Who would get the V6 instead of the V8 if the MPG were better?

Silverado Steve · December 4, 2014

I agree MPG is nor hear or there. But you do have to figure upcharge in engine packages. Say an extra 1500 for the upgrade own the vehicle for 5 years thats up to a 3 grand in savings. saving money matters to a lot of people. One thing with the 6.2l is the up charge is actually a lot higher as you can only get it in premium trims, which means getting the 6.2l can potentially cost you over 10 grand more plus the loss of 200 bucks a year.

. Interesting point you bring up, but your missing a key ingredient of car ownership...resale. The volume engine for the Silverado and Sierra has been and always will be the 5.3. With that in mind, you can in most circumstances equip most models that come with the 4.3 with the 5.3. I may be wrong but with the $1095 upcharge for the 5.3' you will more likely than not get that back at trade in or resale over the 4.3. BLUF....the 5.3 equipped truck will recover more in resale than the 4.3 ever will so any potential savings buying the 4.3 may be lost at time of resale...no?

nards444 · December 4, 2014

. Interesting point you bring up, but your missing a key ingredient of car ownership...resale. The volume engine for the Silverado and Sierra has been and always will be the 5.3. With that in mind, you can in most circumstances equip most models that come with the 4.3 with the 5.3. I may be wrong but with the $1095 upcharge for the 5.3' you will more likely than not get that back at trade in or resale over the 4.3. BLUF....the 5.3 equipped truck will recover more in resale than the 4.3 ever will so any potential savings buying the 4.3 may be lost at time of resale...no?

You make some good points, and look I would never buy a NA v6 in what they currently offer. My point being was when you factor in upcharge decreased MPG over time it means money, and for some people it matters. And I wasn't comparing the v6 to the 6.2, I was more or less saying every step you go from 4.3 to 5.3 and 5.3 to 6.2 includes a great upcharge and a larger MPG deficit. Resale your right your probably going to see better marketability as in ease of sale, and you may make the money back, that's possible. But on a depreciating item, and on something that cost 45k today and in 10 years is worth 5, I don't necessarily buy into the resale logic per say. 5 years from now a like trim truck with different motors, we really going to see a price difference, and that point you already lost 15-20k on the vehicle.

You are right the 5.3 is the volume seller, but GM is now trying to make the 4.3 the volume seller, which I would have to look at numbers, but I think they did fairly well with the 4.3 And I wouldn't go as far as saying a v6 will never be a volume seller. Over the years we have seen V8s get smaller and produce more power and V6s get more power, so at some point somebody is going to say 6 or 8? Maybe we get 7 lol.

Silverado Steve · December 4, 2014

You make some good points, and look I would never buy a NA v6 in what they currently offer. My point being was when you factor in upcharge decreased MPG over time it means money, and for some people it matters. And I wasn't comparing the v6 to the 6.2, I was more or less saying every step you go from 4.3 to 5.3 and 5.3 to 6.2 includes a great upcharge and a larger MPG deficit. Resale your right your probably going to see better marketability as in ease of sale, and you may make the money back, that's possible. But on a depreciating item, and on something that cost 45k today and in 10 years is worth 5, I don't necessarily buy into the resale logic per say. 5 years from now a like trim truck with different motors, we really going to see a price difference, and that point you already lost 15-20k on the vehicle.

You are right the 5.3 is the volume seller, but GM is now trying to make the 4.3 the volume seller, which I would have to look at numbers, but I think they did fairly well with the 4.3 And I wouldn't go as far as saying a v6 will never be a volume seller. Over the years we have seen V8s get smaller and produce more power and V6s get more power, so at some point somebody is going to say 6 or 8? Maybe we get 7 lol.

