Jump to content

GM disappointingly small fuel tanks continue

Like-A-Rock44
 Share

Recommended Posts

Like-A-Rock44 Enthusiast

Like-A-Rock44

Posted
Posted

How much life does Chevy suck out of there customers? Lets look at the 1/2 ton Chevy Crew short box 24 gal tank and F-150 Crew Short box 36 gal tank. 

17 MPG over 150,000 miles you fill up 123 more times if you own a Chevy! Over your life time of driving (2,000,000 miles) it comes out 1,600 more fill ups!  

 

How long will GM continue to put small undersized fuel tanks in their trucks? They are missing out on sales and driving the brand into the dirt! The small fuel tank literally wastes my life! It is a deal breaker when buying a new truck. My next truck will be 3/4 ton crew long box 2500 Silverado 36 gal, F250 48 gal, Ram 50 gallon! 

 

So many advantages of a large fuel tank.  

Who likes filling up at the gas station and wants to do it more because they own a Chevy with a small fuel tank? NO ONE! 

Who wants to use E85 and still have a reasonable driving range? MANY PEOPLE!  

Who pulls a trailer and still needs a normal driving range? MANY PEOPLE! 

Who wants to save money by avoiding fill ups at high priced stations when it is the only option because your out of fuel? EVERYONE!

Who worries about weight and only fills up with enough fuel to make it through the day? NOT MANY! The large tank does not add much weight when it only 1/2 full! 6 lb a gallon BTW not much...

In a pandemic who wants to have a Chevy with less driving range then the competition? NO ONE! 

 

WHO WANTS TO SPEND MORE TIME DOING WHAT THEY WANT AND LESS TIME FUELING UP? EVERYONE! BUY A FORD   

 

I am a long time Chevy owner but it is time they start listing to there real customers!     

 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 2
  • Replies 128
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

dieselfan1
dieselfan1

Dude you have issues if you let something this bother you.  

Booger T
Booger T

OP's original post stated that the small fuel tank was hated by everyone, not me. Doesn't bother me one bit, I can get 500-600 range out of a tank and that is way longer than I care to sit behind the

ChuckTaylor
ChuckTaylor

The argument "you need to go to the bathroom anyways" is bunk.  The additional range means for lunch you stop where you want to eat on a cross country tow instead of stopping for gas and food (not alw

Posted Images

3737 Enthusiast

3737

Posted
Posted

So previous short box GM trucks had 26 gallon tanks, anyone know why for the new model they shrunk by 2 gallons to 24? Yeah GM should at least offer the option of a larger tank. I'm all for giving customers the choice. 

Jetiemann Enthusiast

Jetiemann

Posted
Posted
16 minutes ago, dieselfan1 said:

Dude you have issues if you let something this bother you.

 

I wouldnt normally agree but he seems oddly upset about this. I don't like the fact that my range is less than ideal but I wouldn't go this far with it.

  • Like 3
Like-A-Rock44 Enthusiast

Like-A-Rock44

Posted
  • Author
Posted
43 minutes ago, dieselfan1 said:

Dude you have issues if you let something this bother you.

 

Hey Bro don’t try and derail progress and don’t worry about me. We have a name for people like you “Energy Vampire” 

  • Confused 2
Like-A-Rock44 Enthusiast

Like-A-Rock44

Posted
  • Author
Posted
1 hour ago, 3737 said:

So previous short box GM trucks had 26 gallon tanks, anyone know why for the new model they shrunk by 2 gallons to 24? Yeah GM should at least offer the option of a larger tank. I'm all for giving customers the choice. 

Yes a step in the wrong direction! No one is happy about it. 

MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted

Ford shrank their base gas tank too. The big tank is optional. It is 100% lazy engineering, an easy way to cut weight when they literally go down to the gram when considering part weight cost. People who aren't bothered by it must like having long trips interrupted more often.

  • Like 2
Booger T Enthusiast

Booger T

Posted
Posted

OP's original post stated that the small fuel tank was hated by everyone, not me. Doesn't bother me one bit, I can get 500-600 range out of a tank and that is way longer than I care to sit behind the wheel before getting out and walking around a bit. Oh wait I have a diesel now.? Still it never bothered me when I drove a gasser. Kind of like splitting hairs when one worries about how much time one uses in a lifetime refueling ones vehicle.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 3
Like-A-Rock44 Enthusiast

Like-A-Rock44

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Seriously who wants to stop at the gas station when you should not have too?! GM seems to be there own worst enemy. A 24 gallon tank is pathetic. Good enough will Keep GM from making good sales numbers. Lets come out with a cool truck then cripple its driving range so you cant use it! The small GM tank must be for the poser that has extra time on there hands to hang out at the gas station and move around. 

  • Sad 1
3737 Enthusiast

3737

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, MikeNH said:

Ford shrank their base gas tank too. The big tank is optional. It is 100% lazy engineering, an easy way to cut weight when they literally go down to the gram when considering part weight cost. People who aren't bothered by it must like having long trips interrupted more often.

Is it the weight of the extra material needed to make the tank 2 gallons bigger or the weight of the fuel or both? I would think the extra plastic for a larger tank would be practically nothing. The weight of the fuel would be12 lbs I guess. I am assuming weight is such an issue for EPA MPG?? In the real world I wouldn't think anyone is concerned with a few pounds.

