Jump to content

6.0 gas engine

cat320

Recommended Posts

Doug Rosewood Enthusiast

Doug Rosewood

Posted
Posted

In my head I understand partially, but I have to ask, why are there so many mpg threads in a forum section dedicated to fuel gobblers lol. You can't have a Prius and a truck capable of moving large amounts of mass unless you buy a train

  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply
SMiller Senior Enthusiast

SMiller

Posted
Posted

In my head I understand partially, but I have to ask, why are there so many mpg threads in a forum section dedicated to fuel gobblers lol. You can't have a Prius and a truck capable of moving large amounts of mass unless you buy a train

Couldn't agree more, let's debate the mileage of a 7,000lbs truck that has the exact same engine since '07.

 

News flash, the 6.0 gets 12mpg, end of all mileage threads forever...

4x4Pete Enthusiast

4x4Pete

Posted
Posted

I wonder how much better fuel economy and power would be if one were to completely blueprint the whole drivetrain in a 2500HD gasser. The stacking of tolerances in the manufacturing industry can be excessive. This is why the exact same vehicles are so different. I think this has a bigger influence rather than what day of the week it was made. Either way the truck would still be hard on gas and power wouldn't be vastly different. It still would be interesting to see what the best case power and efficiency could be.

  • 4 weeks later...
gearheadesw Senior Enthusiast

gearheadesw

Posted
Posted

Got 13 - 14 mpg with stock tires,

get 12 - 13 mpg with 325 65 18s with as little lift as I can get away with.

So a roughly 35 by 13.50 tire that weighs 70 lbs, only effected milage by... 8%, same as my delta number on the change in tire diameter from stock. Add 8% to my milage on the trip meter, divide gallons into miles driven. Semi close to real milage for truck.

  • 2 weeks later...
TRKLGND Enthusiast

TRKLGND

Posted
Posted

Couldn't agree more, let's debate the mileage of a 7,000lbs truck that has the exact same engine since '07.

 

News flash, the 6.0 gets 12mpg, end of all mileage threads forever...

I agree that they get what they get as far as mpg goes. However, the engine is not the only thing that determines mpg. I'm pretty sure that prior to '09 the HD's had the 4L80. I would think the 6L80 would help mpg but I haven't looked at the ratios of the two transmissions.

2016HD Enthusiast

2016HD

Posted
Posted

Only way the 6l80/90 will help mph is in town. Lower 1st and 2on compared to 4l80. 4l80 first gear was way to tall for a towing rig. Other than that maybe very minor difference when it top gear. But not enough to compensate for the added weight of the newer chassis etc.

The variable cam timing should have helped some but only seems to have bumped the power a bit instead. I love the 6.0l and 6speed combo compared the older 4speed. Just wish they would have bumped the power to 400hp and 420/50 ftbls.

magnum74 Enthusiast

magnum74

Posted
Posted

I love the 6.0l and 6speed combo compared the older 4speed. Just wish they would have bumped the power to 400hp and 420/50 ftbls.

Yup. I'm patiently waiting for info on the future gas HD. Will they massage the 6.0 or go with something entirely different? Unless I'm just looking in the wrong places there doesn't seem to be too much to talk about in this regard yet.

SierraHD17 Senior Enthusiast

SierraHD17

Posted
Posted

I agree that they get what they get as far as mpg goes. However, the engine is not the only thing that determines mpg. I'm pretty sure that prior to '09 the HD's had the 4L80. I would think the 6L80 would help mpg but I haven't looked at the ratios of the two transmissions.

4L80E ended with the gmt800 body in 2007. Anything 2007 onward starting with the gmt900 has been the 6L90E. The transmissions share absolutely nothing in common and the first gear in the 4L80E is almost exactly the second gear in the 6L90E. That alone was a nice change.. along with more gears, more efficient, deeper overdrive, etc.

  • 3 weeks later...
Cowpie Senior Enthusiast

Cowpie

Posted
Posted

I must have a very unique 2015 2500 6.0L    If I average 12 mpg, it is on a very cold winter day bucking 20+ mph winds.  Mine has averaged just shy of 14 mpg for the life of the truck.  I can't recall ever getting 12 mpg or less on a tankful.  On road trips, I have typically gotten 16+ most of the time. Even popped almost 18 mpg on a tank a couple of times.  And yes, those were hand calculated mpg averages, not DIC.  All told, it has averaged only 1-2 mpg lower than the 2013 1500 5.3 it replaced.    And I have to be a little fair about it.... I don't really tow that much.  Mostly got the 2500 for what I could load in the back, which is significantly more than a 1500 can safely deal with.  A ton of building material or supplies in the back is not a pretty sight with a 1500.

 

GM is probably playing around with engine replacements for the 6.0L.  Given that 3/4 of the 2500/3500 buyers are commercial users, they are not going to tick that crowd off and go goofy with some new engine that has a lot of wow factor, but could be more of a problem.   The 6.0 has been a real reliable, rock solid engine for the majority of gasser truck users.  Why mess with success?  If one needs more power, the Dmax is always an option.

