Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Hi everyone, I’m wondering if anyone can help me with the payload sticker on a 2020 Sierra Denali with ultimate package and tech package, short box and 6.2L. I’m thinking of buying one but there are none on the lot here. There was a 3.0 diesel Denali Ultimate that only had payload of 1350 so I am hoping the 6.2L has a little more. Thanks to anyone who can help!

Edited by GMCnoob
Posted (edited)

Don’t know if this’ll help or not, but I was looking at identical specked Silverado high countries and noted a difference of 144 lbs if my math is correct. Both were identical except for the engines. They were 4x4 short box crew cabs. This was read directly from the “b” pillar door sticker. I’ve been able to call around and asked sales guys to run out to the truck and send me a photo of it. 
 

 

Edited by Kaze Morrissey
Posted
37 minutes ago, Kaze Morrissey said:

Don’t know if this’ll help or not, but I was looking at identical specked Silverado high countries and noted a difference of 144 lbs if my math is correct. Both were identical except for the engines. They were 4x4 short box crew cabs. This was read directly from the “b” pillar door sticker. I’ve been able to call around and asked sales guys to run out to the truck and send me a photo of it. 
 

 

You are saying the difference was that the 6.2L had 144 lbs MORE payload than the 3.0L diesel in an identically spec’d truck? I am wondering if the diesel Powertrain weighs that much more. And yes, that definitely helps, they didn’t have any gas Denalis and the next nearest dealership is 100 miles. 

Posted

To add further upon it, looking up that configurator calculator. Going to the 6.2L added 82.8 lbs on the front axle and 2.6 lbs to the rear axle from a base 4.3L 6 speed, I think, but the 3.0L added 183.6 lbs to the front axle and 79.8 lbs to the rear axle. I also leaned the difference in short to standard box is 50 lbs from the configuration page. I was in a similar boat to you, but trying to figure out differences in weight from a standard to short box. Hope this gives you what you were looking for. With that gm calculator, I just flipped through the screens to read the weight differences. 

Posted
10 minutes ago, Kaze Morrissey said:

To add further upon it, looking up that configurator calculator. Going to the 6.2L added 82.8 lbs on the front axle and 2.6 lbs to the rear axle from a base 4.3L 6 speed, I think, but the 3.0L added 183.6 lbs to the front axle and 79.8 lbs to the rear axle. I also leaned the difference in short to standard box is 50 lbs from the configuration page. I was in a similar boat to you, but trying to figure out differences in weight from a standard to short box. Hope this gives you what you were looking for. With that gm calculator, I just flipped through the screens to read the weight differences. 

That’s a major help, appreciate you looking that up. Had trouble navigating the site you linked on my phone so will check it out on PC later. 
 

Ram has a site you can input the VIN of any truck and get the VIN specific payload and towing numbers but GM makes it a little bit harder on us if we don’t have the truck right in front of us!

 

I should add I just realized the truck I pulled the payload sticker off was a standard box Denali 3.0 diesel (they had the exact same truck in short box that I had been looking at but when I went back to check the payload sticker i checked the standard box one. So 1348 lb payload is for Denali ultimate package standard box with diesel. Short box must be closer to 1400.

Posted

One more thing, the GVWR of the CC short box 3.0 diesel is 7200 lbs compared to GVWR of CC short box 6.2L of 7100 lbs (non-max trailering model). So if the 3.0 diesel is about 260 lbs heavier than base and the 6.2L is about 85 lbs heavier than base, the 6.2L should have about 75-80lb more payload in an identical truck based on the 175 lbs higher weight of the diesel but 100 lbs higher GVWR of the diesel model.

Posted

Yeah, I’m finding some discrepancies even with the door stickers. Comparing identical trims on a lot and a standard to short box showed only a 9lbs differnce, when everywhere else is saying it should be 50lbs. Good luck in your hunt. Your other option that I found was helpful was calling dealerships that had the trucks I wanted to compare and having them take a picture of the door sticker and sending it to me. Could help I your shopping if you’re that far away from dealerships. All the dealerships I spoke with were happy to help, but then of course I have been barraged with sales calls ever since.

