Jump to content

Gas vs. Diesel, please read 1st


Recommended Posts

Posted

I am sure this is a common topic on here but I am really hoping to get some solid advice specific to my situation. I am looking to replace my 1500 with the 5.3L, I have modified it as much as I can and it just doesn't have enough power to tow my travel trailer. I have a 28' trailer with dry weight of 5340 and GVWR of 7000. We love going to the mountains and that is where it lacks adequate power. I know the diesel is superior but looking online at hundreds of listings for a used one it is also $10,000 more. If the 2500HD with the 6L gas would be adequate for my situation that is a lot of money to save. I don't need to go 80 mph up the mountain with my trailer but I would like to be able to keep a reasonable safe speed. From all I have heard to 6L is a great, reliable engine but I need to be sure it is adequate. Thank you ?

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Posted

With that size trailer I would be all over the 6.0.  I had the first year 6.0 in my 99 2500 put 180,000+ miles on it pulling a lot of trailers and it was a good set up to do the smaller trailers but when I stepped up to a box trailer for one of my hobbies the 6.0 just did not like the trailer and I did not enjoy the driving experience then.  :jester:

Posted

Gearing is cheaper than buying a different truck. What's your final drive ratio? What do you consider a safe speed towing in the mountains? 

Posted

I had a duramax for the last 14 years. Great motor and transmission.  Had plenty of power for anything I needed. I just traded that truck in for a 2016 2500hd with the 6L. The fuel economy is about 13-14 empty and 8-10 towing.  But with gas(in my area) being almost .90 cents a gallon cheaper it's a easier pill to swallow.  The truck down shifts a little more than my diesel but I've always felt it had more than enough power.  It's been almost a year and I don't regret my decision 

Posted

A 6.0 isn't going to be any faster than a 5.3.  If you are going to tow with a naturally aspirated engine, get used to hearing the engine scream.  You can tow that trailer up steep hills all day long with your foot to the floor and the 6.0 will never break, but it isn't much more powerful than the 5.3 so if that is really what you want you need a 6.2 GM, a diesel, or maybe an Ecoboost Ford.  

Posted

Having owned a fantastic Duramax for 8 years,  I sold my 33 foot Fifth wheel and bought a 5000 pound double slide Arctic Fox. I needed the payload that the 6 gasser gave me over another Duramax so I did research , know a few people that love their 6 gassers so I ordered my High Country with the 6.0. Three years later, no regrets, my 6 moves my 13000 pounds up an 8 % Grade at 60 mph,  No problem, great reliable motor.  A 1500 with a 5.3 will never tow as good as a HD, 

The HD has 4:10 gears and better brakes. There is a reason an HD has a higher tow rating than a 1500. Either way you can't go wrong, the 6 or Duramax will both work for you. To really justify a diesel you need to tow heavy or be a very high mileage driver. Best of luck. 

Posted

I’ve owned a 6.0 3500 and it was a great truck, hit 200k miles the day I traded it. Original engine but was on the third trans. 

I would base the decision off of how frequently you plan on making the trip over the mountains. One huge advantage to the Duramax is the Allison transmission. The vgt brake is another plus. Just turn it on and downshift. Makes a big difference when trailering on grades. 

Posted

As a fellow RVer who went from the 5.3L to the 6.0L, it's a world of difference in stability and low end power.

 

If your TT only has a GVWR of 7000# though, the 5.3L 1500 should more than handle it. My Sierra 1500(3.42 rear end) did well with our 34' TT (9600# GVWR - 8300# actual loaded weight). The suspension was why I upgraded to a 2500. The 1500 is just too soft for my size trailer and truck was pushed around more than I cared for.

 

I didn't want a diesel. Nothing that breaks on a diesel is less than a few thousand, and the added vehicle costs don't justify it (sure, mileage is better, but fuel cost offsets it). Many will disagree and say Diesel or bust, but real world towing (Fancy Gap, WV Mountains) with my rig shows the 6.0L is a beast. An older design, but very reliable (and thirsty) beast.

 

If you plan to upgrade your trailer to something larger, then a 2500 should be used. If you're going 40' 5th wheel, then definitely diesel 3500. 

 

If you keep current TT and go 2500 gasser, you WILL be doing 80 up the mountains. I pulled Fancy Gap (7 miles @ 7%) steady at 60mph with no issues.

 

EDIT: Make sure your hitch is setup properly too. A good WD hitch (I use Equalizer). Hitch setup will make or break.

Posted

Lots of good feedback thank you!

