aczlan
Good Morning
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2008
- Messages
- 16,985
- Tractor
- Kubota L3830GST, B7500HST, BX2660. Formerly: Case 480F LL, David Brown 880UE
GM unveils new 6.2 1/2t specs
- Thread starter Peacock
- Start date
- Views: 20643
DeereMann
Platinum Member
Big whoop - so GM finally caught up with Ram & Ford....5 years later. I sold my Chev Silverado 3 years ago for a Ram. Couldn't be happier with the balance of power & fuel economy of the HEMI 5.7L V8.
Like many, would prefer a light duty diesel......but hopefully that is coming. A decent one, that is.
Like many, would prefer a light duty diesel......but hopefully that is coming. A decent one, that is.
DeereMann
Platinum Member
409 ft-lbs torque with a 6-speed tranny is plenty. I get 20 mpg dead-heading on the highway.
Sure beats the old Chev 5.3 mutt-motor - screaming up interstate hills at high rpm with my hunting trailer. And - the oil-pumping problem they had from deactivated cylinder piston ring sticking at app. 30,000 miles.
Then bankruptcy, and delayed development. Sorry, I wasn't waiting another 3 years for them to get caught up. Look at the rpm where they rate there "hp", btw.
Sure beats the old Chev 5.3 mutt-motor - screaming up interstate hills at high rpm with my hunting trailer. And - the oil-pumping problem they had from deactivated cylinder piston ring sticking at app. 30,000 miles.
Then bankruptcy, and delayed development. Sorry, I wasn't waiting another 3 years for them to get caught up. Look at the rpm where they rate there "hp", btw.
fordmantpw
Veteran Member
Well, it's not that those aren't great numbers, because they are. The point is, Ford is still 1 MPG better, and is only giving up 55HP and 40 ft-lbs of torque. Oh, and those HP and torque numbers for the GM 6.2 are on premium, whereas Ford's (and I think Ram's) HP/torque numbers are on regular.
So, comparing to Ford, GM's engine makes 55 HP and 40 ft-lbs of torque more, on more expensive fuel, and gets 1 MPG less, than an engine that is 3 years old and set to be replaced soon. And you are saying that GM has more than caught up? I would call it a draw, myself.
fordmantpw
Veteran Member
And my counter is that the EcoBoost tows only 700 lbs less, and gets 1 MPG better. You can slice it and dice it any way you want, and you're going to find a winner for your preferred brand. Personally, I think it's pretty close. GM has more HP, Ford gets better MPG, while towing nearly as much. Look at the torque curve. I guarantee the EB has a much flatter, broader torque curve.
Now, if you want to compare GM's 6.2 to Ford's 6.2, then yes, GM is the clear winner. But comparing to the EB, it's really close. Would you rather have a few more ponies or an extra MPG? I think we need a head-to-head test to determine the winner here, because neither is a clear winner on paper.
And in all honesty, I think that's more HP/torque than is necessary for a half ton. Seriously, who tows that much with a half ton?
DeereMann
Platinum Member
I remain skeptical & unconvinced. GM seems late to the party with a "me-too" product.
Lest anyone think I have an axe to grind, that is not the case. I drove nothing but Chev Silvardo for 12 years before I switched to Ram. Nor am I phishing for validation of my decision. Just offering MHO is all.
I am still interested in seeing what the light duty diesel offerings end up with.
Lest anyone think I have an axe to grind, that is not the case. I drove nothing but Chev Silvardo for 12 years before I switched to Ram. Nor am I phishing for validation of my decision. Just offering MHO is all.
I am still interested in seeing what the light duty diesel offerings end up with.
