2019 Trail Boss...Why no 6.2L

[Black02Silverado]

1 minute ago, Gagliano7 said:

The 6.2 doesn't cost anymore to make than the 5.3. Maybe $100. THat $2600 option is all profit for gm. Don't understand why you can't get the 6.2 in all truck models.

Don't forget the 6.2 is bolted to the 10sp so there is more of a cost involved there. 

[Gagliano7]

11 minutes ago, Black02Silverado said:

Don't forget the 6.2 is bolted to the 10sp so there is more of a cost involved there. 

Yes but it can be bolted to the 8 speed or 6 speed.

[pronstar]

Certainly, it all depends upon the use.  Under different usage (or different tests), the results of different vehicles will not be proportional to the results on the EPA tests.  One vehicle can be higher than another for one type of use, but lower for other uses or tests.
 
A good example of this is the Ford Ecoboosts...they do pretty fantastically on the EPA tests, but drive lots of hills/mountains, tow a trailer and their mileage drops like a rock (you can have "Eco" or you can have "Boost" but not both at the same time).  The 5.3 and 6.2 are a lot more similar so the difference between them won't be as dramatic, but for different uses don't expect the mileage difference between the two to remain exactly proportional to the ratings.  For some use, the 6.2 can actually do better than the 5.3.

Yeah I think carmakers game the epa test cycle with turbo engines.

The test cycle is at such low speed, with such small throttle input, the turbos never build significant boost for an appreciable amount of time.

Under boost, turbo/blown gas motors run fat to protect the cats, eliminate knock and keep NOx emissions at bay...which kills fuel efficiency.

When I towed 6k lbs with a Procharged Expedition, I got 5 mpg. Sucking a 30 gallon tank dry every 2 hours got old in a hurry.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[mfbearded]

so ive been driving my new trail boos for about 2 weeks and heres what ive determined....the truck is def quicker than my 2015. could be a combo of reduced weight or the gearing and transmission but i def dont feel its lacking power. pull a 16 ft jon boat  fully rigged up for waterfowl hunting and a 12 foot enclosed trailer for field hunting and so far have found no issue there. imo more horsepower fits in our constant desire for the theory of more power is better but with speed limits, traffic and the fact the truck is limited to 98 mph...i cant say i need any more. 

[shift_grind]

Was your 15 a 5.3 with 3.42 gears? What was the wheel and tire package?  Also, is your 19 limited to 98?  Can't imagine needing to go faster but a guy on Youtube said his 6.2 hit the limiter at 108.  

 

It's good to hear from a 2019 owner, thanks for the input  There are so few right now. 

 

[mfbearded]

17 minutes ago, shift_grind said:

Was your 15 a 5.3 with 3.42 gears? What was the wheel and tire package?  Also, is your 19 limited to 98?  Can't imagine needing to go faster but a guy on Youtube said his 6.2 hit the limiter at 108.  

 

It's good to hear from a 2019 owner, thanks for the input  There are so few right now. 

 

15 was a 5.3....cant remember gears so i dont wanna speculate. the wheels and tires were after market and they were transfered to the new truck. im just saying the the new truck def feels quicker. 

[protovack]

I honestly don't understand all the fury over this issue. With the payload and towing capacity of the 1500, the 5.3 is plenty of engine for virtually anything. If you are towing near the max capacity of the truck regularly and find yourself needing the 6.2L, you shoulda got a 2500. Towing around huge trailers with a 1500 is dangerous and not advisable, especially as these trucks get lighter and lighter.  Get the truck you need with enough power to do the job. If that's towing gigantic trailers then get a 2500.  Please don't let GM upsell you to a higher trim level just because you want moar power that you don't really need. 

 

[rkj__]

8 hours ago, protovack said:

I honestly don't understand all the fury over this issue. With the payload and towing capacity of the 1500, the 5.3 is plenty of engine for virtually anything. If you are towing near the max capacity of the truck regularly and find yourself needing the 6.2L, you shoulda got a 2500. Towing around huge trailers with a 1500 is dangerous and not advisable, especially as these trucks get lighter and lighter.  Get the truck you need with enough power to do the job. If that's towing gigantic trailers then get a 2500.  Please don't let GM upsell you to a higher trim level just because you want moar power that you don't really need. 

 

It's all relative. 

 

My 5.3 is more powerful than my previous truck, so I think it's awesome.  It's very rare for me to put the throttle all the way down, and ask for all its power. 

 

But, if anybody has owned a more powerful vehicle in the past, it's sometimes hard to move to a less powerful one. 

 

When comparing the 5.3 to the 6.2, it's more about wants, than needs I think. 