@ewbldavis I have put cold air intake, cat-back exhaust, Black Bear performance Tuner on the 5.3L. All have helped but still feels like it lags going over the mountains. Maybe I don't push it enough and it has more power. We went on a 2 week trip last summer to Grand Teton and Yellowstone, by the time we were driving over the Sierra Nevadas out of Reno coming home I was just tired of dragging up the mountains with bigger trucks pulling trailers flying by me. I dont even want to talk about the grade leaving Idaho going to Jackson Hole, foot was all the way to the floor and if it was another 1/10th of a mile up that hill I don't think I would have made it. I also put air bags on which helped with ride quality pulling the TT. And I do have a really nice WD hitch set up

 

@grumpy bear I would like to easily do 55 mph

Posted

You wouldn’t have any trouble with the 6l maintaining that speed or more at that weight. Also keep in mind. Max torque is made @4200rpm with a 6l. Which is turning pretty good but they are built for that. That’s the main difference between gas and diesel power output. Gas=High RPM. Diesel=Low RPM.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted
On 3/5/2019 at 8:26 PM, i82much said:

A 6.0 isn't going to be any faster than a 5.3.  If you are going to tow with a naturally aspirated engine, get used to hearing the engine scream.  You can tow that trailer up steep hills all day long with your foot to the floor and the 6.0 will never break, but it isn't much more powerful than the 5.3 so if that is really what you want you need a 6.2 GM, a diesel, or maybe an Ecoboost Ford.  

Disagree, the 6 L is  torquey engine made to pull. It will pull the Rv much easier.

Posted

If the 6.0 has any real advantage, it is the gearing.  In any event, I tend to doubt that someone who feels a 5.3 has inadequate power is going to be impressed by a 6.0 with roughly the same output in a much heavier truck.  

 

But truth is, unless we set up a race with the same trailer, this is just another instance of two people tossing out opinions on the internet.

Posted
3 hours ago, avalonandl said:

Disagree, the 6 L is  torquey engine made to pull. It will pull the Rv much easier.

Actually I did some more reading and I think this is essentially inaccurate.  Check out these two graphs:

 

https://www.gmpowertrain.com/engines/docs/GMQD16CL860_L83_Product PDF.pdf

 

https://www.gmpowertrain.com/engines/docs/GMQD16CLA60_L96_Product PDF.pdf

 

Look at the numbers from between, say, 2500 RPM to 4500 RPM.  Basically the range you would be in towing a 7000 lb trailer in a hilly area.   I see no real advantage for the 6.0, certainly not enough to overcome 1,000 lbs of extra weight in the 2500HD.  

 

Again, if a 2500HD has a power advantage over a 1500 with a 5.3, it isn't the output of the engine - it is the gearing.  

Posted

Is this truck a daily driver?

Or just used to pull the TT and haul, tow occasionally?

If so gaser IMO.

From the sounds of it a 6.0 HD will getter done.

 

:)

Posted

I came from a crude, thirsty, and gutless (but pristine) 1996 F350 with a 460 into a new 2018 GMC All Terrain HD 2500 Duramax, knowing that the modern gas engines would likely be the better choice.   I don’t drive it daily and I don’t consistently work it hard. 

 

I can fully accept the fact  that modern diesels don’t hold the economic advantage over their gas counterparts that they once did. Perhaps at resale, but that’s about it. I’ve developed the opinion that you either have to WANT or NEED a modern diesel to make it worth the overall cost of ownership. You can pay for a lot of 87 octane with the cost advantage, you just won’t have the same effortless driving experience.

 

I wanted it, plain and simple. I don’t need it. This is my first diesel that I’ve owned, and I wanted the power and control that a gas will never give. I like being able to drive out west heading into the wind with a sideways sail of a snowmobile trailer and not feeling one single downshift. I like the steady surge of power accelerating with a load behind me, knowing there’s more to give if I ask. I like having this magic exhaust brake button I can push that feels like I throw an anchor off the back of the trailer when I let off the accelerator. I like barely being able to hear the truck doing it’s thing as I’m driving normally. 

