2014 Chevy/GMC specs

[94BULLITT]

No it's not, the 5.0l is rated at:
4x2 - 15 city / 21 highway / 17 combined
4x4 - 14 city / 19 highway / 16 combined

Even in 4x4 the new GM 5.3l beats the 2WD 5.0l I still say the 5.0l is a good engine though and if Ford goes to an aluminum frame, mileage will go up but so will price.

There are guys getting 17-18 with a 5.0 4WD.

 

[94BULLITT]

If the read world numbers prove these number correct then good for GM. But I have to think that GM's money woes is why they are sticking with a push rod V8 vs multi-cam more valves per cylinders. Who else is using cylinder shut down to get higher EPA numbers? If nobody then I would expect that all the other brands will add it just to boost their numbers as well.

GM and Ram are using cylinder cut out.

 

[RollingsFarms]

I'm curious to see how the new disc brakes made by Duralast (I think that's the name) are going to be. The disc brakes I had on my 2004 were terrible. Good bit better on my 2011 though with the NHT package. I'd also like to know how the 5.3 is rated to tow 11,500 when my 2011 with the 6.2 and NHT package was only rated to tow 10,600. Maybe the disc brakes for 2014 are much larger? Is the frame all new for 2014?

 

[crazyal]

GM and Ram are using cylinder cut out.

So there's no reason not to expect others to add it if it actually does produce real world results (or fudging the EPA numbers).

 

[crazyal]

I'm curious to see how the new disc brakes made by Duralast (I think that's the name) are going to be. The disc brakes I had on my 2004 were terrible. Good bit better on my 2011 though with the NHT package. I'd also like to know how the 5.3 is rated to tow 11,500 when my 2011 with the 6.2 and NHT package was only rated to tow 10,600. Maybe the disc brakes for 2014 are much larger? Is the frame all new for 2014?

I always assumed that Duralast was Autozone's house brand.

 

[Dmace]

There are guys getting 17-18 with a 5.0 4WD.

And those guys will probably get 18-20 with this 5.3. It's all in the driver and environment.

I was expecting a little more considering the direct injection AND cylinder deactivation but many people with the RAM MDS and GM AFM are able to beat the highway fuel mileage rating with light foot driving.

 

[Ford850]

Rams MDS and GMs AFM are as finicky as the Ecoboost is when trying to get great mpgs. It takes more attention to driving style to keep the mpgs high. On average though they probably all return fairly good results.
I like the new 5.3 numbers. They are nothing great, but close to the 5.0 with more low end tq. The Ecoboost still kills the 5.3 for tq though. It's funny how all of a sudden everyone wants to talk about who gets the best MPGs. If you are an average driver, it makes little difference in the life of the truck between them all (low and mid range engines). You'll be better off buying the truck that you like or that fits your needs rather than chasing the best MPGs.

 

[Ford850]

Looks like GM released some specs on the 2014 1500 trucks.

2014 Silverado/Sierra Release 5.3L MPG, Power, Payload and Towing Numbers - PickupTrucks.com News

V8 5.3l direct injected, normally aspirated, EcoTec making 355 HP / 383 LB.FT. burning 87 octane with no turbos or drivetrain tricks. Nice flat torque curve plus still has that V8 sound.

4x2 - 16 city / 23 highway / 19 combined
4x4 - 16 city / 22 highway / 18 combined

11,500 lbs max towing capacity
2,102 lbs max payload

The 6.2l EcoTec will be a monster!

Here come the anti-anything-but-Ford stories...

Unfortunately they are playing the marketing game even more than usual for the truck brands. Look at the order guide and try to build a few configurations that you like. To get those bragging numbers, the perfect combination has to be configured. I know that is not unusual for any brand, but these are extreme. For example, the best selling cab style (crew cab) is not available in those max number packages. Some are limited to the 6.2 which is limited even more to certain models. Speaking of Crew Cabs, that will be the only cab style built for some time, and built only in Mexico. So all the new trucks you will see on the lots will be built in Mexico until late this year. And all crew cabs, so there will be no max packaged trucks available. It might push more buyers into 13's if they can't wait until December to get the truck they need.
Payload ratings for GM look closer to Ram than Ford now. Ford's standard payload is nearly the same as GM's max packages. Then Ford has the Max Tow package that bumps payload up approximately 500 lbs. Then you can add the HD Payload package and bump it up another 500 lbs. In the end, Ford's max payload (3100lbs) is 150% of GM's and Ram's. These heavier payloads fit my needs better, but I know most people just use their truck like an SUV these days. I would think Ford's heavier packages will decrease when they come out with a new lighter truck in a couple years. I know GM said they didn't move their shock location out because that would have required a change to the frame, which they didn't do. But I wonder with some of their other suspension advances if they improved the ride some more. I would think that would put GM and Ram ahead of Ford for 'car like ride'.

 

[Diamondpilot]

Which engine are you comparing it to?
It gets BETTER economy than the competition. Plus I gaurantee the fuel mileage while towing will be much better than the Ecoboost.

Try the Eco, Hemi 8 speed, Tundra 5.7, ect.

Typical GM. 3 years late and playing catchup.

Chris

 

[Diamondpilot]

Again you have absolutely nothing useful to add..

I agree.
They're typically pretty conservative with new engine releases.

So GM is conservative but Ford was not with its numbers? Stop while you can.

Chris