8lugCT Enthusiast

8lugCT

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Cowpie said:

I must have a very unique 2015 2500 6.0L    If I average 12 mpg, it is on a very cold winter day bucking 20+ mph winds.  Mine has averaged just shy of 14 mpg for the life of the truck.  I can't recall ever getting 12 mpg or less on a tankful.  On road trips, I have typically gotten 16+ most of the time. Even popped almost 18 mpg on a tank a couple of times.  And yes, those were hand calculated mpg averages, not DIC.  All told, it has averaged only 1-2 mpg lower than the 2013 1500 5.3 it replaced.    And I have to be a little fair about it.... I don't really tow that much.  Mostly got the 2500 for what I could load in the back, which is significantly more than a 1500 can safely deal with.  A ton of building material or supplies in the back is not a pretty sight with a 1500.

 

GM is probably playing around with engine replacements for the 6.0L.  Given that 3/4 of the 2500/3500 buyers are commercial users, they are not going to tick that crowd off and go goofy with some new engine that has a lot of wow factor, but could be more of a problem.   The 6.0 has been a real reliable, rock solid engine for the majority of gasser truck users.  Why mess with success?  If one needs more power, the Dmax is always an option.

seems about what I would get if i didn't have 35in tires

TRKLGND Enthusiast

TRKLGND

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Cowpie said:

I must have a very unique 2015 2500 6.0L    If I average 12 mpg, it is on a very cold winter day bucking 20+ mph winds.  Mine has averaged just shy of 14 mpg for the life of the truck.  I can't recall ever getting 12 mpg or less on a tankful.  On road trips, I have typically gotten 16+ most of the time. Even popped almost 18 mpg on a tank a couple of times.  And yes, those were hand calculated mpg averages, not DIC.  All told, it has averaged only 1-2 mpg lower than the 2013 1500 5.3 it replaced.    And I have to be a little fair about it.... I don't really tow that much.  Mostly got the 2500 for what I could load in the back, which is significantly more than a 1500 can safely deal with.  A ton of building material or supplies in the back is not a pretty sight with a 1500.

 

GM is probably playing around with engine replacements for the 6.0L.  Given that 3/4 of the 2500/3500 buyers are commercial users, they are not going to tick that crowd off and go goofy with some new engine that has a lot of wow factor, but could be more of a problem.   The 6.0 has been a real reliable, rock solid engine for the majority of gasser truck users.  Why mess with success?  If one needs more power, the Dmax is always an option.

I only have 4800 miles on mine and I average 12.6 lifetime.  Probably 25% highway and 75% city mostly unloaded.  Only towed the boat twice so it was a non factor this season.

I have the Alaskan edition that has the Goodyear Duratrac tires.  Probably cost me 1 mpg.  Not worried about it.  It gets what it gets.  My '72 Sedan De'Ville with the 472 got 7mpg.

Cowpie Senior Enthusiast

Cowpie

Posted
Posted

I have BFG KO2’s, next size up from stock.  

  • 2 weeks later...
SMiller Senior Enthusiast

SMiller

Posted
Posted
On 10/6/2017 at 12:00 PM, paracutin said:

I agree that they get what they get as far as mpg goes. However, the engine is not the only thing that determines mpg. I'm pretty sure that prior to '09 the HD's had the 4L80. I would think the 6L80 would help mpg but I haven't looked at the ratios of the two transmissions.

I have had about 20 6.0's, starting with 2000 model year up to 2015's, they all got 12mpg.

 

Yes the 6-speed low first gear is nice, not sure if the VVT 6.0 has the bottom end as it sure seems to have to rev higher not that I care.

 

A little tuning and 4.56 gears and I think it would be a winner.

  • 1 month later...
Bhurt Enthusiast

Bhurt

Posted
Posted
On 10/30/2017 at 3:03 PM, paracutin said:

I only have 4800 miles on mine and I average 12.6 lifetime.  Probably 25% highway and 75% city mostly unloaded.  Only towed the boat twice so it was a non factor this season.

I have the Alaskan edition that has the Goodyear Duratrac tires.  Probably cost me 1 mpg.  Not worried about it.  It gets what it gets.  My '72 Sedan De'Ville with the 472 got 7mpg.

ED25C72D-F87A-41CC-AD96-0337B0C528A9_zps

 

3753A174-61DD-4C14-93D0-68D8CD0786F3_zps

 

Also have the Alaskan, slight lift/level and otherwise stock.  Just completed 3100 miles in 15 days through the rockies and back.  Combination of highway and city and all kinds of weather.  19.5 works out to about 12mpg.  If I wanted fuel mileage we could have taken my wifes dodge dart.  But I wanted the convenience and safety of my truck on the highways.  

