Jump to content
  • Sign up for FREE! Become a GM-Trucks.com Member Today!

    In 20 seconds you can become part of the worlds largest and oldest community discussing General Motors, Chevrolet and GMC branded pickups, crossovers, and SUVs. From buying research to owner support, join 1.5 MILLION GM Truck Enthusiasts every month who use GM-Trucks.com as a daily part of their ownership experience. 

Recommended Posts

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 .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.