Jump to content

3.0L Duramax - who owns or has driven one

redwngr
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 596
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

srqG8
srqG8

New guy here...   Hoping to give my .02 in case someone is considering the 3.0. And it’s also for the guy who is believing all the negative BS reviews like I almost did.    Long post, so

Gswartz
Gswartz

When I was shopping in November, I had salesman tell me: -1500 diesel didn’t exist -it’s a duramax/Allison so it will last forever -It’s a 1500 but can pull like a 2500 with the diesel

chris84
chris84

Joined the club over the weekend  

Posted Images

ArTurf Enthusiast

ArTurf

Posted
Posted
22 hours ago, steve841 said:

I just jumped on the diesel bandwagon with a 2020 Denali 1500.  Was not in the market, but 84 months at 0% allowed me to accomplish some things so I did it.

 

Actually had the 19 Chevy High Country with a 6.2L.  90% of my driving is towing a trailer.

 

With the 6.2L at 70mph, that thing got between 7 and 10 MPG depending on the headwind.

 

Im dying to see how the 3.0L diesel treats me ....

Let us know

  • Like 1
Colossus Senior Enthusiast

Colossus

Posted
Posted

Bet you would have gotten 13-14 if you did 65 MPH.  It's amazing how 5 MPH can increase the fuel consumption.  Glad you have a truck you like though!  I might get sold on this 3.0L eventually.  I'm hopeful.  I'm happy with the Duramax in my 2500 so time will tell how the little baby max holds up vs the real max. 

 

steve841 Enthusiast

steve841

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Colossus said:

Bet you would have gotten 13-14 if you did 65 MPH.  It's amazing how 5 MPH can increase the fuel consumption.  Glad you have a truck you like though!  I might get sold on this 3.0L eventually.  I'm hopeful.  I'm happy with the Duramax in my 2500 so time will tell how the little baby max holds up vs the real max. 

 

Actually, there was no difference in mileage from 65 to 72.  Above 72, 8 mpg.  Under 65, I would see 12 mpg.  Under 60, I'd see 12-14.

burninoil Enthusiast

burninoil

Posted
Posted

got a p1098 fault code this morn on my 3.0 Duramax.  any one have this code yet an do you know what it was for?

cant find any info an dealer is closed for 2 more weeks because of virus. was able to put the light out so no big deal. truck behaves normal, just curious. 

 

redwngr Senior Enthusiast

redwngr

Posted
  • Author
Posted
7 hours ago, AJS2294 said:

Any direct comparisons between the Silverado and Sierra? Loss of 3 MPG true? Much prefer the Sierra Denali at the moment 

Video interview of one of the GM engineers suggested part of it is better aerodynamics on the silvy.

The other part is the way the tests are done.  EPA requires that if an option is purchased on a certain % of vehicles that the impact (weight?) of that content be included in the testing.  Sierra's, on average, have more added content and/or higher trim -- and that impacts the epa rating. 

 

 

nolat1 New Member

nolat1

Posted
Posted
On 12/20/2019 at 11:51 AM, SkiDooNick700 said:

 

I'm in the dream shopping phase.  My thing is that I'm a bit skeptical this truck is getting as good of MPG as it is rated for.  Obviously we've seen TFL, and I saw two other Private owners (actual buyers) of the truck do highway loops at 70mph and did achieve 30 or 31mpg.  Then I see other people on here going 75 - 80mpg getting 24 or 25.  My truck gets 18mpg at that speed. I suppose this is still a good improvement at 6 to 7mpg minimum. Over a 500 mile trip that is 7.7 gallons saved and 23$ (comparing to 6.2L premium fuel) or 18$ saved on regular fuel.

 

I suppose at the end of the day it is still a great purchase, assuming long term ownership doesn't have any problems.

 

But then @becker87 says he installs a leveling kit and assuming an E rated tire slightly larger than stock and gets 18 mpg lol so it seems way too easy to kill the mpg on this truck.  Leveling my truck with a 1 inch taller tire netted a 1 - 1.5mpg loss on highway, however I did stick with a P rated all terrain.

 

Honestly I would opt for the RST Silverado vs the Sierra simply because one of the major factors is the MPG it gets.  I don't love the new sierra enough to already be a few MPG behind the silverado before I do any mods.

 

 

Agreed!  Did you see The Fast Lane Truck run it against the new EcoDiesel?  That EcoDiesel is sooo slow lol it lost by truck lengths.

" Installs a leveling kit and E rated and gets 18 mpg".........Dude must be driving like a 16 year old with testosterone boiling out of his ears lol.....I have a 2020 3.0 with a 6" fabtech lift and 35" tires and I still get 22 mpg around town, 26 highway......I get 15-16mpg hauling a 23' foot bay boat.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
RLit9 New Member

RLit9

Posted
Posted

7ff5521cf1abd9cb1e1cc8a2b6465c4c.jpg
b2dfe4cf0ff7ec787d7d9bf14ad94ab6.jpg
Out with the old 2016 Colorado & in w/the new RST. Gotta say, I really enjoyed they Colorado for 70k trouble free miles. What a great truck & motor. However, the 3.0L is another level. It has none of the quirks that sometimes frustrated me on the Colorado. Clocked 28.1 mpg on the way home, which is on par w/the Colorado when it was stock. That is just silly for a full size truck. Hopefully its as trouble free as the Minimax!