Posted (edited)

Yeah, good catch. The 144 lbs difference from the 6.2l to the 3.0l Duramax accounted for the difference in the GVW. The door stickers I compared were for a 6.2L 7100 vs a 3.0L 7200, but the 6.2L had 144lbs more payload. 
 

finally Figured out how to upload the files. So the first pic I believe is the 6.2L high country deluxe package and tech package, bottom pic is identical except for the 3.0L Duramax, both short boxes. Mind you these are silverados and I even found the GMCs will weigh differently, the carbon bed I think increases payload 40-50lbs along with possibly the carbon leaf springs, but the multi-functional tailgate adds a bit of weight as well. I’ve been banging my head against a wall trying to understand all these payload configurations and how they’re figuring them out

45E51484-85C4-4B30-B2E3-540CC1167EBF.jpeg

1959B475-60E5-4D37-BE06-1CBEA32BA21D.jpeg

Edited by Kaze Morrissey
Posted (edited)

Here is my 2019 CC/SB Denali ultimate 6.2l. I can't imagine there is any difference between 19 & 20.

 

Jay

2019 CC:SB Denali.jpg

Edited by Jay P
Posted (edited)

If payload capacity is important to you, consider other trim levels.  I needed more payload capacity because I tow a travel trailer so I wound up getting an LTZ with the 6.2L and max trailering.  I now have the power and payload capacity I need to tow my travel trailer.  This is my sticker...

    

Trailering Information.jpg

Edited by AlaskaErik
  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, AlaskaErik said:

If payload capacity is important to you, consider other trim levels.  I needed more payload capacity because I tow a travel trailer so I wound up getting an LTZ with the 6.2L and max trailering.  I now have the power and payload capacity I need to tow my travel trailer.  This is my sticker...

    

Trailering Information.jpg

That’s awesome. Payload matters to me because need to make sure I can fit enough passengers and have enough payload for a small trailer but I don’t need as much payload or trailering as you have with that max trailering package. Was following this on the Ram forum and there are a lot of guys with loaded 1500 trucks coming in at 1000-1100 payload because they didn’t consider that when choosing options. It’s crazy. I need about 1450 or so to be comfortable. 
 

Ram actually makes it really easy to find VIN specific payload and towing info online but doesn’t have the nice stickers on the side with trailer capacity like GM has. Hopefully GM will set up an online database and then have best of both worlds in the future. 

Posted

We bought a 2020 because the increased payload.  This is the limits for a GMC 3500 Denali.  Plus you get the 360 when you go Denali - 6.6L 10 speed Allison - also has auto engine braking!

35D2233B-E032-4775-9C48-FE7ABEFD60F0.jpeg

Posted
20 hours ago, Kaze Morrissey said:

Yeah, good catch. The 144 lbs difference from the 6.2l to the 3.0l Duramax accounted for the difference in the GVW. The door stickers I compared were for a 6.2L 7100 vs a 3.0L 7200, but the 6.2L had 144lbs more payload. 
 

finally Figured out how to upload the files. So the first pic I believe is the 6.2L high country deluxe package and tech package, bottom pic is identical except for the 3.0L Duramax, both short boxes. Mind you these are silverados and I even found the GMCs will weigh differently, the carbon bed I think increases payload 40-50lbs along with possibly the carbon leaf springs, but the multi-functional tailgate adds a bit of weight as well. I’ve been banging my head against a wall trying to understand all these payload configurations and how they’re figuring them out

45E51484-85C4-4B30-B2E3-540CC1167EBF.jpeg

1959B475-60E5-4D37-BE06-1CBEA32BA21D.jpeg

Digit 8 of the VIN is the engine code. 

