2017 Gas 2500 Changes

[The Fiddle]

The Allison does have more parasitic loss than the 6L90E mostly from "beefier" components. The difference is not great though.

 

The big reason the 6.0L isn't backed with the Allison in 3/4 and 1 ton GM pickups is mostly gear spacing. The ratios of the Allison are ideal for low rpm, high torque engines like the Duramax and the 8.1L, though the 8.1L is the minimum amount of engine I'd put in front of an Allison. You see some guys over on the Ram forums talking about the gear spacing on the 66RFE being too big for the 6.4L Hemi, and the 66RFE has almost identical ratios to the Allison.

 

As far as not updating the 6.0L, that disappoints me. A little massaging to push it to the 390 hp & 420 lb ft range would have been the ticket.

[wcup102]

Considering a new 2500 gasser but leery of the 4:10's and how they will treat me for a daily driver. Anyone have any mileage numbers on a crew cab with the 4:10's?

[Skeld]

12 to 13 maybe.

[SouthpawHD]

Considering a new 2500 gasser but leery of the 4:10's and how they will treat me for a daily driver. Anyone have any mileage numbers on a crew cab with the 4:10's?

 

As Skeld said, 12-13. I get less because I take a lot of shorter trips and the 6.0L does not seem to like short trips from a fuel mileage standpoint.

[Big Whiskey]

Considering a new 2500 gasser but leery of the 4:10's and how they will treat me for a daily driver. Anyone have any mileage numbers on a crew cab with the 4:10's?

If you have a 2500HD gasser now, you won't notice any difference in MPG. My dad traded his 2011 6.0 (3:73) for his 2015 6.0 (4.10). His MPG is the same, but the new one pulls better.

[Cowpie]

Well, in all fairness, driving style and other factors play into how one's fuel economy is going to be. I can make the same vehicle get terrible fuel economy or get darn good fuel economy depending on driving style. And speed is only part of the equation. There is a lot that goes into driving style beyond just speed.

[redwngr]

The Allison does have more parasitic loss than the 6L90E mostly from "beefier" components. The difference is not great though.

 

The big reason the 6.0L isn't backed with the Allison in 3/4 and 1 ton GM pickups is mostly gear spacing. The ratios of the Allison are ideal for low rpm, high torque engines like the Duramax and the 8.1L, though the 8.1L is the minimum amount of engine I'd put in front of an Allison. You see some guys over on the Ram forums talking about the gear spacing on the 66RFE being too big for the 6.4L Hemi, and the 66RFE has almost identical ratios to the Allison.

 

As far as not updating the 6.0L, that disappoints me. A little massaging to push it to the 390 hp & 420 lb ft range would have been the ticket.

Or maybe it's because the duramax has double the torque as the gasser, (765 ft lb vs 380 ft lb) and they don't need the allisons capability behind the L96.

[Hockeylover86]

Well, in all fairness, driving style and other factors play into how one's fuel economy is going to be. I can make the same vehicle get terrible fuel economy or get darn good fuel economy depending on driving style. And speed is only part of the equation. There is a lot that goes into driving style beyond just speed.

To a point, a truck is still heavy, and shaped like a truck.

 

The new 10 speeds coming for the half tons will help with this, but there isnt much to be gained anymore.

[Hockeylover86]

The Allison does have more parasitic loss than the 6L90E mostly from "beefier" components. The difference is not great though.

 

The big reason the 6.0L isn't backed with the Allison in 3/4 and 1 ton GM pickups is mostly gear spacing. The ratios of the Allison are ideal for low rpm, high torque engines like the Duramax and the 8.1L, though the 8.1L is the minimum amount of engine I'd put in front of an Allison. You see some guys over on the Ram forums talking about the gear spacing on the 66RFE being too big for the 6.4L Hemi, and the 66RFE has almost identical ratios to the Allison.

 

As far as not updating the 6.0L, that disappoints me. A little massaging to push it to the 390 hp & 420 lb ft range would have been the ticket.

 

The Ford SD will have 430lb/ft and the F150 will have 470lb/ft with the 10 speed auto.

 

I wish GM would have bumped up the 6.0, its plenty tough to handle it.

[Cowpie]

To a point, a truck is still heavy, and shaped like a truck.

 

The new 10 speeds coming for the half tons will help with this, but there isnt much to be gained anymore.

 

 

True, but last time I checked, my semi truck is shaped like a "truck" and it gets equivalent fuel mileage, when loaded, as many 6.0L 2500's do pulling a camper, according to what I read from others. Now that is truly sad. When a semi truck with a 128" wheel base and a 70" walk in sleeper cab, hooked up to a 53 ft, 13 ft 4" tall box trailer that is like pulling a bill board around in the wind, running on 14 tires which are larger and have greater negative fuel economy impact, can match a little pickup pulling a aluminum and wood can in fuel economy. Sure the fuels are different, but so in the engine size by over 2 times for the semi. Some of that low fuel economy by the pickup has to come from poor driving style by those getting that kind of mpg, though many will not admit it due to ego.

[CRApex]

And a freight train can move over a ton of freight 500 miles on a gallon of fuel..apples to oranges comparison.

[Cowpie]

Then why does a locomotive need 5000 gallon fuel tanks? Using their marketing methodology, my semi truck can move 1 ton of freight 210 miles on 1 gallon of fuel. And I can do it in 1/4 of the time they can.

[CRApex]

using data on what a semi or train can do really isn't that relevant to a pickup truck..in my opinion...regardless of the methodology.

[Cowpie]

But I have made the point various times that driving style can compensate quite admirably for the brick aerodynamics of a pickup.

[CRApex]

But I have made the point various times that driving style can compensate quite admirably for the brick aerodynamics of a pickup.

Agree 100%