There are a couple of points of discussion to be had. First, while mpg's might be a consideration for a truck buyer, they are not the primary consideration for the truck buyer and that is no more evident than from the response of posters here on thi site, capability in regards to power to provide towing and payload take front and center and with those thing at the forefront, if a manufacturer can provide those items at a savings of mpg's, then that's gravy for the buyer and a plus for the manufacturer. I don't want to confuse the 6.2 with our conversation as you are right, the 6.2 can only be had in the highest of trims as of this time; therefore, the 5.3 and the 4.3 are the apples to apples comparison for this conversation. As I mentioned in my previous post, the 5.3 can be had in nearly every config the 4.3 is equipped with exception to the highest LTZ trim. While I may be wrong in this specific point, I cannot buy a Crew Cab 4x4 LTZ here in Colorado with the 4.3; however in the LT and WT every trim can be had with the 4.3 and 5.3 at a cost of $1095 for the 5.3 upcharge. So with a difference of $1095 between two identically equipped trucks, one with the 4.3 and one with the 5.3, the 5.3 will garner you that $1095 in resale alone down the road....time and overall depreciation having no barring in the conversation. So for anyone saying they are saving money by springing for the v6 in the 1500 is null and void long term as we have already determined the mpg difference is negligible between the 2 motors,you have to recognize the fact that the $1095 will be recovered at some point the truck is either sold, traded in or totaled? The idea that this doesn't matter as a vehicle depreciates is moot, since all vehicles depreciate. If that is the basis of your argument, you might as well argue that we should all ride public trans and rent a truck when necessary, but that outlook is far to Draconian for most Americans.

I have to disagree with you wholeheartedly that GM is trying to make the 4.3 the volume engine in the 1500 lineup and the reasons are clear. First, the 4,3 in the 1500 lineup clearly gives the buyer less capability than the current model of the Colorado/Sierra. 6500lbs towing for the 1500 with the 4.3 vs 7000lbs towing for the new GM midsize twins when equipped with the V6. With the recent release of the midsize platform from GM, they are giving buyers of the current 4.3 equipped model to consider a downsized truck. These will be your typical fleet buyers and companies that need a truck yet gives economy over capability. Your white Orkin and Napa trucks come to mind. GM hedged a bet that there was a market for a midsize, they are not going to contradict themselves by trying to push the 4.3 onto the 1500 buyer, it just doesn't make sense; especially when the capability isn't there when compared between the 2. I haven't seen the numbers breakdown, but I would venture the bet that the 5.3 outsells the 4.3 by a 2 to 1 margin if not more and the primary trim sold is the LT model which both engines can be had. I would also venture to bet the 4.3 doesn't outsell the 6.2 by much either and for 2014, the vast majority of 4.3 models were fleet sales. With the Colorado, that number will change. Now if GM makes a trurbo charged v-6 like the egoboost, this conversation is null and void as the 3.5 egoboost is the volume engine for Ford.

redwngr · December 4, 2014

Todays V6 has more horsepower than some of the 350's I've owned in the past.

SouthernSilveradoGuy85 · December 4, 2014

Ya I don't think GM is trying to make the new 4.3 the volume engine for the half tons. The 5.7 was the main engine in the GMT400s and then came the 5.3 which has been the primary V8 in the half tons since 99. As far as I know GM has always offered a V6 as a base engine in their half tons. It's just for someone that wants or needs the room and bed size of a full size truck but doesn't need the capability of a V8. Sure the V6s have gained power, but a buddy used to have a little 01 GMC Jimmy with the 4.3 so I kind of laugh when I see a full size truck with a V6 to be honest. It's just me though, but I do understand some people just want the size of a full size but doesn't need a V8. I'm not downgrading the 4.3 at all, it's a great V6. It's basically a 350 minus 2 cylinders when talking about c.i. I just wouldn't want a V6 in anything full size, but a V6 fits good in a small truck or SUV.

Silverado Steve · December 4, 2014

Todays V6 has more horsepower than some of the 350's I've owned in the past.