Top pic is a D - L84 5.3L

2nd pic is a T - LM2 3.0L

 

The L87 6.2L would be L

 

Fwiw, first digit is country of manufacture.

1 = US

3 = Mex

 

 

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
  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • I had an 88 K1500 with a 5.7 that had those symptoms, I know totally different, it ended up being the ECM. Once you get the fuel system fixed if it still runs lousy you may want to investigate that. it didn't set any codes, stalled ,ran rough at times etc
    • Congratulations Isttype, on your gmc. Really like my 2024 2500hd sle doublecab now with 85,500 miles.  I checked the oil today at 4800 miles since last oil change and barely reading on the stick.  I don't care if GM says it's Acceptable adding a quart every 2000 miles because that is 100% BS, It is not a 1966 Harley Shovelhead! Sounds like it's setting up a future failure like I had with my 1500 6.2l. Other than oil consumption problems, I really like the 6.6l gas and 10 speed is really nice.  Towed a light 4000 pound trailer last week and averaged 14 mpg.  I was pretty impressive that a 7300 pound gas truck did 14mpg towing, Later-
    • Long Term Cold Cycle Limited Testing   Back to the 1990's and XOM's million mile test. Since then there have been others and there will be more. Schaeffer's, AMSOIL to name two. Of these Schaeffer's is the stand alone which I will explain in a bit later.    http://papers.sae.org/600190/:   http://papers.sae.org/850215/:   Up to 75% of  engine wear occurs on cold starts. These two links (above) provide the technical reasons for engine wear. In a nut shell, and by a large margin, cylinder wear is what takes out most motors and even with a pre-oiling system that part of the engine is dry enough on cold starts and cold warm up to pierce Stribeck.   So when you put a motor, or a car, on a dyno for a million miles stopping only for oil changes, (yes fuel is uninterrupted) or break down maintenance, you are depriving the test of the most important part of it's wear cycle. Yes a million is then a pretty easy walk even for a mineral oil under those conditions.    How about cleanliness during the long test cycles? Same thing. Varnishes that stick rings and insulate parts are laid down by repetitive 'heat cycles'. It's the cool down the precipitates the varnishes. These long runs also hinder acidic attack caused by cold start richness and less than optimal cold start ring sealing. They hinder water formation and enhance breathing of the crankcase; the petri dish of acid formation, the first step in sludge formation, amalgamation and precipitation. These motors are also monitored and controlled for water and oil temperatures to within the "normal operating range".      https://www.swri.org/sites/default/files/sequence-iiih-test.pdf Note the test sequence in some boutique oils literature for testing, API IIIH, is not the standard used for the ILSAC G7 testing. Does that mean it is irrelevant? No, not as used. As used as a 'visual guide' it makes it's point. The G7 weighted piston deposit minimum is lower.      Back to Schaeffer's. That was a cyclical test of an engine in fleet service and not a dyno mule and if you saw the video it was not mirror clean but wear was low.    There are oils like BioSyn and other 'Renewable" source oils that taught cleanliness and have proven themselves in fleet testing. Havoline an other example.    The newest ILSAC G-7 test prioritize cleanliness, LSPI mitigation and fuel economy OVER WEAR. In comparison Porsche C30 Specification Verses ILSAC G-7 Specification below:      Some will balk that this graph isn't apples to apples and I will challenge that in that this graph represent the SPECIFICATION and not the any One Oil Performance.   It is absolutely possible to minimize wear, maximize cleanliness and mitigate LSPI etc., It just isn't cheap and currently I see none that are not walking toward profit over performance.     
    • I don't think you will need a split, separate product, etc., the OBD port should be able to deliver everything you need. Since your device would be plugged into it all the time, it wouldn't miss anything.    Hardware in this case will be the easiest part of your project - ELM 327 devices will already deliver all the data you need. Reporting/software is where your advantage/marketability is.
    • I do too. I’ll never be stuck again 😂
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...