Jump to content

Heavy-Duty GM Pickup Fuel Economy Numbers Published By CR

Gorehamj

Recommended Posts

5.3Avalanche Enthusiast

5.3Avalanche

Posted
Posted

I understand you two believe your opinions should be as important to everyone else as they are to you. I find information such as this very useful. That's another opinion. Opinions are not facts nor the truth. Here's some facts...

 

5.3 Motor data from Fuelly.com

 

http://www.fuelly.com/car/chevrolet/silverado_1500/2017?engineconfig_id=63&bodytype_id=&submodel_id=

 

Based on data from 67 vehicles, 1,444 fuel-ups and 439,317 miles of driving, the 2017 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 gets a combined Avg MPG of 16.46 with a 0.14 MPG margin of error.

 

​Enough said.

 

So to prove that the CR data somehow allows readers to make a decision, you show that you have to go to an alternative source in order to find additional data in order to draw a conclusion? Interesting thought process.

 

Thanks for replying and showing that Fuelly.com provides more meaningful data than CR does which is what we are criticizing. So really, all CR managed was to coax it's readers to go find data elsewhere because their own data was not sufficient in order to draw a meaningful conclusion.

 

From Fuelly.com we can find the information that everyone wants to know about.

 

2017 Chevrolet 2500HD with 6.6 diesel : 14.9 mpg average

2016 Chevrolet 2500HD with 6.0 gas : 11.2 mpg average

2016-2017 Chevrolet 1500 with 5.3 gas : 16.5 mpg average

2016-2017 Chevrolet 1500 with 6.2 gas : 16.5 mpg average

 

http://www.fuelly.com/car/chevrolet/silverado_2500_hd

http://www.fuelly.com/car/chevrolet/silverado_1500

j-ten-ner Senior Enthusiast

j-ten-ner

Posted
Posted

From the CR ( https://www.consumerreports.org/pickup-trucks/heavy-duty-pickup-truck-fuel-economy/?loginMethod=auto )

 

Quote:

 

"...

What we found in our tests was that the efficiency of the diesel engines wasn't enough to offset the added bulk of these monstrous trucks. The heavy-duty diesels achieved only 14-15 mpg, which was 1-2 mpg less than their gasoline-powered light-duty counterparts.

The extra power and brawn of the heavy-duty trucks do give them more hauling capability.

But for those just looking for improved fuel efficiency from a diesel engine, it's not worth upgrading to a heavy-duty truck. ..."

 

And yes, I've heard people talking about switching to a HD diesel just for fuel economy reasons.

 

so long

j-ten-ner

Gofas Enthusiast

Gofas

Posted
Posted

They compare the 2 cause little wankers justify driving big diesels over lil light duties for daily driving without carrying payloads nor trailers. Thinking they are getting just as good mpg's.

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted

 

So to prove that the CR data somehow allows readers to make a decision, you show that you have to go to an alternative source in order to find additional data in order to draw a conclusion? Interesting thought process.

 

 

 

2017 Chevrolet 2500HD with 6.6 diesel : 14.9 mpg average

2016 Chevrolet 2500HD with 6.0 gas : 11.2 mpg average

 

 

Nooooo. I added the Fuelly information for the second person replying that no one with the 5.3 got worse than 20 mpg. Thus my opening. 'you two'. Has nothing to do with my thought process and everything to do with two answers in one posting.

 

Fuelly proves nothing one way or the other about CR. The Fuelly data base is a composite of hundreds or trucks thus conditions vs CR's control study of the same conditions is oranges to apples. Neither tells you what YOU will get driving either truck. So from that stand point nobody's research would be of any value. Good thing no one studies medicine. Right?

 

Funny reply from the fella that said we shouldn't have to sift data. Me thinks you just like to argue.

truckofwinandawesome Senior Enthusiast

truckofwinandawesome

Posted
Posted

The mileage numbers they are reporting are a lot lower than what almost everyone with these trucks are getting. How did they bungle it that badly?

 

Most people are averaging a lot closer to 20 mpg overall with the 5.3 1500's.

Same with the diesel 2500's. Most people are getting much higher overall numbers than what CR is reporting.

I have a 9000 mile overall average of over 20 mpg US on my '17 Sierra 1500 4x4 with 5.3 and 3.42 gearing. That includes highway, city, stop and go & everything.