The same can be said about today's 4 cyl vs yester years V-6's

redwngr · December 4, 2014

Not many 4 cylinders in 1/2 ton trucks

Imcrazy · December 4, 2014

Ya I don't think GM is trying to make the new 4.3 the volume engine for the half tons. The 5.7 was the main engine in the GMT400s and then came the 5.3 which has been the primary V8 in the half tons since 99. As far as I know GM has always offered a V6 as a base engine in their half tons. It's just for someone that wants or needs the room and bed size of a full size truck but doesn't need the capability of a V8. Sure the V6s have gained power, but a buddy used to have a little 01 GMC Jimmy with the 4.3 so I kind of laugh when I see a full size truck with a V6 to be honest. It's just me though, but I do understand some people just want the size of a full size but doesn't need a V8. I'm not downgrading the 4.3 at all, it's a great V6. It's basically a 350 minus 2 cylinders when talking about c.i. I just wouldn't want a V6 in anything full size, but a V6 fits good in a small truck or SUV.

The new 4.3 is nothing like the old 4.3. The V6 in the new trucks has 285 hp and 305 tq. It pulls harder than the 4.8 it replaced. With that said if I had it to do over again I'd probably have given more consideration to the 5.3.

Silverado Steve · December 4, 2014

Not many 4 cylinders in 1/2 ton trucks

What does that have to with your previous statement? Any current engine is going to be more efficient and more powerful than one from 10-15 years ago.

Not many 4 cylinders in 1/2 ton trucks

What does that have to with your previous statement? Any current engine is going to be more efficient and more powerful than one from 10-15 years ago.

Silverado Steve · December 4, 2014

Repost deleted

nards444 · December 4, 2014

There are a couple of points of discussion to be had. First, while mpg's might be a consideration for a truck buyer, they are not the primary consideration for the truck buyer and that is no more evident than from the response of posters here on thi site, capability in regards to power to provide towing and payload take front and center and with those thing at the forefront, if a manufacturer can provide those items at a savings of mpg's, then that's gravy for the buyer and a plus for the manufacturer. I don't want to confuse the 6.2 with our conversation as you are right, the 6.2 can only be had in the highest of trims as of this time; therefore, the 5.3 and the 4.3 are the apples to apples comparison for this conversation. As I mentioned in my previous post, the 5.3 can be had in nearly every config the 4.3 is equipped with exception to the highest LTZ trim. While I may be wrong in this specific point, I cannot buy a Crew Cab 4x4 LTZ here in Colorado with the 4.3; however in the LT and WT every trim can be had with the 4.3 and 5.3 at a cost of $1095 for the 5.3 upcharge. So with a difference of $1095 between two identically equipped trucks, one with the 4.3 and one with the 5.3, the 5.3 will garner you that $1095 in resale alone down the road....time and overall depreciation having no barring in the conversation. So for anyone saying they are saving money by springing for the v6 in the 1500 is null and void long term as we have already determined the mpg difference is negligible between the 2 motors,you have to recognize the fact that the $1095 will be recovered at some point the truck is either sold, traded in or totaled? The idea that this doesn't matter as a vehicle depreciates is moot, since all vehicles depreciate. If that is the basis of your argument, you might as well argue that we should all ride public trans and rent a truck when necessary, but that outlook is far to Draconian for most Americans.

Im not necessarily saying you are wrong, Im more or less playing the devils advocate here. Like I said I wouldnt buy a NA V6 currently. I also think your going to save a little more money than 200 bucks a year on gas, as GM advertises the 4.3 with 3.42s and the 5.3 with 3.08s. So I think you put 3.42s in that 5.3 the MPG disparity is probably going to be a little greater. All Im saying with depreciation is that I dont get into buying something because of resale, 5 years down the road its hard to guess what that truck might be worth how and who your going to sell it too. Like I said earlier 5 years later when your trying to sell and the truck is now 15-20k less than what you paid, getting 1000 less or more for an engine, does it really matter. I understand your point and not saying your wrong, I just dont get into buying or not buying because of resale, as I beleive that theory is more of a myth.

