Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
12 hours ago, swathdiver said:

So how far do you want to go before refueling?  800 miles?  1,500 miles?

I use my truck for so many things its about more then just a range for me. Extended idling using it as an office for work, off roading low speed all day, long road trips... I see so many pros to a large fuel tank. I see companies driving more effective out of their fleet trucks asking for larger fuel tanks to keep their employees from wasting time filling up. Chevy is missing out on so many sales when they don’t have to.   

Posted

Being a “yes man” is the greatest disservice you can do to GM. Accepting a down sized fuel tank truly hurts the brand long term not to mention resale valve. I am a true Chevy enthusiast with hundreds of thousands miles under my belt on Chevy Trucks. This good enough attitude has keep GM in 2nd place for way too long, now Ram is budding momentum I guess 3rd place is good enough. I could act you and say go buy a Honda Ridgeline it has a small fuel tank and a signal spend transfer case! Why celebrate and defend these small steps in the wrong direction. We are all GM enthusiast and we want GM to put out a better truck then the competition. I really have not got to the root cause for this fuel tank reduction does anyone know?  Why does GM only offer a 24 gallon tank? The competition is offering a 50% larger tank 36 gallons!  

Posted
On 4/5/2020 at 8:43 AM, diyer2 said:

No big deal to me.

:)

No big deal to anyone with any emotional intelligence. 

 

Mr LikeARock must be a huge snowflake. Christ Almighty, if you’re that upset over a frakkin fuel tank, buy a Ford or Ram or a diesel or add a tank or drive a Prius. You’re preaching to the choir on here, and GM couldn’t care less what you think you want. 

  • Like 2
Posted
3 hours ago, Like-A-Rock44 said:

Being a “yes man” is the greatest disservice you can do to GM. Accepting a down sized fuel tank truly hurts the brand long term not to mention resale valve. I am a true Chevy enthusiast with hundreds of thousands miles under my belt on Chevy Trucks. This good enough attitude has keep GM in 2nd place for way too long, now Ram is budding momentum I guess 3rd place is good enough. I could act you and say go buy a Honda Ridgeline it has a small fuel tank and a signal spend transfer case! Why celebrate and defend these small steps in the wrong direction. We are all GM enthusiast and we want GM to put out a better truck then the competition. I really have not got to the root cause for this fuel tank reduction does anyone know?  Why does GM only offer a 24 gallon tank? The competition is offering a 50% larger tank 36 gallons!  

Get your truck key out of your ear. You’ve already been told what the root cause is. Saving a little weight in the name of EPA fuel mileage, and underbody packaging. GM engineers give you 400-500 miles of range on a gas vehicle (if you’re lucky) and call it good enough.  And they don’t mind one bit if that forces you into a more expensive diesel model, if you need more range.  Now move on, the grownups have real world issues to deal with right now. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
Get your truck key out of your ear. You’ve already been told what the root cause is. Saving a little weight in the name of EPA fuel mileage, and underbody packaging. GM engineers give you 400-500 miles of range on a gas vehicle (if you’re lucky) and call it good enough.  And they don’t mind one bit if that forces you into a more expensive diesel model, if you need more range.  Now move on, the grownups have real world issues to deal with right now. 

Facts. Also to OP, 400-500 isn’t uncommon or “low”. Most cars get this range. Small cars to large SUVs. If a car/truck has a bigger tank it could be that they get worse mileage hence why it’s bigger on the max tow of F150.

  • Like 2
Posted
7 hours ago, Like-A-Rock44 said:

I use my truck for so many things its about more then just a range for me. Extended idling using it as an office for work, off roading low speed all day, long road trips... I see so many pros to a large fuel tank. I see companies driving more effective out of their fleet trucks asking for larger fuel tanks to keep their employees from wasting time filling up. Chevy is missing out on so many sales when they don’t have to.   

Me too.  I'd love a larger fuel capacity as well.  But you didn't provide specifics on your wants, how many miles, how many hours? 

 

My old truck with AT tires can travel almost 500 highway miles before refueling.  Around town, she needs refueling about every 12 hours if the average speed is about 30 mph.  My longest time between refueling was 18 hours and she still went 391 miles at an average speed of 22 mph.  The motor used less than 24 gallons burning 1.3 gallons per hour.

 

How much is enough?  It's too bad that the gas tanks are considered emissions devices nowadays.  This is why the aftermarket won't touch them for gasoline powered vehicles.

 

My '88 F-SuperDuty carried an additional 80 gallons; she hauled cargo across country.  

Posted

Rams 1500s like the GM 1500s which offer an optional eco diesel have the same small 23 gal/Double Cab or 26 gal/ Crew Cab gas tanks as the GM 1500s which also offer an optional diesel.

