6.0 gas engine

kstruckcountry · February 7, 2015

The crazy thing is, if you look at Fuelly, the pickups prior to AFM don't return any worse mileage than the ones with it. This is over hundreds of thousands of miles. Maybe simplicity counts for something. The 6.0 (and Duramax and Allison) are very proven setups, regardless of their "age". We'll see how the DI motors stack up economy (and reliability) wise over time.

Agree on the .30-06, I'd rather have my trusty ought six than whatever tacticool caliber is in style any given month.

Cowpie · February 8, 2015

Oh, if they would just give us back the 454. I have never owned a 454 that I didn't like. One heavy motor, but darn near bomb proof.

BigKahuna · February 19, 2015

I'm averaging 16.5mpg combination with my 14 1500 denali cc 4x4 6.2, best tank was 19.9 so far.

I had a 02 2500hd 4x4 6.0 which averaged around 12mpg and never got better than 15.5. A new one might do 1mpg better with the 6spd?

The only thing keeping me from buying a new 2500hd is the lack of a better gas engine. If they put the 6.2 and. 8spd in them for. 2016 I'll be buying one. If not, I'll have to pass again.

No more diesels for me, I only utilize their capabilities a handful of times per year. The rest of the time, as a daily driver, I find they are a hinderance for many reasons.

Cowpie · February 20, 2015

Lack of a better gas engine in what way? The 6.0L is tried and proven and darn near bullet proof. The newer 6.2L engines are still going thru their working out the bugs cycle of life. True, they put out more power, but what good is it if it has problems all the time. And it has the dreaded AFM thing going on which has not had a great track record. Nope, I am thru with being used as a guinea pig for GM to test out new things and see if they work. That is why I ditched my 2013 5.3L while the getting out was good. And there is nothing a 6.2L can do that a 6.0L can do better. With a cast iron block and solid internals, you strap a blower up on top and the 6.0L will have the 6.2L crying out for mercy. The L96 6.0L in the current crop of 2500's is a solid platform to build upon if one wanted to. Take a look at the marine side of things and check out the L96.

Now, it is possible they will have the AFM portion turned off on a 6.2 in a 2500, but that is about it. The internals will still be the same and subject to the same malfunctions that have been a problem with AFM for a while. As Scotty said on Star Trek.... "the more complicated the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain". If I needed more than the 6.0L can give me, then I would have gotten a Dmax. I just don't need that kind of power on a regular basis, and it is stupid to buy all that power, and the associated problems, just to use it a few times a year. Besides, I deal with diesels already to the tune of around 140,000 miles a year and roughly 20,000 gallons of diesel a year. I have very little desire to deal with them on my off time in a pickup. I don't need one to prove my machismo.

becker87 · February 20, 2015

My next truck will be a diesel. Why? Because I want one, and when I drive on the interstate I don't want to get 14 MPG. I don't tow much but when I do the diesel will be nights and day better and I am willing to put up with the issues. Now saying that I will be keeping my current truck for running around town as I don't need to be driving a $60,000 diesel to the store.

newdude · February 20, 2015

Now, it is possible they will have the AFM portion turned off on a 6.2 in a 2500, but that is about it. The internals will still be the same and subject to the same malfunctions that have been a problem with AFM for a while. As Scotty said on Star Trek.... "the more complicated the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain". If I needed more than the 6.0L can give me, then I would have gotten a Dmax. I just don't need that kind of power on a regular basis, and it is stupid to buy all that power, and the associated problems, just to use it a few times a year. Besides, I deal with diesels already to the tune of around 140,000 miles a year and roughly 20,000 gallons of diesel a year. I have very little desire to deal with them on my off time in a pickup. I don't need one to prove my machismo.

If they put the new 6.2 in the 3/4 and 1 ton trucks in some sort of fashion (lets say iron block alloy head) it would not have the AFM guts in there. They most likely would build it without them. Its lifters and the valley cover. It would be cheaper to build too without the more expensive parts.

Just as a rough ballpark using retail prices and rounded, the AFM engine's lifters, lifter guides and the AFM valley cover is about $1090 in parts. For a non AFM engine, the same parts would be $581. Basically 1/2 as much in cost for those parts.

Cowpie · February 21, 2015

For the sake of everyone who jumps on that combination, I hope you are right. I am not that trusting of OEM management. And I am not going to wait and find out. It is a card game I am not going to opt in on. I have developed a healthy skepticism over the decades when it comes to what they say they might do, what everyone thinks they will do, and what they actually end up doing. I am more than comfortable with staying with the 6.0L I got in my 2015. If it plays out like you think, fantastic. I will be happy for those that took the risk. We'll just have to wait and see won't we. I will not gloat if I turn out to be right. In fact, I hope I am not. I don't like seeing anyone get screwed.

But as a side note, your analysis of any cost savings is way off target. Let's take a couple of examples, though they are not directly related, they give a good picture.

