Jump to content

Duramax and 6.0 sort of confusion for purchase

Buckwheat535

Recommended Posts

Buckwheat535 New Member

Buckwheat535

Posted
Posted

Hi All, So I have been reading pages upon pages to help make a purchase, hence the title. Perhaps a little background. I just sold my 2010 Tundra which was a great truck. It did all I asked about it except towing had to stop too frequently for gas with the 26.5 tank.This prompted me to look at a little heavier duty trucks with larger tanks. I tow approximately every other weekend with a 7x14 enclosed trailer to races. Really not much weight. All loaded for the weekend i would guess in the 2k range. Where it gets interesting is when I load up my tractor thats about 7k depending on the implements I happen to need. The Tundra did it but where I live, a lot of hills and dirt roads. So I am currently looking at 3 choices. 2500hd 6.0, Duramax, and the 6.2 mith max tow. I should also mention, I will be using it for my daily driver as well. Some days I wont be towing at all, just driving from site to site inspecting. It may be idling a lot if that makes sense.I used a mileage calculator I found here and the cost over a 3 year period came very close cost wise using 13 mpg for gas vs 18 for the diesel. I was surprised to say the least. That did not account for the other cost associated with diesel. And, I didnt figure in the 6.2 as i ran out of time. What would your thoughts be? Thanks and this is a great resource.

Cowpie Senior Enthusiast

Cowpie

Posted
Posted

Fuel economy is in favor of the Dmax, but it has higher maintenance costs as well, and you have to figure in the initial cost to determine any cost per mile operating costs in comparison. You are going to shell out a substantial more for the Dmax than either the 6.0 or the 6.2. And if you will be idling a lot, it is not ideal with the emissions stuff on the diesels now. You will encounter more frequent DPF regens, which decrease the life of the DPF filter. Based on what you are hauling, the 6.2 in the 1500 (not offered in the 2500) probably would do the trick and give you the lowest operating costs and better value. I am factoring in the daily driver and idling. The lighter 1500 with the newer 6.2 DI engine will offer reasonable economy that won't hurt the wallet as bad as the 6.0 in the 2500. But even being lighter, if the 1500 has the max tow option it will do the job fine for what you mention.

mdauwald Enthusiast

mdauwald

Posted
Posted

GM's half tons are also limited by a 26 gallon tank which really limits range while towing so I would only look at 3/4 ton GMs. Ford and Ram do offer 34+ gallon half tons but they are Fords and Rams. I'm in the same boat as you and have decided on the 6.0 over the diesel mainly because I have a very short commute and don't put that many miles in a year.

Buckwheat535 New Member

Buckwheat535

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks, That is what I was thinking. One thing that kind of messes that up is it is hard to find one with the max tow right now with 3:42 rear. Apparently some sort of restraint. I can find the 3:42 with the 6.2 however none I have found have the max tow with the larger rear ect. There are lots with the 3:23 and the 8 speed trans but not sure what the rear is as far as size and the heavier springs which I would definately want. Any body here have any experience towing with the 3:23 and 8 speed? I would be very curious to see what the concensus is about that.Thanks again.

Thanks, That is what I was thinking. One thing that kind of messes that up is it is hard to find one with the max tow right now with 3:42 rear. Apparently some sort of restraint. I can find the 3:42 with the 6.2 however none I have found have the max tow with the larger rear ect. There are lots with the 3:23 and the 8 speed trans but not sure what the rear is as far as size and the heavier springs which I would definately want. Any body here have any experience towing with the 3:23 and 8 speed? I would be very curious to see what the concensus is about that.Thanks again.

Buckwheat535 New Member

Buckwheat535

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well to add to this, I just started a job today and they gave me a car to drive to and from home and said if I wanted to use my own vehicle, they would give me xxx dollars if it is a 1/2 ton and it goes up if using a 3/4 ton. I wish I knew that before starting with them. That also includes them giving me a card to fuel up on them.When out pricing, the best I could get out of the dealer on a 2015 2500 w/ 6.0 Lt package was 45,875 which I felt could be better but they didn't. That was a crew cab with 20's which for whatever reason seemed to ride better than the same truck in Ltz configuration with 18" wheels. I liked the console better in the ltz but neither had telescopic wheel. Dealer told me they are on the build sheet but deleted as they ran out of that part.I am 6'1" with long arms but when the seat was adjusted to ideal position, the wheel felt too far away. I feel it may be a necessary item considering that and also my wife may drive it from time to time and need it.

pcf Enthusiast

pcf

Posted
Posted

Tax return season is the wrong time of year to try to do any serious negotiating on a car sale. I wouldn't buy a truck because of a job perk like a fuel card, it may not be there tomorrow and if you're left hanging it can seriously impact your budget. Plus it's hard to beat a company car that picks up the travel miles, depreciation, and crash risk.