  • Like 2
Duramax3oh Enthusiast

Duramax3oh

Posted
Posted

Had another long road trip today on I-10 in Texas (flat drive). Made it 700 miles on the tank before pulling in to fill up with 23 gallons. Boy I cut it close. 
 

Was able to have cruise control on 70mph for around 80 miles straight. Got up to 31mpg over that time. ?

Note: the “best” was on a previous trip going much slower. 

 

4C32B57C-3188-4930-A386-CCC7F9881F12.jpeg

  • Like 5
becker87 Senior Enthusiast

becker87

Posted
Posted
" Installs a leveling kit and E rated and gets 18 mpg".........Dude must be driving like a 16 year old with testosterone boiling out of his ears lol.....I have a 2020 3.0 with a 6" fabtech lift and 35" tires and I still get 22 mpg around town, 26 highway......I get 15-16mpg hauling a 23' foot bay boat.
Have come to find out that colder weather also played a huge role in this numbers. It was pretty cold and windy when I got those numbers. As it's nicer out now in the spring my mileage has been pretty good

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

redwngr Senior Enthusiast

redwngr

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 hours ago, becker87 said:

Have come to find out that colder weather also played a huge role in this numbers. It was pretty cold and windy when I got those numbers. As it's nicer out now in the spring my mileage has been pretty good

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
 

Warmer weather also moves fuel blends towards summer style -- which improves fuel economy. 

Ninjaspot New Member

Ninjaspot

Posted
Posted

Thank you for this thread and site. Just bought 2020 Sierra with the 3.0 Duramax and had never owned diesel before so was pretty overwhelmed reading the manual. However many of these posts put my worries at ease. 

 

Now if I can figure out how to remove the rear view mirror cover so I can hardwire my radar detector\dash cam combo without destroying it....lol

 

Pics: 

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Au8KKHL6Oauug4VZtJ_yrAnE6wB0zg

https://1drv.ms/u/s!Au8KKHL6Oauug4VaKSw06WAhkfqDgg

  • Like 1

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • KARNUT
      Post Pics of your "Other" Rides

      By KARNUT · Posted

      Well one of our most reliable vehicles was sold yesterday. The first and only I gave for free to a grandkid. If they got skin in the game they take care of it. My wife bought new. Five years later my daughter got it to use. We got it back and gave it to our grandson after graduation. He did zero maintenance just oil changes. When the AC quit he drove his mother’s car rather than get it fixed. Instead he just bought a beater and sold the Elantra. 
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      I usually do as well or better than the sticker for mileage. Usually better going west than east. North then South. Wind makes a difference. I’m not usually a conspiracy theorist. But it did dawn on me I’m going by the vehicle calculation. Now that would be interesting.
    • Grumpy Bear
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      https://www.msn.com/en-us/autos/news/fuel-economy-stickers-don-t-tell-the-whole-story-aaa-data-reveals-why/ar-AA26ocHk?ocid=winp2fptaskbarhover&cvid=6a4122ea3dae47e5b8dfbed5d4fd3d55&cvpid=648f6b4fc2fa4eddb4c12893aeb957ed&ei=59
    • KARNUT
      OCI, not when but why?

      By KARNUT · Posted

      What’s missing in all this is patience and investment in the future. Buy a 170K starter home. Ten years later sell it invest in a more expensive home. Eventually you’ll have a 600K home and pay starter home payments. Buy a starter car. Maintain it well. Save the payments after it’s payed for then buy an expensive car if you desire. Buy a tumbler make your own coffee, pack your lunch. Cook your own dinner. Most importantly take care of your car.
    • Atlas
      OCI, not when but why?

      By Atlas · Posted

      People mislead themselves. Statistics are highly useful indicators.   Here's the tie-in to this thread. If an oil sample tests shows a wear indicator of 7 using cheaper ACDelco oil, and a wear indicator of 2 (lower = less wear) using a particular brand of Mobil oil, and wear has a linear relationship with engine lifespan, anyone could assume that Mobil is reducing wear by more than 50% (let's just say a 200% reduction for you red state people trying hard to do math) which leads to increasing engine life by 2x. Perhaps, in a vacuum, by itself, when dreamed by AI.   Yeah?! That's what the statistic is saying, isn't it?   No, it isn't. It didn't come out and say engine life is doubled. That's a very bad assumption, and a case of severe myopia by assuming something potentially untrue about the only data point in focus.   Average cost of a new car is 50k. You bet it is.   The median cost of a new car is more like 35k. Expensive cars are skewing the perception that "average" now means a $50k price of entry for a very average automobile. And that's not true. People who don't understand statistics twist the living heck out of them to mean all sorts of things they don't actually mean.   "Average" new car payment is $1000/month. Yep, it is. And in that number are all the $35k new car buyers who bring significant equity, and the $25k new car buyers who finance the car for a month just to get a rebate, and then pay it off. Know what isn't in that number? All the payments made by people who don't finance a car.   Picking one's own data point (don't have a car payment, never paid $50k for a new vehicle, my house cost $170k, I afforded a middle class lifestyle on $4.50/hr) is just a data point. Just like earning $25/hr in an area where the median home price is almost $1 Million is a data point. In fact, it's a lot of data points given that 80% of the US population lives in/around major cities. They're not idiots; the vast majority of them do it to make a living because that's where the big money is.   The highs have become higher, lows have become lower, and how your personal mileage varies is not truth for an entire country. At the same time you can't NOT acknowledge the data. While it doesn't paint YOUR personal picture, it certainly tints the reality that you also live in, as does your single data point.    

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...