Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
9 minutes ago, karmasoft said:

Interesting... so do you think that means, the package may include a larger fuel tank?

Not according to the Owners Manual.  The only way to get a larger Factory installed tank is to buy the Long Bed .

Posted

This is the competitor's description of their max trailer package (below). Wouldn't it make sense, despite what the owner's manuals indicates, that the GM equivalent would also upgrade the fuel tank size?

 

Includes:
• 3.55 Electronic-locking rear-axle
• 4-pin/7-pin wiring harness
• 36 Gallon fuel tank
• Auxiliary transmission oil cooler
• Engine oil cooler
• Class IV trailer hitch receiver
• Pro Trailer Backup Assist with Tailgate LED
• Smart Trailer Tow Connector (standard on LARIAT and higher)
• Integrated Trailer Brake Controller
• Upgraded front stabilizer bar
• Upgraded rear bumper

Requires 3.5L EcoBoost® engine. 
Does not include Trailer Tow Mirrors. Trailer Tow Mirrors are a standalone option and must be ordered separately.
Max GCWR/Max Tow achieved on SuperCrew® when equipped with 20-inch Wheels. This configuration will also come equipped with max springs, steering gear, and upgraded stabilizer bar.

Posted
11 minutes ago, karmasoft said:

This is the competitor's description of their max trailer package (below). Wouldn't it make sense, despite what the owner's manuals indicates, that the GM equivalent would also upgrade the fuel tank size?

 

Includes:
• 3.55 Electronic-locking rear-axle
• 4-pin/7-pin wiring harness
• 36 Gallon fuel tank
• Auxiliary transmission oil cooler
• Engine oil cooler
• Class IV trailer hitch receiver
• Pro Trailer Backup Assist with Tailgate LED
• Smart Trailer Tow Connector (standard on LARIAT and higher)
• Integrated Trailer Brake Controller
• Upgraded front stabilizer bar
• Upgraded rear bumper

Requires 3.5L EcoBoost® engine. 
Does not include Trailer Tow Mirrors. Trailer Tow Mirrors are a standalone option and must be ordered separately.
Max GCWR/Max Tow achieved on SuperCrew® when equipped with 20-inch Wheels. This configuration will also come equipped with max springs, steering gear, and upgraded stabilizer bar.

Does not include tow mirrors.  What is the point of getting the rest of it if you can't see around your trailer. 

  • Like 1
Posted

After more homework, and to DougFL's point, seems like there is no increased capacity available.  For example, in GM's own press release, linked here.  Seems pretty clear cut.

 

Definitely a head scratcher... guess only time will tell if sales are impacted.

Posted (edited)

So they have 3 tank sizes available. Small, really small and average.  Obviously it's not a cost savings deal as if that was the case they'd only have 1 size.  So what possible reason could they be so narrow minded and just plain stupid?

 

All trucks should have a 26 gallon.  Offer a upgraded 34-38 gallon.  Problem solved and then you only have to make two tanks!

Edited by shift_grind
Posted

Yeah its puzzling. Why design a class leading truck then take a step backward with fuel tank size? The Colorado has a 21 gallon capacity... and the Silverado is only +3 over that?

Posted

Weight savings, CAFE requirements, gas mileage, etc, They have to trim weight with each new design.  Smaller gas tanks, Auto start/stop, Aluminium panels, front air dams only inches off the ground, awful driveability.  I'm not sure why everyone doesn't understand this..

 

I for one could care less about a few MPG... I would rather have great driveability and real steel, but there are many truck buyers that choose solely on this, they could care less if it's Ford, GM, Dodge. 

Either way, no need to complain.  Either keep your 1999 truck, or adapt. 

  • Like 1
Posted
2 minutes ago, GMC-AT said:

Weight savings, CAFE requirements, gas mileage, etc, They have to trim weight with each new design.  Smaller gas tanks, Auto start/stop, Aluminium panels, front air dams only inches off the ground, awful driveability.  I'm not sure why everyone doesn't understand this..

 

I for one could care less about a few MPG... I would rather have great driveability and real steel, but there are many truck buyers that choose solely on this, they could care less if it's Ford, GM, Dodge. 

Either way, no need to complain.  Either keep your 1999 truck, or adapt. 

Why does everyone use CAFE requirements as a end all excuse for everything, relevant or not?  Did the MPG go up with the new truck?  numbers indicate - no.  So why use a smaller tank? They're lowered the expected fuel range.  They were already criticized for using a 26 gallon unit and their response is to go smaller?  Why not offer a larger tank option like everyone else does, does it not solve all the complaints?  They offer their smaller tank for that .01mpg improvement, but people who tow can have 3-400 mile range without issue. They are stressing how important towing is with these trucks and are going to ignoring one of the most important aspects of towing, being able to tow a decent distance without stopping for fuel.  I don't know about you but if I'm pulling a camper across country, i don't want a 220 mile range. 

 

I've never seen or heard of a manufacture having different MPG ratings for different tank sizes, I doubt they even need to fill it completely during testing.  So if offering a larger tank as an option has LITERALLY NO EFFECT on the mpg rating, how is CAFE requirements even relevant?  Same thing goes for a number of things people who don't understand CAFE like to blame CAFE for.  

 

"No need to complain, keep your 1999 or adapt"?  I can only shake my head at comments like this.