 

I don't think you'll see much of a range difference between a 6.0 with a 33 gallon tank and the Tundra with a 26.5 gallon tank. There might even be a bit of a drop in range. 6.0's tow well but fuel economy is not it's strong suit, sub-10mpg numbers are not uncommon.

 

If I was towing 2k on a somewhat regular basis and occasionally towing 7k, and fuel economy was high up on my list I'd look at the 5.3, and just suck it up if I had to go slow up some hills.

Cowpie Senior Enthusiast

Cowpie

Posted
Posted

But also keep in mind, if one is using their own vehicle for use at their job and can justify doing so, it fluctuates, but at least last year one could write off 55.5 cents a mile of deduction on their tax filing. Less if compensated by an employer. Then you can only deduct the difference. Only requirement is to keep some form of log to show odometer readings per day, what it was used for, etc. My pickup is our primary family vehicle, but serves double duty as also the parts and supply hauling vehicle for the business. When it gets used for that, mileage is logged and deduction taken at end of the year.

KMGZ400 Senior Enthusiast

KMGZ400

Posted
Posted

With the duramax you get about a 450 to 500 miles tank range depending on how heavy your foot it which is very nice

BigKahuna Enthusiast

BigKahuna

Posted
Posted

I would expect about a 350-400 mile tank range with a 6.0, my 1500 6.2 with the 26gal tank is good for up to 400. The computer tells me as high as 440-470 but I wouldn't run it that low on fuel.

  • 2 weeks later...
redwngr Senior Enthusiast

redwngr

Posted
Posted

Thanks, That is what I was thinking. One thing that kind of messes that up is it is hard to find one with the max tow right now with 3:42 rear. Apparently some sort of restraint. I can find the 3:42 with the 6.2 however none I have found have the max tow with the larger rear ect. There are lots with the 3:23 and the 8 speed trans but not sure what the rear is as far as size and the heavier springs which I would definately want. Any body here have any experience towing with the 3:23 and 8 speed? I would be very curious to see what the concensus is about that.Thanks again.

Thanks, That is what I was thinking. One thing that kind of messes that up is it is hard to find one with the max tow right now with 3:42 rear. Apparently some sort of restraint. I can find the 3:42 with the 6.2 however none I have found have the max tow with the larger rear ect. There are lots with the 3:23 and the 8 speed trans but not sure what the rear is as far as size and the heavier springs which I would definately want. Any body here have any experience towing with the 3:23 and 8 speed? I would be very curious to see what the concensus is about that.Thanks again.

All 2015 6.2's have the larger dia rear end. (not sure about 2014's)

When doing daily driver duties, my 6.2/8sp is getting about 3 mpg better than the duramax it replaced.

It's a double cab so has the 'standard (6.5')' box. I miss the larger tank on the 2500, (36 gal vs 26 gal) because even with the increase mpg, the range per fill is less.

Next week (week mar 23) is the earliest TPW date anybody has for a 6.2 max tow. Hopefully once they start building them they will open the tap and make them readily available rather than the slow trickle that the 6.2 8sp started with.

(product shortage is the oldest marketing trick in the book)

I also tow and enclosed 7x14 and it pulls it fine (but I miss having tow mirrors, which are only factory available with the max tow pkg). When it does decide it needs to downshift it does it smoothly. Completely different from the downshift experience from the 4 speeds of old.