Even when I tow an enclosed cargo trailer with 2000# of cargo, I get much better mileage than CR is reporting.

 

I've never put a lot of credence into CR's reporting & this just supports my position even more.

not only that, they will try their hardest to push you into a Tundra or a Titan anyway because they are heavily biased towards the Japanese brands.

Nanotech Environmental Enthusiast

Nanotech Environmental

Posted
Posted

I understand you two believe your opinions should be as important to everyone else as they are to you. I find information such as this very useful. That's another opinion. Opinions are not facts nor the truth. Here's some facts...

 

5.3 Motor data from Fuelly.com

 

http://www.fuelly.com/car/chevrolet/silverado_1500/2017?engineconfig_id=63&bodytype_id=&submodel_id=

 

Based on data from 67 vehicles, 1,444 fuel-ups and 439,317 miles of driving, the 2017 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 gets a combined Avg MPG of 16.46 with a 0.14 MPG margin of error.

 

​Enough said.

Good Lord!!

So many things wrong with this, I don't know where to start. How many of those trucks were loaded? Pulling trailers? empty? City only? Highway only? Driven above speed limits? Below? By leadfoots? Hypermilers? winter driving? summer driving? rear end gears? etc,etc,etc.....

This data maybe potentially gives an overall fleet mileage idea but nothing more and says nothing about what the CR article was trying to infer. it says nothing about individual mileage and neither does the CR report. Pretty much everyone on the fuel mileage threads is beating these numbers by a significant margin.

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted

Good Lord!!

So many things wrong with this, I don't know where to start. How many of those trucks were loaded? Pulling trailers? empty? City only? Highway only? Driven above speed limits? Below? By leadfoots? Hypermilers? winter driving? summer driving? rear end gears? etc,etc,etc.....

This data maybe potentially gives an overall fleet mileage idea but nothing more and says nothing about what the CR article was trying to infer. it says nothing about individual mileage and neither does the CR report. Pretty much everyone on the fuel mileage threads is beating these numbers by a significant margin.

 

 

What do you think statistics are? These are not cherry picked people. These are Dick and Jane participants using a tool that gets published for the benefit of all. It can't get more real world than that. Statistics by nature filter you objections to such a data pool. Graphs of the results bear this out. You want cherry picked numbers but you can't decide on the parameters to be used and disagree with anyone and everyone for the sake of disagreement. This makes this an irrational exchange. I don't do irrational.

 

Oh, I don't actually care who you are. The world thought itself flat on the base of such experts.

Nanotech Environmental Enthusiast

Nanotech Environmental

Posted
Posted

 

What do you think statistics are? These are not cherry picked people. These are Dick and Jane participants using a tool that gets published for the benefit of all. It can't get more real world than that. Statistics by nature filter you objections to such a data pool. Graphs of the results bear this out. You want cherry picked numbers but you can't decide on the parameters to be used and disagree with anyone and everyone for the sake of disagreement. This makes this an irrational exchange. I don't do irrational.

 

Oh, I don't actually care who you are. The world thought itself flat on the base of such experts.

You misunderstood my post.

Z45 Senior Enthusiast

Z45

Posted
Posted

 

 

What we found in our tests was that the efficiency of the diesel engines wasn't enough to offset the added bulk of these monstrous trucks. The heavy-duty diesels achieved only 14-15 mpg, which was 1-2 mpg less than their gasoline-powered light-duty counterparts.

The extra power and brawn of the heavy-duty trucks do give them more hauling capability.

But for those just looking for improved fuel efficiency from a diesel engine, it's not worth upgrading to a heavy-duty truck. ..."

You hear many diesel owners bragg over 20 mpg with a Duramax.

Colossus Senior Enthusiast

Colossus

Posted
Posted

Yes, I've heard a few of the 01-07 brag they have hit 22 MPG at 55MPH in fact.

sdeeter19555 Senior Enthusiast

sdeeter19555

Posted
Posted

Yes, I've heard a few of the 01-07 brag they have hit 22 MPG at 55MPH in fact.

The early versions of the big three diesels could get over 20mpg if driven sensibly. I had multiple Cummins that I tracked every tank...the 99s were having a bad day if they were less than 21-22mpg. Our 95 12 valve would pull 26-28 mpg on the highway. My 3rd gen was the worst, it averaged high teens with 4.10 rears, but took a lot of money to make it consistent and reliable.