I have to disagree with you wholeheartedly that GM is trying to make the 4.3 the volume engine in the 1500 lineup and the reasons are clear. First, the 4,3 in the 1500 lineup clearly gives the buyer less capability than the current model of the Colorado/Sierra. 6500lbs towing for the 1500 with the 4.3 vs 7000lbs towing for the new GM midsize twins when equipped with the V6. With the recent release of the midsize platform from GM, they are giving buyers of the current 4.3 equipped model to consider a downsized truck. These will be your typical fleet buyers and companies that need a truck yet gives economy over capability. Your white Orkin and Napa trucks come to mind. GM hedged a bet that there was a market for a midsize, they are not going to contradict themselves by trying to push the 4.3 onto the 1500 buyer, it just doesn't make sense; especially when the capability isn't there when compared between the 2. I haven't seen the numbers breakdown, but I would venture the bet that the 5.3 outsells the 4.3 by a 2 to 1 margin if not more and the primary trim sold is the LT model which both engines can be had. I would also venture to bet the 4.3 doesn't outsell the 6.2 by much either and for 2014, the vast majority of 4.3 models were fleet sales. With the Colorado, that number will change. Now if GM makes a trurbo charged v-6 like the egoboost, this conversation is null and void as the 3.5 egoboost is the volume engine for Ford.

Im not going to say you are right or wrong or I am right or wrong. But making the 4.3 the standard engine in a truck says something and then saying if you want a v8 you need to drop another grand, if anything thats a marketing gimic. The capability isnt there your right. But think about it that 4.3 has more capability than the old 5.7 that was running around and everybody used that forever. As of May the 4.3 was accounting for 20% of sales, which is 1 of 5, and Im guessing the 6.2 accounts for roughly 30% of sales, so its close. Really I would like to keep the 6.2 out of this, as a big block(not really a big block) in a 1/2 is a nice package but if you look at history in all manufactures they slip in and out of production, the issue has always been MPG and the fact the engine outperfoms rest of the truck, really to much engine for the truck at least in a towing and payload sense. I still beleive GM is doing themselves a disfavor by what trims they offer it in, I dont know if this is a supply issue which I think it is, so they figure they have fewer of these engines so lets make as much as possible on each one Or it could just be an exclusive thing.

I think one thing you might be missing is what GM markets and wants people to buy and what the typical buyer wants. You mentioned evidence from this forum, what you have to realize this forum is enthusiast and not your average buyers. How many buyers go into the dealer and say I want a truck it needs leather, and I want the best MPG, and really doesnt factor in everything a whole. Thats a lot of buyers.

Silverado Steve · December 4, 2014

Well i think GM along with the other truck manufacturers have the sales number to support that many of truck sales tend to lean towards the higher trims not to mention the higher profit margin that goes with their sales; hence why the 6.2 is only available on such trims as to give buyers incentive to buy up...i think we both agree and acknowledge that. However, the vast majority of truck buyers will sacrifice small mpg loses for more power...this is not debatable as many truck buyers expect lower mpgs vs other vehicles. This cannot be more evident than the voices of the folks on this board. Yes, we make up the enthusiast crowd of truck buyers, but the sales number mirror the sentiments of the folks on this board. Many of the posters here represent higher trim trucks and the want of the 6.2 even the 5.3 over the 4.3, this sentiment is a microcosm of the truck market

Anyways i digress on that, while the current 4.3 produces as much if not more power as the old 4.8 v8 and the 5.7s of 15 years ago, while being more efficient, the size of half tons have grown as well in size and capability; therefore while 270 hp and 300pounds of torque might of been plenty for the 1500 from 1999, those numbers wouldn't cut it in todays highly competitive 1/2 truck market for the average ruck buyer. Those numbers are whats now expected out of the midsize capability...hence why we wont see the 4.3 as the volume engine in the 1500. Now with that being said, 90% of truck buyers buy above and beyond what they need, myself included...we drive around with an empty bed 95% of the time and rarely tow...that's your average truck buyer, but we also buy with the mindest of "incase". Yes the 4.3 will suffice for those of us truck buyers, but we don't but buy with that fact in mind, yet another reason the 4.3 wont be the engine of choice in the 1/2 market unless turbo boosted an on par with high ouput V8s

