Jump to content

diesel for 19

RP53

Recommended Posts

RP53 Enthusiast

RP53

Posted
Posted

just read that GM will be offering a 3.0 diesel in the 19 1500 series guess they needed to keep up with dodge and ford 

Donstar Senior Enthusiast

Donstar

Posted
Posted

A diesel 1/2 ton appeals to me but the cost will probably put it out of reach.  The efficiency and power in the current generation of gas engines also detracts from the benefit of a small diesel,  imo.  It will be interesting to see how GM promotes this engine/truck combination.

RP53 Enthusiast

RP53

Posted
  • Author
Posted

my bet you wont be able to touch one for less than $55,000.00 and that would probably be work truck trim

esloser Enthusiast

esloser

Posted
Posted

Would be nice if it split the difference between torque and mileage. I’d like to see 20-25 mpg and 500 ft-lb. of torque. Ram is at 420 and not sure what the Ford is coming in at yet with their 3 liter diesel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
Posted
20 hours ago, RP53 said:

my bet you wont be able to touch one for less than $55,000.00 and that would probably be work truck trim

The price of a new denali? I highly doubt that.

 

You can get a nicely equipped 2500 duramax for that much

truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, Donstar said:

A diesel 1/2 ton appeals to me but the cost will probably put it out of reach.  The efficiency and power in the current generation of gas engines also detracts from the benefit of a small diesel,  imo.  It will be interesting to see how GM promotes this engine/truck combination.

I agree, most of the other manufacturers are around 250hp for the 1/2 ton diesels.

 

It will probably cost around the same as a 6.2, which would surely do a better job at towing.

 

250hp vs 440hp, hmm, not a tough choice (just guessing on new 6.2 output) 

 

 

Donstar Senior Enthusiast

Donstar

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, truckguy82 said:

I agree, most of the other manufacturers are around 250hp for the 1/2 ton diesels.

 

It will probably cost around the same as a 6.2, which would surely do a better job at towing.

 

250hp vs 440hp, hmm, not a tough choice (just guessing on new 6.2 output) 

 

 

V6 is 285 hp and doesn't cost any extra!  (Of course there are other advantages to diesels besides horsepower)

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted

I'd like to know what happens to Colorado/Canyon Duramax if this thing gets over 30mpg?  Hopefully the 3.0 can be implemented into the Express/Savana as well. 

newdude Senior Enthusiast

newdude

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, RP53 said:

my bet you wont be able to touch one for less than $55,000.00 and that would probably be work truck trim

 

It will be priced like the Colorado/Canyon most likely at a 3-4K premium not 9-10k like the HD counterparts.  

Donstar Senior Enthusiast

Donstar

Posted
Posted

A 3-4 thousand dollar initial price difference and higher servicing costs will be significant considerations.  I like the torque and the fuel costs of a diesel but they don't make diesels an easy choice!

Jeffro19 Enthusiast

Jeffro19

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, esloser said:

Would be nice if it split the difference between torque and mileage. I’d like to see 20-25 mpg and 500 ft-lb. of torque. Ram is at 420 and not sure what the Ford is coming in at yet with their 3 liter diesel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ford is at 250hp and 440 tq with their 3.0 diesel. I’m sure GM will match or exceed it but be very close to these numbers. 

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Nick The Great said:

Good.  I don't understand why we don't have more diesel engines in this country.  

Because they cost too much over their gas counterparts. 

truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, MikeNH said:

Because they cost too much over their gas counterparts. 

And they don't make enough power.

 

The 2500+ diesels are the only ones that have a clear advantage over their gas counterparts.

All the smaller diesels are just too underpowered and too costly compared to gas.

 

Now if they made the 1500 duramax with 350hp and say 550ft lbs, priced it the same as the 6.2, there might be a conversation there.

 

But if the diesel is like 260hp/460tq vs and the 6.2 is 440hp/480tq, and the cost the same, screw the diesel.

