Jump to content

Comparison of 1998 Silverado 1500 Diesel to 2018 Colorado Diesel Is Very Surprising

Gorehamj

Recommended Posts

Gorehamj Senior Enthusiast

Gorehamj

Posted
Posted

 

silverado-colorado-ig.jpg

John Goreham
Contributing Writer, GM-Trucks.com
3-8-2018

 

A new infographic from Spork Marketing draws an interesting comparison between the 1998 Chevrolet Silverado diesel and the 2018 Chevy Colorado Diesel. The older truck in a larger segment with a large 6.5-liter displacement diesel engine must surely have greater torque and capacities, right? Guess again. The "smaller," modern Chevy actually matches the old 155 Silverado in every category except bed length. The new Colorado is 50% more fuel efficient but has the same power and torque as the older Silverado. The new Colorado can tow more but is down just a smidge on Max rated payload. We found the inflation-adjusted price comparison the most surprising. What spec comparison surprised you?

Nanotech Environmental Enthusiast

Nanotech Environmental

Posted
Posted

Must be a typo on the curb weights.

I have a hard time believing that a 1998 ext cab 4x4 with a big boat anchor diesel is only 4173lbs. I could see the base model reg cab shortbox 2wd with a 4.3 weighing that. Definitely not ext cab 4wd with 6.5 diesel. Trucks have gotten heavier, but not that much heavier. The modern 1500 equiv with gas is about 5600ish or so. The modern 2500 with 6.6 Dmax is about 7300lbs. Diesel vs gas in a modern HD is almost 1000lbs difference. The old 6.5's were no lightweights.

 

I had an 84 SC 1500 4wd with 8ft box & 350 v8. It was well over 4000lbs.

 

The real weight for the 98 should probably be around 6000-6500 lbs or so.

Logan Lanfear Enthusiast

Logan Lanfear

Posted
Posted
15 hours ago, Nanotech Environmental said:

Must be a typo on the curb weights.

I have a hard time believing that a 1998 ext cab 4x4 with a big boat anchor diesel is only 4173lbs. I could see the base model reg cab shortbox 2wd with a 4.3 weighing that. Definitely not ext cab 4wd with 6.5 diesel. Trucks have gotten heavier, but not that much heavier. The modern 1500 equiv with gas is about 5600ish or so. The modern 2500 with 6.6 Dmax is about 7300lbs. Diesel vs gas in a modern HD is almost 1000lbs difference. The old 6.5's were no lightweights.

 

I had an 84 SC 1500 4wd with 8ft box & 350 v8. It was well over 4000lbs.

 

The real weight for the 98 should probably be around 6000-6500 lbs or so.

Ive actually had my 1998 weighed and it does have the 350 but I can tell you that number is accurate.  My truck came in at 4050 lbs and had a light tank of fuel and no one in it.  So with the larger engine its probably realistic.  

 

Also these trucks are not named Silverado or Sierra.  Those are just trims.  If its 4WD is a K1500, for 2WD its C1500.  1999 was the first year for calling them a Silverado or Sierra.  

Nanotech Environmental Enthusiast

Nanotech Environmental

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Logan Lanfear said:

Ive actually had my 1998 weighed and it does have the 350 but I can tell you that number is accurate.  My truck came in at 4050 lbs and had a light tank of fuel and no one in it.  So with the larger engine its probably realistic.  

 

Also these trucks are not named Silverado or Sierra.  Those are just trims.  If its 4WD is a K1500, for 2WD its C1500.  1999 was the first year for calling them a Silverado or Sierra.  

Umm, it appears your scale is waay off, or not working properly.

 

Here's the factory specs for the 1998 ext cab shortbox 4wd with V6 & manual trans; curb weight 4561 lbs.  https://www.thecarconnection.com/specifications/chevrolet_c-k-1500_1998_ext-cab-141-5-wb-4wd

A diesel with auto will definitely be well over the 5000 lb mark.

muddkatt Senior Enthusiast

muddkatt

Posted
Posted

I can tell you that an 01 Sierra extended cab, 5.3 engine 2WD with about 100 pounds of tools and tool box weighs in at about 5600 pounds give or take a 100. My truck is on the scales at least once a month hauling construction debris to the dump.

Its a different body design, but there is no way that they added 1300 pounds to the truck before factoring in the weight of the diesel engine, 2nd battery?, 4WD set up, etc...

Nargg Enthusiast

Nargg

Posted
Posted

Kills me how many guys say that little I4 diesel is not powerful enough.  It's plenty powerful for the market it's aimed at.  And the new I6 coming to the 1/2 ton is also plenty of engine.  If you need more, don't gripe about the smaller trucks, they obviously are NOT what you need if you need more.

Likarok Senior Enthusiast

Likarok

Posted
Posted

And remember that these Baby D's have been in use in Thailand and Asia for decades! In Thailand they are in two ton trucks like Hino's. 

Jsdirt Senior Enthusiast

Jsdirt

Posted
Posted

Kind of a silly headline. Everyone remembers the 6.5 as a gutless slug of an engine. At least I do.

 

If they're still designing the front ends to require major surgery for just a front pad replacement, GM would have to pay ME to drive one. Dumbest design EVER on a motor vehicle. Hopefully they improved the design of the engine too, so you don't have to drop the oil pan and remove the intake manifold just to remove a valve cover ...

 

People may not care about these things ... but they surely will when repairs are needed, and they're socked with a $1,800 bill for any kind of work under the valve covers, when the CHANGE ENGINE LIGHT comes on after 100k miles, like the 2.8 ...