There are a couple of points of discussion to be had. First, while mpg's might be a consideration for a truck buyer, they are not the primary consideration for the truck buyer and that is no more evident than from the response of posters here on thi site, capability in regards to power to provide towing and payload take front and center and with those thing at the forefront, if a manufacturer can provide those items at a savings of mpg's, then that's gravy for the buyer and a plus for the manufacturer. I don't want to confuse the 6.2 with our conversation as you are right, the 6.2 can only be had in the highest of trims as of this time; therefore, the 5.3 and the 4.3 are the apples to apples comparison for this conversation. As I mentioned in my previous post, the 5.3 can be had in nearly every config the 4.3 is equipped with exception to the highest LTZ trim. While I may be wrong in this specific point, I cannot buy a Crew Cab 4x4 LTZ here in Colorado with the 4.3; however in the LT and WT every trim can be had with the 4.3 and 5.3 at a cost of $1095 for the 5.3 upcharge. So with a difference of $1095 between two identically equipped trucks, one with the 4.3 and one with the 5.3, the 5.3 will garner you that $1095 in resale alone down the road....time and overall depreciation having no barring in the conversation. So for anyone saying they are saving money by springing for the v6 in the 1500 is null and void long term as we have already determined the mpg difference is negligible between the 2 motors,you have to recognize the fact that the $1095 will be recovered at some point the truck is either sold, traded in or totaled? The idea that this doesn't matter as a vehicle depreciates is moot, since all vehicles depreciate. If that is the basis of your argument, you might as well argue that we should all ride public trans and rent a truck when necessary, but that outlook is far to Draconian for most Americans.

Im not necessarily saying you are wrong, Im more or less playing the devils advocate here. Like I said I wouldnt buy a NA V6 currently. I also think your going to save a little more money than 200 bucks a year on gas, as GM advertises the 4.3 with 3.42s and the 5.3 with 3.08s. So I think you put 3.42s in that 5.3 the MPG disparity is probably going to be a little greater. All Im saying with depreciation is that I dont get into buying something because of resale, 5 years down the road its hard to guess what that truck might be worth how and who your going to sell it too. Like I said earlier 5 years later when your trying to sell and the truck is now 15-20k less than what you paid, getting 1000 less or more for an engine, does it really matter. I understand your point and not saying your wrong, I just dont get into buying or not buying because of resale, as I beleive that theory is more of a myth.

I have to disagree with you wholeheartedly that GM is trying to make the 4.3 the volume engine in the 1500 lineup and the reasons are clear. First, the 4,3 in the 1500 lineup clearly gives the buyer less capability than the current model of the Colorado/Sierra. 6500lbs towing for the 1500 with the 4.3 vs 7000lbs towing for the new GM midsize twins when equipped with the V6. With the recent release of the midsize platform from GM, they are giving buyers of the current 4.3 equipped model to consider a downsized truck. These will be your typical fleet buyers and companies that need a truck yet gives economy over capability. Your white Orkin and Napa trucks come to mind. GM hedged a bet that there was a market for a midsize, they are not going to contradict themselves by trying to push the 4.3 onto the 1500 buyer, it just doesn't make sense; especially when the capability isn't there when compared between the 2. I haven't seen the numbers breakdown, but I would venture the bet that the 5.3 outsells the 4.3 by a 2 to 1 margin if not more and the primary trim sold is the LT model which both engines can be had. I would also venture to bet the 4.3 doesn't outsell the 6.2 by much either and for 2014, the vast majority of 4.3 models were fleet sales. With the Colorado, that number will change. Now if GM makes a trurbo charged v-6 like the egoboost, this conversation is null and void as the 3.5 egoboost is the volume engine for Ford.