Nanotech Environmental Enthusiast

Nanotech Environmental

Posted
Posted

The diesel would be nice, except they charge waaaay too much for the pleasure. It's the same in the Canyon/Colo, the diesel is many thousands extra, yet the manufacturing and productions costs aren't that much higher. In reality, the manufacturing & production costs for a diesel in this class is maybe a few hundred $$ more, up to 1 g at the outside, compared to the gas engine it replaces, yet GM will charge 5 or 6 g, plus a couple of forced option packages to get it. Too much!

Because of that, I'll stick with gas.

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • No F-bdy Bs
      Brand new to this forum. Questions about re-gearing my 26’ HD

      By No F-bdy Bs · Posted

      Diesel or gas?  The 37s will obviously, drastically reduce mpg, but the gasser will take a bigger hit to mpg, and power.  Rough guess, but I'd estimate at least a  2mpg hit on the diesel, and up to 4on the gasser. Maybe more.    I wouldn't sweat a gear change on a duramax at all, and unlikely on the gasser either. You're obviously not concerned with acceleration or towing, and the 10spd will find itself in the right gear without much hunting, if any.    If towing, mpg and acceleration are a concern, you're doing the wrong mods.  Either leave it alone, or do the lift/tires and let the chips fall where they may. 
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      I understand. It is disturbing to think a manufacture asks so much and gives so little in engineering support. This is not a GM issues, this is a greed issue and one the ALL practice.    My intent was not to remove the wind from anyone's sail but rather to point out the areas deficient so that they can be discussed with improvements the goal. But to do that you have to know the truth and what that truth is.    The commercial interest are honed in on a few select issues in which they control all the variables and are not forthcoming in the least with their customers about the details. Failure is the only thing that drives these people to improvement. One way not to fail it to manage public "expectations". The set a bar they can clear and put their thumbs under the suspenders with chest puffed.... Only the internal data tells the story fully. As we don't have access to that for decades then we have to generate it ourselves. UOA's with data that matters.  
    • Chuck FB
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I had skimmed through that article when you posted the link and honestly I felt rather defeated in a sense and realized that all these years in changing oil that in fact putting in what I was told was a good quality oil was probably not filtered as well as it should be although the filter put on the engine would be what ( as long as it never went into bypass mode ) would be the final filtering of the new oil that the engine components would first see, but then the filtering media itself is not up to par to what is ideal because a full flow filter would be too restrictive to filter fine enough for the engines best outcome in the long run. Only one of our tractors over the years which was a Versatile with a 855 Cummins had a separate bypass filter, some engine manufacturers did spec a partial bypass system within the main oil filter but I don't believe any other trucks or equipment I was servicing used such a filter. No doubt a product like the Amsoil bypass system is of benefit as long as nothing goes sideways with the extra plumbing and filter such as a rupture/leak that could cause the oil to pump out of the engine ( yes that Versatile had a remote canister with hoses routed to it as well ). With the idiot egr system on a diesel and as a result forcing a lot more soot into the oil, that certainly isn't helping the diesel engines cause or as you pointed out the GDI engine issue with creating more soot and aside from having a fancy secondary filtering system, changing the oil more often helping lower the total soot load.     So oil manufacturing and the end product is not something one can control and I wonder if there are specs on what various oil packaging companies produce in particle count or size. As to the filtering, if the OEM is not designing a filter size and spec that is really what it could be, they too are short changing the end user and so what is the answer. Of course as you say the oil side can only do so much if the air side isn't keeping up its end of the picture and air filters are only so efficient and if in a dusty environment such as farm or construction or driving gravel roads there is a lot of dirt to filter out and some of that ends up into the air stream.    Of course the irony in places like where I am where they dump the salt on the highways but also will mix in some calcium or outright pure calcium for problem road area's, or using calcium as dust control on gravel roads, the vehicle that gets used in that environment may rust out before a properly engineered engine and maintenance finally wears out so one has to face that reality in the rust belt. 
    • GAMark
      Road Master Active Suspension

      By GAMark · Posted

      Has anyone run these on their 2500?
    • Erfar
      Oil Change

      By Erfar · Posted

      have you stuck with dealer oil changes since then? I made the same switch after getting tired of crawling around under the truck, but I’ve found some dealers are way better than others about getting you in quickly. Curious if yours has been good about scheduling or if you’ve had to look elsewhere for quicker turnaround.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...