  • Like 1
3737 Enthusiast

3737

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Booger T said:

OP's original post stated that the small fuel tank was hated by everyone, not me. Doesn't bother me one bit, I can get 500-600 range out of a tank and that is way longer than I care to sit behind the wheel before getting out and walking around a bit. Oh wait I have a diesel now.? Still it never bothered me when I drove a gasser. Kind of like splitting hairs when one worries about how much time one uses in a lifetime refueling ones vehicle.

A larger tank is better. If you want to stop and walk around, you can at any point, you don't have to be out of fuel to do so. If you tow a large trailer, fuel range shrinks substantially. 

  • Like 1
MikeNH Senior Enthusiast

MikeNH

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, 3737 said:

Is it the weight of the extra material needed to make the tank 2 gallons bigger or the weight of the fuel or both? I would think the extra plastic for a larger tank would be practically nothing. The weight of the fuel would be12 lbs I guess. I am assuming weight is such an issue for EPA MPG?? In the real world I wouldn't think anyone is concerned with a few pounds.

I've read more than one article and a few books about auto design that say when it comes down to it, engineers make design decisions in grams. And yes, they would be considering the full weight as that comes out of payload capacity.

  • Like 1
Like-A-Rock44 Enthusiast

Like-A-Rock44

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Does anyone know what the fuel tank size is for the 2021 Tahoe/Suburban? I did not see it in there media release. Ford Expedition 23.6 gallons and Ford Expedition Max 27.8 gal. I hope GM bumps up there fuel capacity from the 31 gallon tank currently. 

dieselfan1 Senior Enthusiast

dieselfan1

Posted
Posted (edited)
12 hours ago, Like-A-Rock44 said:

Hey Bro don’t try and derail progress and don’t worry about me. We have a name for people like you “Energy Vampire” 

Really?

You need to get a grip pal.

Edited by dieselfan1
  • Like 2
tmo Enthusiast

tmo

Posted
Posted

Don’t worry, In 10 years you will be driving electric and it’s won’t matter because you will plug in at night when you sleep. No more wasting your life.

  • 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

    • Chuck FB
      Towing In Loose Gravel

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      Its possible you never had the joy of the crappy boat launches we tend to have around here or really some of them are just grades down to the river if its a river scenario and the conditions change all the time with the river levels and silt deposits. Some of the lakes we went to years ago, there was no such thing as a cement pad that went down into the water that the trailer stayed on, it was gravel maybe up to the water line and then duck crap much beyond that so sinking the boat tires into mud. Of course some of the more established lakes had a cement bar type boat ramp but sometimes it was covered in green slime closer and certainly within the water and a two wheel drive had all sorts of fun if one had to touch that slime with the rear tires.    A neighbor of mine had made a comment years back with his chev truck that was probably about the same year as yours but a half ton extended cab 4x4 and he a a fiberglass boat with an inboard so it wasn't a feather weight and he had gone out to one of the large popular lakes in the area and don't ask me how this happened but he was in two wheel drive as he figured he didn't require four wheel drive for that boat ramp and somehow upon pulling the boat out he twisted one of his drive axles. I suspect it must have spun and then grabbed on the cement ramp and shocked it to the degree of twisting it. He would have had the standard 8.5 or whatever it was axle housing as the 9.5 ring gear like my truck has also has larger drive axles as far as I know. Anyway he was feeling a vibration driving home and had it checked out and a shop found that the tire/hub was wobbling because of the axle had twisted so in went a new drive axle. After that bad experience he said he made sure to put it into four wheel drive to lower the stress on the rear axle. Of course that is where an HD truck can handle a lot more stress and no doubt these newer half tons with their larger ring gears probably have larger drive axles as well to match vs back in the day. 
    • asilverblazer
      2027 GMC Sierra: Official Discussion

      By asilverblazer · Posted

      Desirable - as in does someone WANT one, aspire to have one. Could reasonably buy any car they want and CHOOSE these instead.    I didn't watch the video, why did they win?
    • Atlas
      Towing In Loose Gravel

      By Atlas · Posted

      The use of absolutes like "always" to describe gear selection, and giving free advice at a boat ramp sounds like a recipe for disaster. It's a boat ramp, not a farm, for starters.   IMO gear selection should depend on the obstacle. If low range is working and this is a slower speed, controlled ordeal, I'd keep using that.
    • diyer2
      Towing In Loose Gravel

      By diyer2 · Posted

      I had a boat for many years, never had a problem even with a 2 wheel drive 93 Silvy for 20 years. Good tires, proper use of the gas pedal worked.
    • Chuck FB
      Towing In Loose Gravel

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I read through that and I won't lie, my eyes rolled at some of the quirks about how it can turn off the trailer braking for example but I can see how it could help control or even up the torque applied to the ground with each wheel in a boat ramp scenario. But of course what it can't do is increase the torque to the wheels if the need is there as it ends up being like driving the four wheel drive version of a two wheel drive ( high range that is ). So far the neighbor that ended up with the 3.0 duramax with the max tow package which meant the 3.73 gears and high range only, I think its been doing ok for what he has been towing but doubt he ventures off into the soft stuff with his holiday trailer. He may have towed his dads river boat locally with it ( he always used his 6.6 duramax before ), I'll have to ask him sometime if he got into a lack of power to the wheels situation as after all that engine produces a lot of torque at low speed once the turbo winds out a bit and I think it has the 10 speed and if so they have a pretty good first gear ratio at 4.70 I see which is vastly better than the 3 or four speed overdrive models of years ago. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...