 

I had a 95 pre-powerstroke and a 97 powerstroke for work trucks...both of those would get 20mpg pretty easily.

 

That's hand calculated...miles driven over gallons to fill up.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • newdude
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By newdude · Posted

      No such thing as regenerative braking on a pure ICE vehicle.     Regenerative braking is the re-capture of energy from electric motors and stores it in the battery pack.  So hybrids, PHEV and EVs have regenerative braking.     What you are seeing is the charging system changing modes is all.  Its likely entering charge mode for some sort of reason is all.  All of the charging modes will be listed below.   As for L10 vs D.  L10 turns off automatic grade braking.  L10 puts you in control of grade downshifts where in D it will automatically do it based on brake pedal position and other factors.  Otherwise L10 and D drive exactly the same aside from that one aspect.    Battery Sulfation Mode The BCM will enter this mode when the interpreted Generator output voltage is less than 13.2 V for 45 minutes. When this condition exists the BCM will enter Charge Mode for 2–3 minutes. The BCM will then determine which mode to enter depending on voltage requirements.   Charge Mode The BCM will enter Charge Mode when ever one of the following conditions are met:   Windshield wipers are ON for more than 3 s. Climate Control Voltage Boost Mode Request is true, as sensed by the HVAC control module via serial data. High speed cooling fan, rear defogger, and HVAC high speed blower operation can cause the BCM to enter the Charge Mode. The estimated battery temperature is less than 0°C (32°F). Battery State of Charge is less than 80%. Vehicle speed is greater than 145 km/h (90 mph) A current sensor malfunction exists. System voltage is determined to be below 12.56 V When any one of these conditions is met, the system will set targeted generator output voltage to a charging voltage between 13.9–15.5 V, depending on the battery state of charge and estimated battery temperature.   Fuel Economy Mode The BCM will enter Fuel Economy Mode when the estimated battery temperature is at least 0°C (32°F) but less than or equal to 80°C (176°F), the calculated battery current is less than 15 A and greater than −8 A, and the battery state-of-charge is greater than or equal to 80%. Its targeted generator output voltage is the open circuit voltage of the battery and can be between 12.5–13.1 V. When fuel economy mode is active, the generator is not charging, only maintaining open circuit battery voltage. The BCM will exit this mode and enter Charge Mode when any of the conditions described above are present.   Headlamp Mode The BCM will enter Headlamp Mode when ever the head lamps are ON (high or low beams). Voltage will be regulated between 13.9–14.5 V.   Start Up Mode When the engine is started the BCM sets a targeted generator output voltage of 14.5 V for 30 s.   Tow/Haul Mode (if applicable) Pressing the Tow/Haul Mode button located on the center stack, the vehicle system voltage is raised and the remote (non-vehicle) battery will be charged. Having the headlamps on will raise the system voltage and if the Tow/Haul button is applied it will not serve any purpose. The voltage is regulated between 13.9-14.5 V.      
    • jaszr2
      Active Grille Delete

      By jaszr2 · Posted

      Hello from Australia Just sharing that there is now a way to delete the active shutters entirely with just a plug in module. Opens up tons of room to light bars etc.
    • jake111
      Gasser Subforum Has Been Quiet - - So, Regenerative Braking and Using L10

      By jake111 · Posted

      I have an observation and a question... 1) I watch the voltage closely because I have had to dial in the cut-in/cut-out voltages of the battery separator to my camper.  The "smart" charging drives me nuts.  Anyway, I noticed that when coasting for a while, and especially if lightly using the brakes (though not necessary), the voltage goes up from mid/high-13 volts to mid/high-14 volts.  Then it drops back down after stopping or going again.  Consistently!   The only explanation I can come up with is REGENERATIVE BRAKING!  Well, maybe that's a little bit of an exaggeration, but it's certainly free extra battery charging.   2) Driving on mountain roads I will use L and vary the max gear.  Things straighten out and I end up in L10.  Sometimes I leave it there for a while.  Is there any difference between L10 and D?   
    • devonthegreat
      anyone interested in a 2002 Chevy Silverado 4x4 parts truck NYC

      By devonthegreat · Posted

      **SOLD** Please end or delete post. thank you
    • PBNB
      Tire pressure for 37s

      By PBNB · Posted

      Do you think this width might affect the chalk test with a higher pressure closer to 65psi? I think lowering the pressure makes sense to get the tread to lay flatter

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...