AKNick Enthusiast

AKNick

Posted
Posted

Been averaging 9.x MPG since I've had the truck. Only 600 miles on it now and I've got a few months to go until the summer when the summer fuel blend, no remote starting, and not running 750 lbs in the bed will help push that # up a bit. 
Was getting 11-12 MPG with the Tundra I had before this with the same sort of driving. Similar load all the time too. But oh well. Needed the payload capacity of the 2500 and don't want two vehicles for regular use. MPG is not on my list of concerns, to be honest. 

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.3k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,716
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    BDS my HD
    Newest Member
    BDS my HD
    Joined

  • Who's Online   0 Members, 0 Anonymous, 450 Guests (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • BDS my HD
      Brand new to this forum. Questions about re-gearing my 26’ HD

      By BDS my HD · Posted

      Hello hello looking forward to expanding my knowledge of the 2026 2500 HD that I just bought.   Truck has 3500 miles on it four-wheel-drive crew cab and I’m about to put a 6 1/2 inch BDS lift on it 18 x 10 -25 offset with 37’s   Already have the wheels and tires just waiting on the lift install in about three weeks   Question what surprises am I not gonna be happy with?  I’m not new to lifted trucks so I know that acceleration towing gas mileage all that is affected..   Question is those of you that have this truck this powertrain with a 10 speed Allison and have done the mods that I’m doing,,, how bad is it? Is that Allison constantly gonna be hunting for the right gear to go into? And what about towing, acceleration, fuel consumption as mentioned?    Lastly how come I can’t find any ring pinion gear set up for these axles and when could I expect to see them?   I apologize if there’s any typos I’m doing speech to text on my iPhone.    
    • linc45bn
      2013 2500HD 6.0L intermittent no crank no start

      By linc45bn · Posted

      I've got a 2013 2500 6.0L Flexfuel. Drove the truck earlier today with no issues. Went to run an errand tonight and noticed key fob wouldn't work. Figured battery was dead, so replaced fob batter. Still wasn't working. Grabbed my other set of keys with the other fob and that one wasn't working either. So I manually unlock truck and insert key. Interior lights come on, dashboard lights up, turn key and truck starts. Turn truck off, like a moron, and try starting again. This time no crank, no click, no nothing. Lights still come on and dash lights up, but now I'm getting a service 4wheel drive, service tire monitor, etc. Check voltage on battery and Im showing 12.2v. Throw my battery charger on it and give it 15 mins and try starting again. But still no crank no start. Decide maybe its a bad battery, run to autozone grab a new one and put it in. Same issue. Disconnect battery and let it sit for 15 mins. Try again and still nothing. I had managed to roll the windows down earlier as its a humid night, but now I can't get them to roll up. Power locks are also not working now. Then randomly I try the key again, and it fires right up. Immediately I roll up the windows as we have nothing but rain forecast this week. I shut it back off wait 30 seconds and start up again. Worked a 2nd time. So turn it off, start putting things back together. Try one more time, and back to no crank no start. And now the car alarm starts going off. Had to disconnect battery and leave it that way for the night as I don't think my neighbors would appreciate my alarm going off again tonight. Any thoughts or help would be appreciated. 
    • Grumpy Bear
      first oil change - 2026 2500HD gas

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      No one will care for you like you care for you. Do what you can for as long as you can. IMHO of course. 
    • Grumpy Bear
      Oil Consumption

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      How about them NICKS!!! 
    • Peoplemvr
      GMC 1500 Illuminated Front Grill Emblem REPLACEMENT.

      By Peoplemvr · Posted

      Hi there.  Long time lurker, first post.    i have read the previous posts regarding the water ingress problem with this emblem.  I bought my 1500 SLT the  summer of 2025 new and after reading the MANY problems with these emblems failing I decided to install one anyways.  As per a YouTube video, I sealed ( or tried to) this sign with silicone sealant around the outer perimeter joint and the holes that were already somewhat sealed on the rear plate of the emblem.  And installed the connector assembly using dielectric grease on the connectors. The installation looked great and worked well for about 4 months……then FAILURE.  Grrrrrr…… I live in the great white north and wash my truck weekly in an automatic car wash  to keep the salt off.  Let me tell you that removing the old, failed emblem is a whole different animal than removing the OEM individual letters without removing the grill assembly. Mainly because the illuminated logo is built differently than the original letters which  you can remove the red surface lettering with a knife or some kind of blade which gives access to the tabs which hold the logo onto the grill. So I had to essentially destroyed the old emblem to remove it. Doing so killed my chance of doing somekind of autopsy on the failed , old logo.  But there was plenty of water inside when I ripped it apart.  Prior to installing the new assembly I tried it with the old harness and it works fine.   Does anyone have any insight as to where the water is getting into this emblem? I intend to seal the new logo with slow curing epoxy this time around using a syringe.  I think this newer emblem may be an updated unit which I hope GM got the vendor to fix. It has an October 2025 date on it.    If this one  fails,  I am just going to revert back to the non-illuminated letters….AFTER PULLING THE GRILL.    Any thoughts on sealing with epoxy would be appreciated. Thx!   Doug  

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...