[WHEELS 555]

Very dissatisfied with General Motors lately. It seems that daily-monthly-yearly games are being played when it comes to build and pricing. You want a 6.2L in a Trail Boss...Cannot order it!...Play the waiting game and hope for the best. Even the pace truck for the Daytona 500 wasn't even a STOCK TRUCK. It was reconfigured to look like a Trail Boss (It was a LTZ) with a 6.2L Motor....Disgusting!

[eppieguy]

It's an LTZ with the 2" GM lift that's an accessory, no games played, a few here have done the same. 

[f8l vnm]

Ford offers ALL engines in every trim. Just sayin'..

But you know GM plays the hierarchy rules with engines , stupid game  IMO .. why not just give us the damn option . 

[SierraAT4]

This issue made me switch from the Trailboss to the AT4 and I'm so glad I did. Aside from the availability of the 6.2 w/10spd, you can get a couple of nice technology features also: 360 degree cameras, camera-based rear view mirror, wireless charging, seat/mirror memory, HUD, the tailgate...on top of that the AT4 has an overall more polished professional look to it. The Trailboss has better wheels, I'm definitely getting some all black rims at some point.

[OnTheReel]

5 hours ago, WHEELS 555 said:

Very dissatisfied with General Motors lately. It seems that daily-monthly-yearly games are being played when it comes to build and pricing. You want a 6.2L in a Trail Boss...Cannot order it!...Play the waiting game and hope for the best. Even the pace truck for the Daytona 500 wasn't even a STOCK TRUCK. It was reconfigured to look like a Trail Boss (It was a LTZ) with a 6.2L Motor....Disgusting!

The pace truck looked more like an RST than anything. It didn’t appear lifted to me, and I don’t know why it would be. Not exactly what you want on a racetrack. The only TB part I saw was the red tow hooks which you can buy for $70.

 

I think they should consider doing a 6.2 RST at some point as it would be a nice successor to the Silverado SS. 6.2 TB would just murder GMC’s / AT4 sales. They have to keep the dealers happy.

1 hour ago, f8l vnm said:

Ford offers ALL engines in every trim. Just sayin'..

But you know GM plays the hierarchy rules with engines , stupid game  IMO .. why not just give us the damn option . 

I agree but Ford plays that game too, because it makes money. They push you into the $70k Limited or Raptor to get the 450hp Ecoboost. The 6.2’s ratings are in between that H.O. 3.5, and the standard output 3.5 / 5.0. I could see why GM wouldn’t offer the 6.2 in a WT if they see it as their “exclusive flagship engine” in the same light as Ford’s H.O. eco. 

 

[f8l vnm]

9 minutes ago, OnTheReel said:

The pace truck looked more like an RST than anything. It didn’t appear lifted to me, and I don’t know why it would be. Not exactly what you want on a racetrack. The only TB part I saw was the red tow hooks which you can buy for $70.

 

I think they should consider doing a 6.2 RST at some point as it would be a nice successor to the Silverado SS. 6.2 TB would just murder GMC’s / AT4 sales. They have to keep the dealers happy.

I agree but Ford plays that game too, because it makes money. They push you into the $70k Limited or Raptor to get the 450hp Ecoboost. The 6.2’s ratings are in between that H.O. 3.5, and the standard output 3.5 / 5.0. I could see why GM wouldn’t offer the 6.2 in a WT if they see it as their “exclusive flagship engine” in the same light as Ford’s H.O. eco. 

 

Cmon now, no one is talking about their specialty engine.  The standard 3.5 EGO that makes 370hp and 475TQ can be had in almost any trim . What you are saying above is not the same. I certainly get the 6.2 part  but to not allow a LT trim to have it is not smart . That is only thing keeping me from Trail; Boss . 

[OnTheReel]

1 hour ago, f8l vnm said:

Cmon now, no one is talking about their specialty engine.  The standard 3.5 EGO that makes 370hp and 475TQ can be had in almost any trim . What you are saying above is not the same. I certainly get the 6.2 part  but to not allow a LT trim to have it is not smart . That is only thing keeping me from Trail; Boss . 

I think the big question facing GM is...would offering the 6.2 in lower trims grab some sales from Ford, or would it just poach sales from their own, more profitable high end trims? It seems they have concluded that it would be the latter. In the case of the Trail Boss, I think it’s clear that a 6.2 in it would put a huge ding in the (presumably) more profitable AT4, pissing GMC dealers off in the process.

 

Personally I don’t see an equivalence between the standard output 3.5 and the 6.2. In basically every performance measure the 6.2 eats the 3.5’s lunch. Hence my argument that GM likely views the 6.2 more in the ranks of the HO 3.5 and would like to keep some exclusivity around it. If anything there is a great argument to be had for increasing the 5.3s output to better match Ford’s 5.0 at least.