Im not going to say you are right or wrong or I am right or wrong. But making the 4.3 the standard engine in a truck says something and then saying if you want a v8 you need to drop another grand, if anything thats a marketing gimic. The capability isnt there your right. But think about it that 4.2 has more capability than the old 5.7 that was running around and everybody used that forever. As of May the 4.3 was accounting for 20% of sales, which is 1 of 5, and Im guessing the 6.2 accounts for roughly 30% of sales, so its close. Really I would like to keep the 6.2 out of as a big block(not really a big block) in a 1/2 is nice package but if you look at history in all manufactures they slip in and out of production, the issue has always been MPG and the fact the engine outperfoms rest of the truck, really to much engine for the truck at least in a towing and payload sense. I sitll beleive GM is doing themselves a disfavor by what trims they offer in, I dont know if this is a supply issue which I think it is, so they figure they have fewer of these engines so lets make as much as possible on each one Or it could just be an exclusive thing.

I think one thing you might be missing is what GM markets and wants people to buy and what the typical buyer wants. You mentioned evidence from this forum, what you have to realize this forum is enthusiast and not your average buyers. How many buyers go into the dealer and say I want a truck it needs leather, and I want the best MPG, and really doesnt factor in everything a whole. Thats a lot of buyers.

Spurshot · December 4, 2014

Guys, the marketing model for the 6 banger truck hasn't changed in ...who knows how long.

The V6 is a cost reduction (significant) for production, which allows for the entry level/fleet trucks to be cheaper/competitive. It is not there specifically for fuel economy. If it were, it would be a V8 of smaller size making as much horsepower, burning less gas. That was the point of my earlier post.

They make millions of those V6 engines for the entire lineup of GM vehicles. It's all about cheap production.

Silverado Steve · December 4, 2014

I agree 100% and couldn't reflect that any better in my past several posts. However, I believe the 4.3 is only available in the 1500, no?

Guys, the marketing model for the 6 banger truck hasn't changed in ...who knows how long.

The V6 is a cost reduction (significant) for production, which allows for the entry level/fleet trucks to be cheaper/competitive. It is not there specifically for fuel economy. If it were, it would be a V8 of smaller size making as much horsepower, burning less gas. That was the point of my earlier post.

They make millions of those V6 engines for the entire lineup of GM vehicles. It's all about cheap production.

nards444 · December 4, 2014

Well i think GM along with the other truck manufacturers have the sales number to support that many of truck sales tend to lean towards the higher trims not to mention the higher profit margin that goes with their sales; hence why the 6.2 is only available on such trims as to give buyers incentive to buy up...i think we both agree and acknowledge that. However, the vast majority of truck buyers will sacrifice small mpg loses for more power...this is not debatable as many truck buyers expect lower mpgs vs other vehicles. This cannot be more evident than the voices of the folks on this board. Yes, we make up the enthusiast crowd of truck buyers, but the sales number mirror the sentiments of the folks on this board. Many of the posters here represent higher trim trucks and the want of the 6.2 even the 5.3 over the 4.3, this sentiment is a microcosm of the truck market

Anyways i digress on that, while the current 4.3 produces as much if not more power as the old 4.8 v8 and the 5.7s of 15 years ago, while being more efficient, the size of half tons have grown as well in size and capability; therefore while 270 hp and 300pounds of torque might of been plenty for the 1500 from 1999, those numbers wouldn't cut it in todays highly competitive 1/2 truck market for the average ruck buyer. Those numbers are whats now expected out of the midsize capability...hence why we wont see the 4.3 as the volume engine in the 1500. Now with that being said, 90% of truck buyers buy above and beyond what they need, myself included...we drive around with an empty bed 95% of the time and rarely tow...that's your average truck buyer, but we also buy with the mindest of "incase". Yes the 4.3 will suffice for those of us truck buyers, but we don't but buy with that fact in mind, yet another reason the 4.3 wont be the engine of choice in the 1/2 market unless turbo boosted an on par with high ouput V8s

I agree with what you say. I think you downplay the number of value buyers a little bit as there are plenty out there whether the v6 is a value or not I think you have a lot more sticker shoppers than you might think. And I I dont think its only MPG its price point as well. Like I said in my earlier post 20% of sales are 4.3 up from 8% the year prior.