Jump to content

2015 Silverado / Sierra 1500


Recommended Posts

Posted

so how many gears will the new tranny have, 8, 9 or 10?

 

they are in the process of launching an 8 speed rear wheel drive transmission right now. So, I'd assume 8.

  • Replies 139
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted

 

By what I've heard, the casting plant in Bedford has started full production on 8 speed rear wheel drive cases, and that Toldedo Transmission is suppose to start full production runs on them by the end of the month.

 

 

Don't know anything about an 8 speed tranny, unless they have done an engineering change and shortened it up a gear or two? Haven't even heard they are building one. We send several parts to Toledo Transmission and Silao Transmission EVERY DAY. Unless they are using all old parts for this 8 speed transmission, or have a completely different supplier, which I doubt, then it aint happening. We have had tooling built for the 2016 and 2017 model years for around a year now, and have made limited runs for the new 9 and 10 speed transmissions that GM and Ford are jointly working on. We are supplying around 15 new parts #'s for these transmissions, and we're still sending what we have been for the last several years.

 

I'm quite happy with my 6 speed transmission. Believe it or not, I got 28.2 MPG over a 19 mile stretch between 2 towns today on a rural 55 MPH highway. 27.0 MPG for the last 25 miles, and 26.8 MPG for the 25.6 miles when I parked in my garage. And no it is not down hill, it is flat, with a slight tailwind. Can't believe it took me 8 months of ownership to crack the code, but we had a long hard cold winter, so cut me some slack. Going to be even more fun now. If you want to know the secret, ask Won_Hunglo, he knows everything!

Posted

To me this seems like good news and bad news. I suppose the fact they will react to slugish sales and make some changes after just one year is a good thing (for me, who still has a 2012) but you really have to feel for the people that pulled the trigger on the 14. It must be a frustrating situation to be in. Thanks for effing the most loyal (early adopters) customers...

 

At the launch announcements Dec. 2013 they flat out stated that the K2XX trucks would be updated often. Now that Ram flushed their 8,000 diesels out in March, they sold more than Chevrolet for the month& the media is making it well known. But not seeing this as a screwing of the customer.

Posted

 

 

Don't know anything about an 8 speed tranny, unless they have done an engineering change and shortened it up a gear or two? Haven't even heard they are building one. We send several parts to Toledo Transmission and Silao Transmission EVERY DAY. Unless they are using all old parts for this 8 speed transmission, or have a completely different supplier, which I doubt, then it aint happening. We have had tooling built for the 2016 and 2017 model years for around a year now, and have made limited runs for the new 9 and 10 speed transmissions that GM and Ford are jointly working on. We are supplying around 15 new parts #'s for these transmissions, and we're still sending what we have been for the last several years.

 

I'm quite happy with my 6 speed transmission. Believe it or not, I got 28.2 MPG over a 19 mile stretch between 2 towns today on a rural 55 MPH highway. 27.0 MPG for the last 25 miles, and 26.8 MPG for the 25.6 miles when I parked in my garage. And no it is not down hill, it is flat, with a slight tailwind. Can't believe it took me 8 months of ownership to crack the code, but we had a long hard cold winter, so cut me some slack. Going to be even more fun now. If you want to know the secret, ask Won_Hunglo, he knows everything!

 

You mean this 8 speed?

 

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/04/saturation-dive-the-gm-8l90-transmission/

 

This is for the RWD cars, so it's only a matter of time before it trickles through the line up. GM has a patent that was filed for it in 2009, so they would have been working on this for over 5 years now:

 

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US8105196.pdf

Posted

 

You mean this 8 speed?

 

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/04/saturation-dive-the-gm-8l90-transmission/

 

This is for the RWD cars, so it's only a matter of time before it trickles through the line up. GM has a patent that was filed for it in 2009, so they would have been working on this for over 5 years now:

 

https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/pdfs/US8105196.pdf

 

 

Good find Dan. That transmission is going in the Corvette. I was under the assumption we were talking trucks, as in light duty 1500's?

 

The 9 speed transmissions are for FWD cars, the 10 speed transmissions are for trucks, SUV's, and possibly some cars.

Posted

 

 

 

Good find Dan. That transmission is going in the Corvette. I was under the assumption we were talking trucks, as in light duty 1500's?

 

The 9 speed transmissions are for FWD cars, the 10 speed transmissions are for trucks, SUV's, and possibly some cars.

 

My point is that in the past 15 years, when has there been a big difference between the transmission found in the RWD cars vs the transmission found in the half ton trucks? The trucks, camaros and the corvettes had the 4L60E, the trucks, camaros, corvettes and cadillacs all eventually got the 6L80E. And now we're seeing the 8L90E which definitely has the torque rating to survive in these vehicles. It just wouldn't surprise me if this pops up in the next year as the response to GM/Dodge. It's definitely available and GM is ramping up production quickly. It's definitely a lot further long than the rumoured 10 speed and I don't know if GM can accord to wait that long.

Posted

 

 

Don't know anything about an 8 speed tranny, unless they have done an engineering change and shortened it up a gear or two? Haven't even heard they are building one. We send several parts to Toledo Transmission and Silao Transmission EVERY DAY. Unless they are using all old parts for this 8 speed transmission, or have a completely different supplier, which I doubt, then it aint happening. We have had tooling built for the 2016 and 2017 model years for around a year now, and have made limited runs for the new 9 and 10 speed transmissions that GM and Ford are jointly working on. We are supplying around 15 new parts #'s for these transmissions, and we're still sending what we have been for the last several years.