 

Fords F150s have a larger gas tank because they do not offer an optional diesel so they can stuff a larger gas tank into the space engineering designed for the undercarriage location crash testing has certified to fit a 24 gal gas tank and a 6 gal DEF tank alongside.

 

What's the big deal anyway? Up to 400 miles at 65 mph is 6+ hours of straight driving, so unless you have a bladder larger than your small gas tank you have to stop to fill your gas tank at the same time you empty yours.

 

Could be a generational thing.....The 26 gal. gas tank in my '74 Impala with a 400 C.I.D. that got 7 mpg on a good day was typical for the period and never heard any owners complain that the  gas tank was too small.

  • Like 3
Posted (edited)
15 hours ago, MaverickZ71 said:

No big deal to anyone with any emotional intelligence. 

 

Mr LikeARock must be a huge snowflake. Christ Almighty, if you’re that upset over a frakkin fuel tank, buy a Ford or Ram or a diesel or add a tank or drive a Prius. You’re preaching to the choir on here, and GM couldn’t care less what you think you want. 

I already told him that . He won't let it go. Sad .

He probably wears Depends so he can keep driving.

Edited by dieselfan1
  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted

This is a real topic?  Most people I know don't even fill up their fuel tank, let alone want to fill up a 36 gallon tank every time.  Even in the F150 the larger tank is an option, not the standard.  They get the same tank size as the GM trucks do otherwise.

  • Like 2
Posted
On 4/5/2020 at 12:56 AM, tmo said:

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.

Probably more like 20, if ever. EVs are a huge ways off from replacing gas and diesel. 

13 hours ago, Thomcat said:

Rams 1500s like the GM 1500s which offer an optional eco diesel have the same small 23 gal/Double Cab or 26 gal/ Crew Cab gas tanks as the GM 1500s which also offer an optional diesel.

 

Fords F150s have a larger gas tank because they do not offer an optional diesel so they can stuff a larger gas tank into the space engineering designed for the undercarriage location crash testing has certified to fit a 24 gal gas tank and a 6 gal DEF tank alongside.

 

What's the big deal anyway? Up to 400 miles at 65 mph is 6+ hours of straight driving, so unless you have a bladder larger than your small gas tank you have to stop to fill your gas tank at the same time you empty yours.

 

Could be a generational thing.....The 26 gal. gas tank in my '74 Impala with a 400 C.I.D. that got 7 mpg on a good day was typical for the period and never heard any owners complain that the  gas tank was too small.

Ford absolutely has an optional diesel on the F150. 

Posted
Quit all the bitching and get one of these.
b97380f01ceec07566d6d7e401094929.png

Pretty sure that’s not certified for gasoline use, I don’t think any of them are due to the flashpoint factor. Only mentioned it because the police that had nothing better to do caught one of the RV transport trucks on a DOT stop and noticed it was a gasser, and the transfer tank full of gasoline. DOT doesn’t like non-DOT certified containers hauling gasoline.
Posted
On 4/6/2020 at 4:32 PM, MaverickZ71 said:

Get your truck key out of your ear. You’ve already been told what the root cause is. Saving a little weight in the name of EPA fuel mileage

 

It is all about the fleet mileage mandate. They need to squeeze every possible fuel economy saving that they can out of every vehicle in the lineup.   

 

I don’t remember what model year it was but from one to the next the recommended tire pressure on the Corvette (and maybe other models)  went from 32 to 35.  Same tires and wheels - it was just a gimmick to improve the fleet mileage. 

 

These moves might seem to have an insignificant impact but when you add them up it gets them to the number they need to meet.   If you want to blame someone it is the bureaucrats.  

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Posted
On 4/7/2020 at 5:51 AM, dieselfan1 said:

I already told him that . He won't let it go. Sad .

He probably wears Depends so he can keep driving.

A Honda Ridgeline maybe a better fit for you it has a small fuel tank too! it will be great for you because you get to stop fill up all the time. Keep in mind a Tesla has a short range too with a long charge time. This forum is for serious truck enthusiasts you may have better luck pushing your small tank justification somewhere else. Long hauls, heavy towing, even the soccer moms likes a large fuel tank so your not wasting time at the pump. The Chevy 24 gallon tank is just too small for Truck Enthusiasts! Lets make a good truck great GM needs a large fuel tank option! 