Posted

When I was pulling I always added a tank- toolbox. Some fuel tanks I would tie into my return line to the truck tank with an on off switch. I wanted to avoid fuel stops as much as possible. It just kills the average speed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted

The smaller tank = less weight. 2 gallons of less fuel in that tank = even more weight savings. Lower weight = more MPG

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

  • Thanks 1
Posted (edited)
47 minutes ago, GMC-AT said:

The smaller tank = less weight. 2 gallons of less fuel in that tank = even more weight savings. Lower weight = more MPG

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
 

I don't think you got what I was getting at.  Would the EPA numbers go down if you could option out a larger tank?  They don't for Ram or Ford, because they don't test every variation of ever model.  They could easily offer a larger tank as an option and it would have no effect on the rating.  They already offer 3 sizes and could have covered all their bases with 2-3 sizes.  There is no excuse for GM on this.  

 

I don't tow a ton, so it's not a make it or break it option for me, but will be for others.  I'd rather they sell more trucks so they can spend more on updates or new trucks.  I can gaurentee with their poor decision making the 2019 model will never take the #1 spot.  It's a shame because they made a great truck and shot their own foot with a bunch of stupid easily fixed mistakes.  

Edited by shift_grind
Posted

I agree.  I think the reason they don't offer tank size options has to be production cost stay lower. They pinch every nickle.   I also agree GM will not be #1 anytime soon.. they are lucky if RAM doesn't overtake them as #2 in the next few years.  I would have ordered the 2019 RAM.. but as nice and as far advanced as they are over GM... they have a ton of issues right now.  So I went with a 2019 Silverado. 

 

 

 

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • My 2025 Silverado 1500 had to receive a brand-new engine (long block) under warranty last month at only around 16,500 miles. Before the replacement, the truck repeatedly displayed "Engine Oil Level Low" warnings, even though the Oil Life Monitor still showed around 50% remaining after about 6,000 miles since my last oil change. After seeing the warning several times, I checked the dipstick with the engine cold, and the oil level was completely normal. The next day, the message escalated to "Add Engine Oil." At first, I assumed it was just a faulty oil level sensor, so I brought the truck to the dealership. After inspecting the engine, they found internal cylinder wall scoring and ultimately replaced the entire long block under warranty. Before this happened, I was planning to install a 4-inch lift and suspension upgrade on my truck. After needing a new engine at just 16,500 miles, I honestly don't see the point anymore. I also contacted GM to ask whether my vehicle qualified for a buyback, but I was informed that it does not at this time. Anyway, this experience has left me with serious concerns about the long-term reliability of this engine. I sincerely hope NHTSA expands the current investigation or recall to include 2025 model and performs a thorough inspection of affected vehicles. My biggest concern is that these engines may fail shortly after the powertrain warranty expires. If GM truly stands behind this engine, then at the very least, please consider extending the powertrain warranty to 10 years for affected owners. That would go a long way toward restoring customer confidence.
    • Without exception but then I'm the odd duck, right? I know what goes into that test, how it is calculated and thus how to beat it. But EPA values are often not beaten by the general public and the government has in past years adjusted the means and methods to come to those values to more closely approximate "Joe Average".    The only real trick to beating that EPA average is don't drive like "Joe Average".    It's the same method you used to profit from "Economic Migration" and in doing so beat the 'stats'. But you, like me, are not "Joe Average".     The thing you don't seem to grasp is this "Purchasing Power Index" isn't forward looking. It doesn't predict what it going to be but looks backward and states what it was. They are not telling us what the THINK, they are telling us what they MEASURED. Example:    Wife says "I'm going to lose 40 pounds by Christmas". May she does, maybe she doesn't but the doctors office who weighed her when she made that statement and again at Christmas only REPORTS what the RESULT was. You and I can banter about what was possible and what aunt Tilly did till the cows come home but the result is the result. Arguing otherwise is.....irrational. That's all I'm saying. This isn't about:      What you are calling a 'Statistic' is a RESULT not a CALCUATION and as a result the RULE. Like gravity as a rule, it can not be broken. 
    • Just wanted to say thank you for posting this. Years later, your thread is still helping Silverado owners.   I bought my 2025 Silverado 1500 in January 2025, and I've had what feels like the exact same rattle since day one. After reading your findings, I believe my truck has the same issue with the cable carrier contacting the rear sliding window. To be honest, I had pretty much given up on pursuing the issue. It wasn't until I recently drove another brand's pickup that I realized just how quiet their cabin was—and how noisy mine has been all along. On my truck, the rattle happens on almost any paved road, gets even worse on rougher pavement, and I can even hear it during braking and acceleration.   I actually referenced your thread when submitting my case to GM, hoping they'll recognize this as a recurring issue instead of treating it as an isolated incident. The reason I reached out to GM first is because my dealership told me they would need to keep the truck for at least two days just to diagnose the problem. I was concerned that even after two days, they still might not be able to identify the source of the rattle before giving the truck back to me. I had also asked a few dealerships about this issue during previous service visits, but none of them seemed to know what was causing it or had a solution. That's why I decided to contact GM directly first, hoping they might already have an official repair procedure or guidance for this issue.   I also hope GM eventually comes up with an official fix for this problem. I have a feeling there are many Silverado owners experiencing the same rattle, but most either choose to live with it or simply don't know what the cause is.   Really appreciate you taking the time to document your diagnosis. Your post is still making a difference years later.
    • I have 2 choices. 
    • Do you have access to BP fuels? Some stations have Silver 91 E-0 priced the same as their 93 E-10.  There is a local Marathon with 90 alky free for $6 a gallon but I go down the road to BP for $5-ish. They also have a 100 E-0 but that stuff is $10 a pop. 
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...