2016 2.8 Duramax paired with new 8 speeds.

[bboyce536 58]

I'm placing bets that GM will roll out a variant of the 8 speed for the new minimax diesel. I feel it is necessary for GM to gain the upper hand and get every bit of mpg they can.

 

Now the speculation comes... the new Ram ecodiesel is one nice ride (even though I would never own a fiat/Chrysler.) My buddy has one and easily beats mpg estimates,often seeing 30~ mpg on the freeway. But...has anyone checked out the curb weight of these Rams?? They are porkers! His crew cab 4x4 weighs over 6k empty.

 

So I did some basic math, if the diesel colorado can match the Ram with an 8 speed, weighs only 200 more then a crew 4x4.v6 lwb...at 4700lbs say. Also comparing the 3500lb cruze that is rated at 46mpg, I am assuring the 4x4 diesel will get 30mpg highway. I will say 33mpg highway for the 4x4 and 35mpg for 2x4.

 

Anyway, just thinking out loud with hopeful predictions. My lease on my k2xx is up next August and my plans are to buy the Colorado diesel...

 

Thoughts?

[newdude 1,905]

Honestly, I think they will be rated higher than the EcoDiesel for sure, but the real world I think will be where the Colorado shines compared to the Ram. And the thing will probably be able to tow the same as the V6 Colorado, say 7000lbs. Diesel Colorado and Canyon will be a threat to EcoDiesel if GM does it right. Near similar towing, better MPG, smaller (the right size for some) package, lighter truck.

[beard_up 29]

Now we just hope the diesel option isn't $9000 extra.

[Cowpie 1,076]

No, the capability of the engine will allow pulling far more than the V6 in the Colorado. it has the torque of a 5.3L V8 and it reaches peak torque at 2000 RPM, something the 5.3L can only dream of. I owned a surprisingly similar 2.8L inline 4 diesel in a 2006 Jeep Liberty. It would yank anything that I ever would ask a small block V8 to pull. If the one going in the Colorado is anything like the one in my Jeep, and from what I have been digging up on this engine, it is surprisingly similar in many details, it will be a one force to be reckoned with in the mid size truck market, and will equal just about anything, in pulling power, as a 1500 with a 5.3L in it. And driven right, it should beat the EPA MPG estimates by a little bit. I have yet to have a diesel in a small vehicle that didn't beat the EPA thing. EPA seems to skew the mpg numbers high on gassers, and low on diesels. Not sure why or how, but it seems to be a pattern.

 

Of course, to get the full effect out of the diesel in the Colorado, GM needs to beef up the chassis and suspension a little. And it will all depend on what diff ratio they put in and the trans behind it. Not sure why it wouldn't be in GM's best interest to put the 8 speed behind it. It wouldn't even have to be a variant on the 8 speed they are doing now. Just use the same tranny. Jeep used the 545 trans from behind the 5.7 Hemi for the trans behind my 2.8L diesel. Worked great.

Edited December 22, 2014 by Cowpie

[dayne66 0]

The tranny on the Libby did have issues....needed an upgraded torque converter.

 

And...damn....only the 6 speed for the '17 d-max.

[Cowpie 1,076]

Mine didn't. The 545 tranny in the Libby did just fine for me. But then, I always do a total exchange of factory fill fluid and change filter on new stuff within the first 5000 miles. Did that on the Libby and was never a problem. Even yanking fuel wagons thru the field or one time when I pulled an Interstate Battery straight truck out of the ditch who had slid off the road during a major ice storm we had.