Posted

I don't mind stopping to get gas. Let's people ooooh and ahhhh at my truck.61c5eb74af18f8246c23ca09f31da950.jpg

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

  • Thanks 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
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts
  • Member Statistics

    342,964
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    BrandonFranceschi
    Newest Member
    BrandonFranceschi
    Joined
  • Who's Online   4 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,231 Guests (See full list)


  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • If everything checks out at the MAF, then the MAF is BAD, new or not.   You don't need a signal generator to troubleshoot this. PCM needs ALL powers and ALL grounds able to light a halogen headlight bulb - if it can light the bulb bright, then the wiring is good enough to run the PCM.   Best thing you can do for yourself is spend some time here: scannerdanner.com - Check out all his YouTube videos on similar issues. If you decide to subscribe it's the best bang-for-buck ratio in the automotive world, hands-down. He's got TONS of free vids on YouTube, too.
    • Yes, I used my multimeter to probe all of the wires at the MAF, both with the sensor connected, sensor disconnected, key on engine off, key on engine running, etc etc etc. I probed all of the wires again at the PCM, at the connectors, etc. All voltages are what they should be according to the service manual/wiring diagrams. All grounds are good, less than 20 millivolts from the battery negative under load. Both at the connector of the MAF, at the PCM connector etc.      I know this throws a pretty big wrench into things, but this truck was acting up before the swap. I don't have very much information, if any on what was causing it, but if you cleared all of the dtcs it would do the same thing where it would crank, fire, then die. And it would do the same thing a dozen or so times, and eventually it would start and run, but the difference is that it would run and actually be drivable. Whereas now if you can drive it at all, it goes into reduced power mode almost immediately, and even then it's not running correctly. When you come to a stop at a light it stumbles down to for 500 RPM before catching itself and returning to the smooth idle. And if you go more than about 50% throttle then it immediately goes back to doing the misfire thing.    Like I said, I know that throws a wrench into things, and unfortunately I was not able to pull any data or anything like that before I did this work, so I don't have much to go on.    I'm trying to not fixate on one particular thing as the cause of the problem, but it seems like all avenues are pointing me towards the PCM. Like I said I have tested the wiring extensively (see above), and during cranking the sensor does produce seemingly legitimate values at least according to my multimeter, but as soon as the engine fires those values quickly descend into gibberish. I've tried it with multiple different known working sensors, I have done literally every test I can think of multiple times on the wiring (probing the signals, probing the pins with the sensors unplugged, probing the pins at the PCM, voltage drop, voltage drop under load, continuity, ohms, and double-checking everything against the wiring diagrams/ proper values in the service data.)    Another thing that pushes me towards a possible PCM failure is, I have noticed in troubleshooting a little bit taking a break and coming back, that when I leave the truck to sit for a while and cool off, it starts and runs smoothly when I first start it up. However once it warms up. It starts having problems. For example, when I went out to the truck this morning after it had been sitting overnight, I was actually able to drive it down the block. And then once I got on the throttle a Little bit after going about a thousand ft, it started misfiring again. I pulled it back into the driveway, shut it down, and started it back up. It idled smoothly. As soon as I touched the throttle it did the misfire thing again. From then on as soon as I started it it would misfire. I shut the truck off and went to go get a coffee and do a bit more research. When I came back out I started the truck up and it immediately went into the smooth idle. After a couple of minutes of playing around with it, it would not idle smoothly anymore. Let it sit a couple of hours, rinse and repeat. This makes me think with temperature change something is going wrong inside the PCM. I have the PCM out of the 2007 donor vehicle and I'm thinking of getting a one-day subscription to the ACDelco programming service to try and program that and see if it helps.   Like I said, I'm really trying to not fixate myself on one potential cause, but it seems everything is pointing me towards PCM failure. I would really like to try to confirm that, but unfortunately I don't have an oscilloscope or a signal generator to do the GM service procedure where you feed 5 khz into the signal pin. 
    • Ahh, sorry about that - I got some bad info. Newdude is correct. That's what I get for working 13 hours straight ... on my "vacation", lol.   Should've checked the files I had instead of the internet.   Anyway ... this is GREAT news, since this would've been an absolute friggin nightmare to get working.   I don't think the lack of VVT is causing this - you've got another issue. Wiring, I'm betting.   I'm telling you right now, your computer isn't bad. If it worked before the swap, it's working now. You need to do some more (better) diagnostics and figure out exactly what you're missing. Did you test every wire directly at the MAF? Have 5V reference? Ground? If you're reading ZERO g/s, your Hz isn't much use - it's going to be the wrong value anyway. The MAF is not working, and you need to find out WHY.   I got this off the net, so VERIFY first: Pin A: Black (BLK) wire, Circuit 552, serves as the Sensor Return (Ground).  Pin B: Tan (TAN) wire, Circuit 472, carries the Intake Air Temperature (IAT) signal.  Pin C: Yellow (YEL) wire, Circuit 492, is the primary MAF Sensor Signal output to the PCM. Pin D: Pink (PNK) wire, Circuit 339 or 539, provides Ignition 1 Voltage (Power).  Pin E: Tan/Black wire, Circuit 552 or similar, often associated with the Intake Air Temperature ground or signal return.  Global-A list: https://postimg.cc/KKJnQC85    
    • Correct....the end user can't reach to Realtruck directly like they can if they purchase a Bak, Undercover, etc...  It has to go through a dealer.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...