Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, OnTheReel said:

The 2021 Silverado build and price is up as of this morning. I know some were waiting for this.

 

https://www.chevrolet.com/build-your-own-chevrolet

 

2021 Sierra went up last week.

 

https://www.gmc.com/build-and-price

Good find! That diesel with the 3.73 will likely be my next choice even though I cant it on TB . I will opt for the RST instead 

Posted

Haven't looked at the configurator yet. Is there an option for a non-leaky rear slider for the 2021s direct from the factory?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Posted
1 hour ago, f8l vnm said:

Good find! That diesel with the 3.73 will likely be my next choice even though I cant it on TB . I will opt for the RST instead 

Yeah, I wish they would allow 3.73 on everything. Makes too much sense to offer it on the TB I guess. I’m leaning towards the diesel too, but holding out for the refresh. 

8 minutes ago, Likarok said:

I have seen a few 2021's arriving. I thought they were suppose to have different dashes? 

2022 for the full refresh. 2021 has only very minor equipment changes, wireless CarPlay and AA is the biggest one. A few new colors as well. There was talk of a new console for 2021 but I’m not seeing it in the configurator.

 

Ironically the HD trucks get more notable changes for 2021, and they’ve been around less time. Like the look of these Z71 sport packages on LT and LTZ.

 

EEC88A0F-F8C2-43F6-8483-8DF35E130775.thumb.jpeg.117b345856bc8c99f154faf3d671398e.jpeg4C08272C-403C-458C-BEA3-E56B911D23F6.thumb.jpeg.f3b6b8744198107af0d45cb7b2a30949.jpeg

 

Posted

I thought the interior upgrades were supposed to hit in 2021.  But from the early car magazine reviews, I guess the General doesn't care about losing more market share.  

Posted

I really wish GM would allow color painted bumpers on all models as an option instead of being forced into the RST 

I do like the new Z71 HD look , looks really good to me with painted bumpers 

Posted
I thought the interior upgrades were supposed to hit in 2021.  But from the early car magazine reviews, I guess the General doesn't care about losing more market share.  
COVID-19 screwed it up. It has nothing to do with marketshare. Iirc, Silverado and Sierra combined outsold F-150 for 2020Q3. It's also why we now have to wait until MY2023 for the ZR2 Silverado.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

Posted
23 hours ago, Likarok said:

I have seen a few 2021's arriving. I thought they were suppose to have different dashes? 

It was. Pandemic screwed it up, so we have to wait another year. 

  • Like 1
Posted

Certain sources reported 2021, based on nothing but wishful thinking. Suppliers knew from the start it was intended to be 2022.
 

The basic design and development of the pickup refresh was done well before the pandemic (and the strike, which feels like ages ago). But obviously they had to direct resources into the T1 SUV first.

  • Like 1
Posted

I really think ( want to believe ) we have some nice updates coming in 22 besides exterior/interior 

10 speed in all engines!!! Even the big bad 6.6 HD motor 

Posted
I really think ( want to believe ) we have some nice updates coming in 22 besides exterior/interior 

10 speed in all engines!!! Even the big bad 6.6 HD motor 

I don't think the half ton trucks will get the L8T. The L8T makes less horsepower (401 @ 5200rpm vs 420 @ 5600rpm), and almost the same torque (464 @ 4000rpm vs 460 @ 4100), than the L87. The block is cast iron instead of aluminum, thus increasing weight. Compression ratio is lower (10.8:1 vs 11.5:1). The bore is exactly the same (103.25mm), while the stroke is minimally longer (98mm vs 92mm). I'm not an expert, but based on the numbers I think the larger displacement may have to do more with cooling capability since the L8T is expected to haul heavier loads. With the half ton trucks maxing out at 13,400 lbs, the L87 is perfect for what it's being used to do. And, given the L87 is based on the LT1, it's going to have the tooling paid for already, which makes it a more profitable engine for GM to produce and sell.

 

My source for both engine specs is GM Authority.

 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

Posted
On 10/7/2020 at 12:32 PM, OnTheReel said:

Yeah, I wish they would allow 3.73 on everything. Makes too much sense to offer it on the TB I guess. I’m leaning towards the diesel too, but holding out for the refresh. 

2022 for the full refresh. 2021 has only very minor equipment changes, wireless CarPlay and AA is the biggest one. A few new colors as well. There was talk of a new console for 2021 but I’m not seeing it in the configurator.

 

Ironically the HD trucks get more notable changes for 2021, and they’ve been around less time. Like the look of these Z71 sport packages on LT and LTZ.

 

EEC88A0F-F8C2-43F6-8483-8DF35E130775.thumb.jpeg.117b345856bc8c99f154faf3d671398e.jpeg4C08272C-403C-458C-BEA3-E56B911D23F6.thumb.jpeg.f3b6b8744198107af0d45cb7b2a30949.jpeg

 

The HDs also got some nice new power steps. I wish they’d offer these on the 1500.

3D8D43E6-87BC-46B2-B48C-B35D765562EC.jpeg

46770339-36E5-444F-8BC3-FB3449F81297.jpeg

  • Like 1
Posted
9 hours ago, Transient said:

I don't think the half ton trucks will get the L8T. The L8T makes less horsepower (401 @ 5200rpm vs 420 @ 5600rpm), and almost the same torque (464 @ 4000rpm vs 460 @ 4100), than the L87. The block is cast iron instead of aluminum, thus increasing weight. Compression ratio is lower (10.8:1 vs 11.5:1). The bore is exactly the same (103.25mm), while the stroke is minimally longer (98mm vs 92mm). I'm not an expert, but based on the numbers I think the larger displacement may have to do more with cooling capability since the L8T is expected to haul heavier loads. With the half ton trucks maxing out at 13,400 lbs, the L87 is perfect for what it's being used to do. And, given the L87 is based on the LT1, it's going to have the tooling paid for already, which makes it a more profitable engine for GM to produce and sell.