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Did have to make 1 modification because of the WeatherTech rear mud flaps and that was needing 3 longer screws than what came with the install package. 😄
    • SFC Retired
      2023 DRW Wheel Liners

      By SFC Retired · Posted

      Picked up the liners yesterday. Installed passenger side WITHOUT any modifications. All mounting holes lined up perfectly. Rain is interfering today with drivers side. Very Happy! Will add pics when finished
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      As a matter of amusement I’ll leave this conversation with this. Do you beat the government average fuel estimate? Statistics are a guide to me. Not a rule. Someone once said I have to have the last word. If true and possible may be. I’ll blame that on working in a family business.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That is a fair point, and I agree that trying to log “everything in the truck” would be the wrong direction.   There are a lot of modules and a lot of traffic. If the product became a full-truck datalogger, the amount of data would get huge very quickly, and most owners would never use it.   I think the first useful version would need to be narrow: - powertrain-side event evidence - selected high-value parameters - communication / voltage / reset events - pre/post event window - short report first, raw log only as backup   One distinction I should make is between active OBD/PID polling and passive bus capture. If you are polling PIDs through OBD, then yes: the more parameters you request, the lower the effective sample rate becomes, and you are adding diagnostic traffic to a vehicle that is already busy running itself. With passive CAN capture, the recorder is not asking all the modules for data. It is listening to traffic that is already on the bus. So it does not consume vehicle bus bandwidth in the same way that a scan tool polling hundreds of PIDs would. But your point still applies in a different way.   Even if passive capture does not add bus traffic, the recorder still has limits: - processing rate - storage rate - timestamp accuracy - decoder workload - event filtering - report size - user attention span   So the answer cannot be “log everything and let the user figure it out.” The product would need to store enough raw evidence to be useful, but only decode, graph, and present the important parts around the event.   A practical report should probably show: - what triggered the capture - how much pre/post data was preserved - which selected parameters changed - how those values compared to baseline - whether the same pattern happened before - whether any voltage, reset, bus-off, lost-message, or communication fault occurred - selected graphs around the event - raw data only as supporting evidence   So I agree with you. More data is not automatically better. The real product is the reduction from raw data into a useful event report.
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That makes sense, and I agree with most of that.   I think the product would need both: 1. a default powertrain template, so it is useful out of the box; 2. user-selected priority parameters, so the owner or shop can choose what they want to see first.   Different users are going to care about different things. One owner may care about oil pressure and voltage. Another may care about misfire trend, AFM/DFM behavior, or U-codes. A shop may want communication events and repeatability first. Your baseline point is probably the most important one. Raw data is not very useful unless the report can show what normal looked like for that vehicle under similar conditions.   The way I would think about it is: - start with a basic known-good baseline - learn normal behavior for that specific vehicle over time - allow the event to be overlaid against baseline - show whether the event was a one-time spike or a repeatable pattern - provide a simple severity level, but with clear limits on what that severity means   For example, early severity could be something like: - Info: event captured, no obvious abnormal pattern - Watch: value moved outside baseline, but not repeated - Warning: repeatable abnormal pattern under similar conditions - Critical: communication loss, voltage drop, bus-off, reset, or severe repeated event   I would not want the first version to say “replace this part.” That would be overclaiming unless there is repair-confirmed data behind it. It would be more honest to say “this pattern deserves inspection.”   On the OBD port question, I think OBD absolutely has a role. OBD is probably the right place for: - DTCs - freeze frame - VIN - calibration information - normal scan-tool parameters - Mode 6 / enhanced diagnostic data if available The reason I am still looking at an ECM-side recorder is that the failure may happen before anyone connects a scan tool. If the owner plugs in a scanner after the event, the pre-event evidence may already be gone unless the ECU happened to save it. So I do not see this as “OBD versus ECM-side.” I see it more like: - ECM-side recorder: always armed, rolling buffer, event evidence - OBD/DLC companion: DTCs, freeze frame, VIN, calibration, normal scan data - phone/cloud: status, notes, upload, report generation, notifications   I agree that phone connection and push notifications would be useful. I just would not want the phone or cloud connection to be required for capture. The recorder should save the event locally even if the phone is not connected. The phone should help with event marking, download, notes, upload, alerts, and report viewing.   For a default GM V8 event report, would this list make sense? - RPM - calculated load / MAP - throttle position - vehicle speed - gear / torque converter state if available - coolant temperature - oil pressure - oil temperature if available - battery voltage - commanded AFM/DFM state if available - actual AFM/DFM state if available - misfire counters / roughness by cylinder if available - fuel trims - relevant U-codes / communication events - bus-off / lost periodic message / module reset / voltage drop events Which of those would you remove, and what would you add?

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...