Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

I have a 2020 Sierra 1500 SLT 5.3L and am disappointed with the highway gas mileage. With cruise control set at 72mph I am averaging just shy of 20mpg. What kind of gas mileage are others with the 2020 5.3L and 10 speed transmission seeing? Thank you.

Posted

If your avg combined miles per gallon is nearly 20, you are doing pretty darn good for a full size truck. That means you are getting 23-24 on the freeway and 16ish in the city. That's almost exactly what the truck is rated for.

 

Drive 65 and the mileage per gallon should go up.

Posted
40 minutes ago, JimCost2014 said:

What kind of MPG were you expecting from a 5000 lb. truck going 72 MPH?

Well, I was averaging 23mpg with my 2019 5.3L with 8 speed transmission.

Posted
5 minutes ago, ljramsey said:

Well, I was averaging 23mpg with my 2019 5.3L with 8 speed transmission.

Honestly with my 18, 6.2, 8 speed, can get close to 23 (what the trucks says), if I stay at/right under 70.

Once I exceed that MPH, it does start dropping quickly.

 

Seems like the new engines and the 10 speed should be getting more MPG's.

Posted

My 2018 Sierra SLT 6.2L with 8 spd got 23 to 24 mpgs all day long running 70 mph. My new HC with 10 spd and 6.2L gets around 20 mpg.  I can’t come close to replicating those numbers. But this new truck drives, rides, shifts, and accelerates so much better than my 2018.  I’ll take the 2 to 3 mpg hit. That 1 to 2 “clunking” in 8 spd drove me nuts. 

 

My stepdad just got new Sierra with 5.3L and 10 spd and he is getting 22 to 23 mpg. He is really liking this new truck. He came from a Furd ecoboost that claimed to get 23 but could never crack 20 mpgs ever in the 5 years he owned it. 

Posted

My 16 with 5.3/3.42/4x4 was lucky to get 20-22 at 70mph. Haven’t checked my 2020 8 speed, 3.23 4x4 5.3 yet. I’m surprised you saw those kinda numbers on your K2, what rear end gear did you have in it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted
18 minutes ago, TNTSilverado said:

My 2018 Sierra SLT 6.2L with 8 spd got 23 to 24 mpgs all day long running 70 mph. My new HC with 10 spd and 6.2L gets around 20 mpg.  I can’t come close to replicating those numbers.

Yeah, my 19’s a pig compared to my 16. These new trucks are a lot bigger, so any benefit of the weight reduction and added gears is wiped out by the giant frontal area of these things. At least that’s what I think the difference maker is. I don’t really care though. Gas is cheap. For now.

 

Mine will do an honest 20 MPG at 70 with the 6.2/10/3.42s. Bump it to 80, and I’m lucky to see much over 18 unless we are on some flat ground. I would imagine the 5.3 should do a little better. Maybe it just needs to be broken in a bit more.

Posted
23 minutes ago, Imcrazy said:

My 16 with 5.3/3.42/4x4 was lucky to get 20-22 at 70mph. Haven’t checked my 2020 8 speed, 3.23 4x4 5.3 yet. I’m surprised you saw those kinda numbers on your K2, what rear end gear did you have in it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

My 2018 had 3.23 gears. And yes no one ever believed I got those numbers till I showed them on the instrument cluster and then also calculated it out after fill up. My nephew who is HUGE Furd guy always knocks GM vehicles till he rode in it and actually saw what I got. It shut him up real quick. 
After tuning it, I also achieved the same MPGs. Idk if I got a unicorn but if that truck wouldn’t have had the d@mn 8 spd clunking, I would have probably never gotten rid of it, or let’s just say not be tempted to test drive a new T1. But then again, this new 10 spd is so smooth and the added features along with extra space in Crew Cab for my kiddos and our 90 German Shepherd, makes up for the loss of mpgs

Posted (edited)

Here is one time I took picture running 70 down highway for home to work. It’s a 32 mile flat stretch, but 450+ hp after tune was still pretty impressive. 

2C8059E3-E468-49FF-8A55-56949365010F.jpeg

Edited by TNTSilverado
Posted

My 2018 Silverado LT had 3.42 gears, a six speed trans, and the same size tire as my 2020 Silverado LT with 3.23 gears and 8 speed trans. I run 75 on the highway.

 

The tires on the 2018 were Bridgestone Duelers and the 2020 has Genral Grabber AT's.  Both 255 17's.

 

Life time mileage on the 2018 was 22.5 at 38,000 miles before the electrical gremlins forced me out of it. At close to 8,000 miles lifetime on the 2020 is 20.1.

 

My opinion is that the engine in the 2020 is spinning just a tad under optimal RPM's at 75 with the 3.23's. Best 400 mile MPG average so far on the 2020 was 24.1 at 79 MPH. The stock General AT tires on the 2020 vs the Stock street tread on 2018 Bridgestone's probably factor into things too.

 

There is no comparison about how much smoother the 2018 ran than the 2020 does from 500 to 1,500 RPM's. The 2018 would idle at 500 RPM so smoothly and quietly it was amazing. I could stop to talk on the phone , put it in park, and when I got out of the truck 45 minutes later the tach and door chime would be the only indication the truck was still running. If the 2020 gets down to 500 RPM's the antenna looks like it's going to vibrate off.

 

If GM would have found the issue in a reasonable amount of time with my 2018 at 243 miles when it first happened, at 3,800 miles the second time it happened, or at 38,000 miles when it happened again I would still have it. Three strikes and it was out.

Posted

I also had 285/45/22s on my truck. It came with stock 20s but I upgraded to 22s. Still never affected the gas mileage

 

There are days I miss it just a smidge! Lol

 

D321F645-1F98-4EE0-8BB6-2EB8B6933918.jpeg

Posted

2020 Denali, 5.3 10 speed. Getting 23-25 mpg. All highway miles. For city driving, use my Wrangler JL and 2018 Trax.

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

    • 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 😂
    • It has happened to me a few times. I carry a jumpstart-tire inflator with me.
  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...