smoother and is quieter than the Tundra. I drove a '14 Tundra right after driving the Silverado and it definitely seems to ride better than my '07 though. Still trying to aviod the need to buy until our damn local dealer actually gets a truck with the 6.2. My guy at Toyota is offering me a nice discount on a '14 Platinum. It's very nice, but I have the itch for that 6.2.

[Jimmy W]

342 seems to be the ticket!

[fondupot]

I like the combination of power and economy with my 3.42s. works for me.

[Savagecanuck1]

I'm on my first tank of fuel with 3.42 gears and find it surprisingly torquey. Coming off a 11 duramax and an 08 with 5.3 and 4.10.comparing duramax not in the same league, no gear hunt and never a shortage of power.

[2014 Sporty Shorty]

I'm just hoping Yukon or some other company come out with 4.10's or 4.56's soon. The difference between the 3.08 or 3.42 isn't that big. I went with the 3.08 because that's what was on the lot and didn't want to have to wait months for a tiny gear bump. I'm a single cab shortbox so I'm faster than all of you anyways ; )

 

Will