What Drove Your Engine Choice?

[MDSilveradoGuy]

14 minutes ago, BlackRST said:

Ya, i have to second that...downsizing is the way of the future sadly. Now I dont think every truck will rock a 4cyl with a snail....But I think youll see more and more v6 with turbos, smaller liter displacement with forced air. Perfect example are the eco diesels and the 3.0 models. They have unreal power for their size and will suffice perfectly fine for the average joe towing or what not. 

I'm a bit disappointed that GM took the economy route with the Duramax in the Silverado now, rather than showing what an Inline-6 diesel is capable of in terms of towing. Looking at the design and numbers, I really think it could dominate the 1/2 ton class if they wanted to.

[econometrics]

34 minutes ago, MDSilveradoGuy said:

I'm a bit disappointed that GM took the economy route with the Duramax in the Silverado now, rather than showing what an Inline-6 diesel is capable of in terms of towing. Looking at the design and numbers, I really think it could dominate the 1/2 ton class if they wanted to.

The 5.3L CC 4x4 SB is 9600#, and the 6.2L in the same configuration is only 9300#. Of course, the Max Tow (NHT) package adds some capacities to those numbers. 

 

I think it's wise that GM played the efficiency game with the 3.0 Duramax. C&D was able to get 40mpg on the highway with this truck recently, which is just stunning. GM knows that almost all users are completely fine with 9300# towing (like I am with my 9600# RST), especially with such immense gains on MPG. 

 

MPG is going to sell a 1500 diesel much better than 3K more in tow capacity would, IMO. 

Edited August 20, 2019 by econometrics

[Cpl_Punishment]

I have nothing against any of the other engines but I like the 5.3 for its combination of capability, fuel economy and proven dependability (aside from any potential future issues that could arise due to DFM). I don't think the V6 or 2.7 would quite have the ability to tow a travel trailer through the mountains. I don't see a need to jump up to the 6.2 with its slightly worse fuel economy, higher purchase cost (though at least you won't have to go up to an expensive trim to get it in 2020) and recommendation for premium to get all the power you paid for. Duramax also has lower towing and GVWR and since I live about 10 minutes from work, it would never get up to operating temperature, which I understand is bad for long term reliability. There also aren't many diesel pumps around here. 

[MacLaren]

30 minutes ago, Cpl_Punishment said:

I have nothing against any of the other engines but I like the 5.3 for its combination of capability, fuel economy and proven dependability (aside from any potential future issues that could arise due to DFM). I don't think the V6 or 2.7 would quite have the ability to tow a travel trailer through the mountains. I don't see a need to jump up to the 6.2 with its slightly worse fuel economy, higher purchase cost (though at least you won't have to go up to an expensive trim to get it in 2020) and recommendation for premium to get all the power you paid for. Duramax also has lower towing and GVWR and since I live about 10 minutes from work, it would never get up to operating temperature, which I understand is bad for long term reliability. There also aren't many diesel pumps around here. 

Allround, all things considered, that 5.3 is mighty hard to beat. 

[MDSilveradoGuy]

33 minutes ago, econometrics said:

The 5.3L CC 4x4 SB is 9600#, and the 6.2L in the same configuration is only 9300#. Of course, the Max Tow (NHT) package adds some capacities to those numbers. 

 

I think it's wise that GM played the efficiency game with the 3.0 Duramax. C&D was able to get 40mpg on the highway with this truck recently, which is just stunning. GM knows that almost all users are completely fine with 9300# towing (like I am with my 9600# RST), especially with such immense gains on MPG. 

 

MPG is going to sell a 1500 diesel much better than 3K more in tow capacity would, IMO. 

You know, thinking about it - and you are right. Not only that, but at those weights I think I would step up to a 3/4 ton for the extra braking capacity alone.

[econometrics]

1 hour ago, MDSilveradoGuy said:

You know, thinking about it - and you are right. Not only that, but at those weights I think I would step up to a 3/4 ton for the extra braking capacity alone.

100% agree. If I’m towing 10K or above routinely, I don’t think I would feel comfortable in a 1500. Once in a while, maybe. Once or twice a year, no prob. But you can really feel that much weight fighting with the 1500s when you pull it around. 

[Cowpie]

While the 1/2 tons across the spectrum seem to be heading to smaller displacement, isn't it great that the reverse is true in the  2500/3500 series.  From a base 6.0L up to a base 6.6L gasser for the 2020 model year.   401 HP and 464 lb torque.  No AFM and doesn't call for premium fuel.  Good 'ol cast iron block.

 

MPG will sell the diesel in the short term, but if we end up with fuel price spreads like we did several years ago, it will mean nothing.  It will all be a wash when it comes to actual fuel cost per mile.  I go thru 21,000 gallons of diesel fuel a year for my commercial needs.  I have worked with diesels since the 60's including 10 years in the interior of Alaska year round.   I know all the pros and cons.  I just don't see how diesel can move some folks as if they are enthralled by some sort of mystique.  I have no need or desire to have a diesel in my personal vehicles, car or truck.  Especially so since all the emissions stuff got piled on them. But if folks want to mess with it, go for it.

Edited August 21, 2019 by Cowpie

[Tritipnbeer]

6.2L Denali because power and smooth as butta 10 speed.  I like the 6.2 because while I normally don;t need or use that much power when I do I like to have it on tap.  Also, I can get 22 MPG highway so the few extra cents for premium is negligible IMO. 

 

FTR I previously had the 6.7L Diesel in a 2014 F250.  The GM 6.2 gives me the same smile.

Edited August 21, 2019 by Tritipnbeer
.

[BenThere]

When I picked my new truck up at the dealer, one of the salesmen asked me "why did you go with the 6.2?"  

 

My answer: "Because they didn't offer anything bigger."  

[JHP]

I went with the 4.3 V6 engine. 

 

I came from the GMC Canyon 4 cylinder - with the 8 speed transmission.  Experienced to little and the dreaded transmission shutter that didn't get any better with the fluid replacement.  So I opted for the V6 because it would be plenty of power for my use and I wanted to stay away from the 8 speed transmissions.  

 

I'm loving my truck!

[madconcept]

Went with the 5.3 as it was the only real choice I could get in an RST or Elevation(the trims I was looking at on the GMC and Chev).

Wasn’t about to go with the 2.7 turbo! No offence to those that like that engine it just wasn’t for me!  Plus I tow and haul for work and have a 24’ travel trailer.

Had I been in a position to wait until the 6.2 was available in the lower trims I’m not sure what I would’ve done!

I not one to want/need a lot of options and I don’t like chrome so the LTZ, High Country, SLT, and Denali were out and with that went the option of getting the 6.2.

GM made a smart decision making the 6.2 available on lower trims.

 

Waiting until 2020 also would’ve given me the option of picking up the new diesel, but I was kind of in desperate need of a new truck!

Edited November 23, 2019 by madconcept