 

My source for both engine specs is GM Authority.

 

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

 

 

 

I actually meant 10 speed for the HD 6.6 not that I hope they would offer the 6.6 in the half tons . ( but i do agree with you ) 

 

The 6.2 is plenty good ( however the kid in me wishes GM would up the outputs on their 5.3 and 6.2 given we are now 8 years of same output) 

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

    • Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 
    • So, do I go elbow-deep on this thing or list it for sale and play dumb? Seems to "runs good."   I'm about $1200 away from having: -a rebuilt injector ($300) -a new cat ($250) -a new cat back exhaust (OE style) ($300) -a new AC compressor ($200) -AC refrigerant charge ($150)   In theory, this should rectify the obvious detracting issues from its value and operability. Cold AC with a non-squeaking AC pulley both sounds and feels good. An exhaust that isn't cut/hacked in 17 different places and doesn't vibrate on a crossmember would make it sound and feel less janky. A working cat would help the stink, and will save the earth, but *if and only if* the fuel system is working properly, which would also address the intermittent "rich" CEL.   Heard a good one... CEL for "Rich condition" means you haven't spent enough money on the truck lately, and it's letting you know.   Rebuilding the injector would seem to be the most important part. Replacing the cat would be secondary. I don't think mine is plugged or overly restricted, but it might be a little restricted? I have no good way to tell other than seat of the pants feel. I hate the smell.   The current theory is I have a rich idle problem: A bad fuel pressure regulator, or a leaking injector(s) being the highest probabilities. I already replaced the FPR but that doesn't mean its replacement isn't also bad. It was a new part from Dorman, but the packaging looked like it had been sitting on a shelf for 20 years.   This is the (single) upstream O2 sensor shown at idle. I'm getting a lot of "rich" it seems. Sometimes it stays high like that and doesn't drop down. That makes me think it's processing injector leaks or a partially stuck open injector.     Other times it looks like this. Nice oscillations between rich and lean, which is what I think it should be. Under load and at speed, the oscillations are nice and tight and uniform looking, high and low.     Fuel trims suggest the PCM is compensating pretty hard at idle to pull fuel out. But it's not enough to trip a CEL. Something about slowing to a stop: brake vaccum booster, EGR, or the EVAP purge is delayed, or there's pooled fuel in the intake again that's draining into a cylinder is enough to set the CEL. Of course, in two days of driving, it hasn't set. I was hoping to actually look at the freeze-frame data when it sets. IAT is high because it's idling on an 83 degree day here.  
    • Have considered installing a DC to DC charger in your camper to replace your isolator?  
    • Common failure.  You need to replace the fuel door housing.   The painted cover transfers over to the new housing.  To remove the old one there is 4 spots where you poke the plastic to release it.  
    • No such thing as regenerative braking on a pure ICE vehicle.     Regenerative braking is the re-capture of energy from electric motors and stores it in the battery pack.  So hybrids, PHEV and EVs have regenerative braking.     What you are seeing is the charging system changing modes is all.  Its likely entering charge mode for some sort of reason is all.  All of the charging modes will be listed below.   As for L10 vs D.  L10 turns off automatic grade braking.  L10 puts you in control of grade downshifts where in D it will automatically do it based on brake pedal position and other factors.  Otherwise L10 and D drive exactly the same aside from that one aspect.    Battery Sulfation Mode The BCM will enter this mode when the interpreted Generator output voltage is less than 13.2 V for 45 minutes. When this condition exists the BCM will enter Charge Mode for 2–3 minutes. The BCM will then determine which mode to enter depending on voltage requirements.   Charge Mode The BCM will enter Charge Mode when ever one of the following conditions are met:   Windshield wipers are ON for more than 3 s. Climate Control Voltage Boost Mode Request is true, as sensed by the HVAC control module via serial data. High speed cooling fan, rear defogger, and HVAC high speed blower operation can cause the BCM to enter the Charge Mode. The estimated battery temperature is less than 0°C (32°F). Battery State of Charge is less than 80%. Vehicle speed is greater than 145 km/h (90 mph) A current sensor malfunction exists. System voltage is determined to be below 12.56 V When any one of these conditions is met, the system will set targeted generator output voltage to a charging voltage between 13.9–15.5 V, depending on the battery state of charge and estimated battery temperature.   Fuel Economy Mode The BCM will enter Fuel Economy Mode when the estimated battery temperature is at least 0°C (32°F) but less than or equal to 80°C (176°F), the calculated battery current is less than 15 A and greater than −8 A, and the battery state-of-charge is greater than or equal to 80%. Its targeted generator output voltage is the open circuit voltage of the battery and can be between 12.5–13.1 V. When fuel economy mode is active, the generator is not charging, only maintaining open circuit battery voltage. The BCM will exit this mode and enter Charge Mode when any of the conditions described above are present.   Headlamp Mode The BCM will enter Headlamp Mode when ever the head lamps are ON (high or low beams). Voltage will be regulated between 13.9–14.5 V.   Start Up Mode When the engine is started the BCM sets a targeted generator output voltage of 14.5 V for 30 s.   Tow/Haul Mode (if applicable) Pressing the Tow/Haul Mode button located on the center stack, the vehicle system voltage is raised and the remote (non-vehicle) battery will be charged. Having the headlamps on will raise the system voltage and if the Tow/Haul button is applied it will not serve any purpose. The voltage is regulated between 13.9-14.5 V.      
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...