Let's take a look at lockers in a differential. Now how much would it be to put full lockers in two drive axles that didn't have them from the factory? I ordered my semi truck, in which components are substantially higher in build cost than a pickup, and when I ordered up full lockers for both Meritor drive axles, the cost to have them installed at the factory was a whopping $75 an axle. Try to do it for that price after market.

Another analogy. Say you got a blue pickup and you decided you wanted the entire frame, differentials, etc all painted red to off set the blue. Again, what do you think it would cost to prep, seal, prime, and paint the entire underside of a pickup? I ordered this very thing with my semi truck build. Blue body, red frame, suspension, etc. Total cost to me to have the factory seal, prime, and paint the entire chassis, diffs, suspension, etc? A whopping $275. See if you can do it, labor and all, for that price at a body shop. Can't cheat and do it yourself. The comparison would have to be the same.

I would be just about willing to bet a paycheck that, given your assumption on what two different engine builds would contain in them, that in the final analysis, the cost difference would be negligible compared to your retail pricing assumption. But I also understand logistics, and I still cannot see, under the conditions we find GM in today, that they are going to make separate engine builds on the same platform between the 1500 and HD trucks. But again, I hope I am wrong and you are right. Pity the buyer if it is reversed.

KMK454 · April 28, 2015

According to my trip computer, my CC 4x4 6.0 Z71 with tow mirrors and 20" wheels averaged 17 MPG on a long highway drive with an average speed of around 70 MPH. Not bad, and the diesel's gains aren't good enough to warrant the cost of entry for me. We'll see what the next highway run produces...

boringwhitetruck · April 28, 2015

Anyone know if the 2015 6.0 I have has cathedral port heads or the rectangular ones? I have a used TVS 1900 blower in the garage that was supposed to go on my 5.3 '09 truck. Traded that thing in on the new 2015 2500 and the 6.0. Haven't received an answer from Magnuson yet as to if I can adapt it to fit the new truck.

Imagine what 10 pounds of boost would do for this awesome engine. Problem is, I'd have to run 91 octane minimum if I installed the supercharger. I am trying to sell it either way.

Chris · April 28, 2015

The issue with your 1900 is the manifold part. Your current truck has rectangle port heads. The 1900 was made for carhedral port.

Cowpie · April 29, 2015

Has anyone ever blown one of these motors and used E85 with it's 100 octane rating instead of Premium? I know that GM partner Ricardo has taken a 3.2 V6, put turbos on it, beefed up the guts to the extreme, fed it E85, and it is putting out power similar to the Dmax. The higher octane and cooling properties of the ethanol in E85 should make a good option if mounting a blower. Not sure if anyone has messed with ECM to make it all work. Just rambling thoughts.

Edit.. just did a quick search online and yes there is several places that are doing serious turbo/blower tuning for E85 and getting darn close to performance that one would get using high sticker race gas. Now I got my curiosity piqued. Dynotune out of Watertown, SD is putting blowers on and tuning for E85 for just one out of dozens of hits on the search. DB Performance in MN doing it also. I am surrounded by shops doing blower and turbo setups and tuning for E85. At the present price of $1.59 a gallon near me now, man oh man.

pcf · April 29, 2015

I have a buddy with a blown 6.0 in his Wrangler. He tuned it down a bit to run it on e85. But he gets to run it on e85 for less than $2 a gallon vs $8 for 110+ octane race gas. The engine has been an endless money pit, there's always something breaking on it.

Cowpie · May 2, 2015

Anyone know if the 2015 6.0 I have has cathedral port heads or the rectangular ones? I have a used TVS 1900 blower in the garage that was supposed to go on my 5.3 '09 truck. Traded that thing in on the new 2015 2500 and the 6.0. Haven't received an answer from Magnuson yet as to if I can adapt it to fit the new truck.

Imagine what 10 pounds of boost would do for this awesome engine. Problem is, I'd have to run 91 octane minimum if I installed the supercharger. I am trying to sell it either way.

The L96 6.0L has cathedral port heads. At least according to this...

http://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/gm-engines/l96/

Quote from it....

High-Flow Cylinder Heads and Valvetrain: the L96’s cylinder heads feature “cathedral”-shaped intake ports that promote exceptional airflow. They’re derived from the high-performance cylinder heads that were used on the “C5″ Chevrolet Corvette Z06 and support great airflow at higher rpm for a broader horsepower band, along with strong, low-rpm torque. The intake ports that feed the combustion chambers, as well as the D-shaped exhaust ports, are designed for excellent high-rpm airflow.

newdude · May 2, 2015

The L96 6.0L has cathedral port heads. At least according to this...

http://gmauthority.com/blog/gm/gm-engines/l96/

Quote from it....

High-Flow Cylinder Heads and Valvetrain: the L96’s cylinder heads feature “cathedral”-shaped intake ports that promote exceptional airflow. They’re derived from the high-performance cylinder heads that were used on the “C5″ Chevrolet Corvette Z06 and support great airflow at higher rpm for a broader horsepower band, along with strong, low-rpm torque. The intake ports that feed the combustion chambers, as well as the D-shaped exhaust ports, are designed for excellent high-rpm airflow.