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,924
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    KirbyCo
    Newest Member
    KirbyCo
    Joined
  • Who's Online   3 Members, 1 Anonymous, 1,442 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • I will be doing that for sure, but I need to solve who has/ where I can find a bidirectional scan tool that will support OBD 1.5. I'm kicking myself because I ebay'ed a Snap On MT2500 that I didn't think I'd ever need anymore. D'oh!! I'd rather not buy another, so I'll contact a few local shops to see if they have one and how much they'd want to do the procedure. I'd rather have the ability to do it myself... I wish there was a modern tool that could do it all, but I'd have no idea what to buy.   The theory with the pulled timing is that it mimics a rich condition. The delayed spark causes incomplete burn and the O2 sensor picks up low oxygen levels. That's interpreted as a rich condition so the PCM pulls fuel and that shows up in the deeply negative fuel trims.
    • An ultra wealthy man had the most beautiful daughter. But, there was a problem. Everything she touched would melt in her hands. No matter what, Metal, Wood, Stone. Anything she touched would melt. She could not feed herself. Because of this, men were afraid of her. Nobody would dare marry her. Her father was despaired. What could he do to help his daughter? He consulted doctors, scientists and anybody who could solve this problem. Finally one of them said, "If your daughter touches one thing that does not melt in her hands, she will be cured." He was overjoyed and came up with a plan. The next day, he held a competition. Any man who could bring his daughter an object that would not melt in her hands would be given billions of dollars to marry her. Three extremely intelligent and handsome young men took up the challenge. The first brought a very heavy steel rod, But alas, when the she touched it, it completely melted in a matter of seconds. He sadly went away. The second brought a beautiful diamond, knowing diamonds were one of the hardest substance in the world and would not melt. But alas, once she held it in her hand, it melted. He too was sent away disappointed. So now, there was one left He was very nervous & sweating. He approached the daughter & said, “put your hand in my pants pocket and feel what is in there." She did exactly what he asked. She felt something very hard. She held it in her hand, squeezing it as hard as she could. It did not melt & remained extremely hard. Her father was overjoyed. Everybody was overjoyed. She was finally cured. Nothing never, ever melted in her hand again. They married and they both lived happily ever after, raising a wonderful family. Question: What was in the the groom’s pants pocket??? Answer below ↓ M&Ms of course! They melt in your mouth, not in your hand. What on earth were you thinking?
    • There's a bunch of tea leaves that you've read, but in any case the delayed timing is unusual. Not sure how that relates to the rich at idle vs. 'normal' while driving.   If you're in this deep, might be worth investigating, and re-learning the sensor. What have you got to lose? Plus, it properly fixes the timing cover leak.
    • The only problem I have seen this cause is longer crank times. 
    • Injector is being sent off today for rebuild and I estimate I'll have it back in 10 days or so.   It may not be the injector...of course...now that I've torn down the intake again. But, let's rule out the injector and replace those spider legs that have been almost rubbed through.   The truck has always had negative timing and I'm reading "normal" timing at warm idle should be +16 or so. I'm negative 16 to 25 or more, and it's always been like that since I bought it.   A light turned on upstairs last night in the old noggin. Rare, I know...   This will be wild, if it turns out to be the cause!   In 2001, according to the old service documentation, the muffler was replaced. Why? I have no idea, it wouldn't have been rusted through by then. But they did a crappy job.   In 2019, another shop replaced it and noted the prior install was poorly done on the work order. "Exhaust system vibrates on crossmember". Except...I guess they just left it be? I believe the husband, the couple who were original owners, had passed by then. Maybe she said it's just not worth it to have the exhaust system fixed and declined repairs. Very few miles were driven between 2019 and 2025.   The exhaust system vibrates heavily on the crossmember and you can feel it and REALLY hear it, even today. Not always, but at idle, it gets going pretty good sometimes.   What if....   ....What if that's enough to trigger one or both of the knock sensors? Could it be tricking the sensors into sensing knock, so it's pulling timing aggressively? Pulling timing heavily means it's firing after the piston reaches full height which means incomplete burn which means the O2 sensor is sensing a rich condition, which means I've been chasing my tail, and what I thought was an inconsequential problem (janky exhaust) has been THE issue for this truck for 25 solid years?   That would be wild. Maybe it IS wild.   The service documentation thereafter, for years, shows visits for rough idle, replacing O2's, replacing the cat, replacing plugs and wires, a misfire condition, like they could never solve the issue. The injector has been replaced 4 times in 80k miles, that's just crazy.   The secondary theory....   The engine has clearly had a leak at the front seal for a very long time (the greasy trench...). I think the truck changed hands quickly ~2025 because there's Napa receipts from someone I don't recognize in the ownership history. They apparently replaced the timing cover seal, and they did a terrible job. There's RTV smeared all over and the leak I had reduced to a weep by snugging the front oil pan bolts is now a leak again.   HOWEVER....I read about replacing the crankshaft position sensor. Any time the ckp sensor is disturbed or timing cover is removed, the truck requires relearning, and that can only be done through a bi-directional scan tool. Skippy with the RTV probably didn't do the relearn procedure is my guess. His scan tool is lost in a pile of RTV goo somewhere.   So, it's very possible the sensor has been disturbed and the truck is just running on the old learn data but not setting a code for anything. The distributor has since been replaced and so has the camshaft position sensor, so all bets are off for that thing.   In the theme of one step forward, two steps back, I returned the accumulator for the AC. The gal I've been working with at O'Really's has been great. She refunded it under manufacturer's defect and we compared it to the replacement I ordered, and sure enough, the replacement is machined very differently (and a gauge actually fits on it!).   Got it home, installed it, started vacuuming it down.... and I couldn't get good vacuum.   The high side service port, where I replaced the old GM ball valve suspecting that was a source of the previous leak....well, I've clearly exposed whatever pre-existing crack in the line where the service port is welded, and made it much worse. Blessing in disguise? Except there goes another $25, now I'm waiting for a replacement AC line.   In 10-ish days ALL the parts will be here. Rebuilt injector, new exhaust system, new cat, new high pressure AC line.   Oh, did I mention the squeaking ISN'T coming from the AC pump? The truck still squeaks when started, and there were words after I started it with the new AC pump installed. But, there was more to replacing the AC pump for just a squeak. A truck with good working AC is something of value, for the comfort alone.   I've ordered a new harmonic balancer because, 30 years is a good run for one of those. Rule it out. The squeak may be something more sinister, though. I'm worried about that ckp sensor and if it was shimmed correctly, or if the timing set was installed correctly. The squeak may be coming from UNDER the timing cover.   At this point, once I get it put back together, I'm thinking I'll take a 50 mile victory lap and then promptly put it up for sale. This truck is cursed. Betty, from beyond the grave, doesn't want anyone messing with her Blazer. Or maybe she's getting revenge for 30 years of shop visits with that thing.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...