 

I think above posters have already replied with good info.

 

I got my info from a brief "business update" presentation from Jim Glynn (GM N. America VP of Labor Relations), that I saw last week. Showed Bedford and Toldedo were completing the 8 speed rear wheel drive launch. It didn't touch on what vehicles they were going in though. I assume they'll make it to the trucks though, because there aren't that many rear wheel drive cars.

Posted

If the 8sp is gonna go in the 15's, then I am really glad I got a late 14. Took GM years to get the 6sp even close to working OK. I had one of the first one's in a '07 S-D, and let me tell you it sucked bad. The '11 SD was better but I still hated it. This 6.2-6sp combo for 14 finally works. Now I'm wondering if CAFE handcuffed GM into short shifting the 900's on purpose. The 900 6sp wouldn't even downshift right, had to keep pushing and pushing than, bam, down two gears and off to the races you went, then you had to get back out of it. Sucked................

So if the 8sp rollout is anything similar to the 6sp rollout, be careful.

Posted

GM has never put the new trans in the trucks first so I expect we'll see this do duty in the RWD cars first. The 6-speed was in the last Vette before anything else. Aside from being the halo car for new tech they use it to prove out the design before installing it in their money makers. I was honestly surprised the trucks got direct injection first.

 

 

And CAFE is absolutely why all new transmissions drive like crap.

Posted

I don't see the Sierra changing as much as the Silverado if at all. Look at the 1999 Sierra and it looked the same at the end in 2006. Form what I can tell the 07 to 13 look the same too. Now look at the Silverado, 1999 to 2002 looked the same then a big change for 2003 and then some slight hood height changes from there until the end. I find from talking to others and have heard from the dealer that most people dislike the look of the Silverado and are happy or at least content with the look of the Sierra. Being a 2014 owner of first a silverado and now a Sierra I can say I would be somewhat disappointed if GM came out with a nicer looking 15 but I would rather see that then a company that just sits on their hands and hopes people start to like like the look of it. I know this would never happen but if the new 1500 trucks looked like the 2015 Colorado the sale numbers would be much better IMO.

Posted

The 99 to 07 GMT800 Silverado looked the best. It'd be nice to get back to that.

Posted

Lets hope the Sierra drops the dumb looking plastic molding around the wheel wells. What were they thinking? I saw a white diamond Denali the other day and those moldings look cheap.

 

My opinion of course.

Of course you can get painted ones thru accessories to replace the black.

Posted

Of course you can get painted ones thru accessories to replace the black.

I did not know that. I think I would still prefer no moldings at all.

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,758
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Randy Ginoza
    Newest Member
    Randy Ginoza
    Joined
  • Who's Online   3 Members, 1 Anonymous, 1,864 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • I thought I would use your thread and add to it as I just did my first longer drive with my truck in the last couple of days. I drove from the Grande Prairie area of Alberta down to Edmonton and most of where I drove in the city was the ring road so fairly free flowing but a bit of stop and go as well in the city. Stayed the night and returned home and not too many stops along the way each way but every restart and certainly every cold start sets it back for fuel mileage. Why I say that is I see some people will cherry pick a fuel mileage leg after the vehicle had been warmed up driveline wise before hand and its a forgiving ( easy rolling drive leg for example ) and call that their fuel mileage which can give a false perception of reality. I was not heavily loaded at all but never the less the flip bak cover, rubber bed mat, various tools etc and extra jerry cans of fuel all way up to a few hundred pounds of dead weight so its not an empty truck. The cold inflation tire pressures are set more near the freezing point so once they are warmed up driving I was showing 45 front and over 40 rear and realize high inflation pressures would help a little in fuel mileage but certainly not the ride on our crap sections of highway. The weather was good so was not raining as that can really drag mileage down, in fact I had a bit of a tail wind on average driving home. Most people on here would never have driven on that freeway to visualize it but its got a fair bit of rolling type of landscape with numerous river valleys. For the most part I had it on cruise set to 62 although kicking it off if I caught it in time before it started down shifting and self braking going down the grades. Most of the more substantial grades its shifting into 7th I believe as 8th just doesn't have it. Total distance round trip was 643 miles and my overall average and I did refuel three times in all, figured out to 17.65 miles per US gallon. My best fuel mileage section refuel within all of this figured out to 18.46 and these are all hand calculated figures. I find if anything that the trucks computer can be over optimistic, sometimes its pretty close but other times its stretching it. On paper persay in theory the truck would have just about made it on fumes for that whole drive without refueling once.    Which made me think of the topic thread of the wonder if these trucks could do 20 mpg and that is a good question, certainly would have to be on an easy going flat highway, no head wind, the right temperature, not packing around a bunch of dead weight and puttering along even slower than I was I would suspect and going steady and not stopping to smell the flowers or take a piss !. It probably is possible but not without effort to attain that with the wind resistance and weight of these trucks. Of course on my drive most people are passing me if they have the power as per loaded highway tractors, never mind a lot of speedy vehicles but the speed limit is 68 and most are at or well over that. 
    • Monday looks like a good day for the dealer to test an ac issue. Hopefully it all turns out good.
    • Paid $2.72 for E85 today.
    • Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...