Joel Feeger Enthusiast

Joel Feeger

Posted
Posted

I had a Diesel 2 door Blazer  and swapped vacuum hose to wastegate so full boost all the time....100,000 plus  miles....damn good truck for me  and Chevy was nice enough to replace the Stanydine injector block 8 times   out to 100,000....

 

Rob Okray Enthusiast

Rob Okray

Posted
Posted
On 3/9/2018 at 8:54 AM, Nanotech Environmental said:

Umm, it appears your scale is waay off, or not working properly.

 

Here's the factory specs for the 1998 ext cab shortbox 4wd with V6 & manual trans; curb weight 4561 lbs.  https://www.thecarconnection.com/specifications/chevrolet_c-k-1500_1998_ext-cab-141-5-wb-4wd

A diesel with auto will definitely be well over the 5000 lb mark.

My 2007 classic crew cab 350 4wd z71 slt, basically a 1999-2006 was ~4700 IIRC.

Nanotech Environmental Enthusiast

Nanotech Environmental

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, Rob Okray said:

My 2007 classic crew cab 350 4wd z71 slt, basically a 1999-2006 was ~4700 IIRC.

I think you might be off by ~800 lbs. I had an 06 dbl cab SLE 4x4 Z71 5.3 and it always crossed the scales at the dump or the scrap dealer at around 56-5700 with me in it & a few tools & odds and ends in a bin under the rear seat. The weight was after the load in the box was emptied.

michigan2500hd Senior Enthusiast

michigan2500hd

Posted
Posted
My 2007 classic crew cab 350 4wd z71 slt, basically a 1999-2006 was ~4700 IIRC.
Are you sure it had a 350??

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

2018GMC Senior Enthusiast

2018GMC

Posted
Posted

I thought a good estimation of curb weight was:

 

GVWR - Payload = Curb Weight

 

1997 K1500 Extended cab 4x4 6.6' box Z71 5.7 (350) 4L60E 14 Bolt F44 Semi Float Rear

 

6600 - 1700 = 4900lbs

Rob Okray Enthusiast

Rob Okray

Posted
Posted
On 3/20/2018 at 10:59 AM, michigan2500hd said:

Are you sure it had a 350??

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
 

Oh, wait you are correct. That was my '91 It had a 5.3 Too many trucks. Too many brain injuries.

Jsdirt Senior Enthusiast

Jsdirt

Posted
Posted

There was no 5.3 in '91. That was the 5.7 - or 350. The 5.3 was a late 90's engine.

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Jsdirt
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jsdirt · Posted

      Because that is IDIOTIC, much like this question. They've already been forced to do it by past administrations - why would you roll that back when it's a GOOD thing?  WHO IS ARGUING FOR LOWER MILEAGE???? 😂  NOBODY IS!!   I'm certainly not! What I want is RELIABLE vehicles again that are worth the price paid!    I don't get your logic here ...   In 2003 I paid $2,200 for our '86 Grand Marquis. It's STILL running and I've never been inside the engine, aside for the timing cover since it was leaking, so I threw a new timing set in since that makes sense. Transmission is ORIGINAL. Electric pump in the gas tank is ORIGINAL. Rear end is ORIGINAL. I'd have to hit my head REAL hard to want to pay $60k or more for a car that still can't come close to the comfort, seating and storage space, or reliability of this one. Nothing is even in the ball park! Hundreds of thousands of brands and models have been built and sent to the crusher while this one keeps on going!   https://postimg.cc/Z9XRrCSg   I've got a whole fleet of cars, motorcycles, and a truck close to this age for summer and winter. No one could pay me enough to buy anything built this century. I have zero use for any it.
    • Jsdirt
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By Jsdirt · Posted

      Since I'm the one who has to fix them when they break, I'll take vehicles over 30 years old all day, EVERY day, over ANY modern crap. Have you attempted any repairs on anything built after 2006? It's a friggin nightmare, and gets worse the newer the model year.    If I had the will or desire, I can make any car of any age outside of a Model T (I don't have THAT much will ...) just as powerful, comfortable, and have all the tech the new stuff does, and get pretty close in mileage, too. I prefer SIMPLICITY. The less the vehicle has, the less to fix WHEN it breaks, not IF.   I'm glad you snot-nosed punks don't like them. More for us, plus that keeps the prices from climbing more than they already have.👍
    • cautious optimist
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By cautious optimist · Posted

      Bringing this thread back on topic. I just noticed the incredible lack of bright chrome across the entire new lineup. Even the Denali has tinted the brightwork in the grille and has none elsewhere. None of them have chrome bumpers. As far as I can tell there aren't even chrome mirror caps. I'm curious if this also happens out back? Are there no chrome rear bumpers either? This is quite the departure for GMC.
    • cautious optimist
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By cautious optimist · Posted

      Bringing this thread back on topic. I just noticed the incredible lack of bright chrome across the entire new lineup. Even the Denali has tinted the brightwork in the grille and has none elsewhere. None of them have chrome bumpers. As far as I can tell there aren't even chrome mirror caps. I'm curious if this also happens out back? Are there no chrome rear bumpers either? This is quite the departure for GMC.
    • cautious optimist
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By cautious optimist · Posted

      Bringing this thread back on topic. I just noticed the incredible lack of bright chrome across the entire new lineup. Even the Denali has tinted the brightwork in the grille and has none elsewhere. None of them have chrome bumpers. As far as I can tell there aren't even chrome mirror caps. I'm curious if this also happens out back? Are there no chrome rear bumpers either? This is quite the departure for GMC.

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...