Results 11 to 20 of 29
Thread: Hey GM Wake UP!!!!!!
02-21-2013, 09:56 AM #11
@nakranij, let me make sure I have this straight:
- You claim to care about fuel consumption and prices
- But you want to up the horsepower on the vehicle to 600+
- And you want to scream past guys with vettes in your truck
- Both of which burn a metric crapton of fuel
- Meaning you don't really care about how much fuel you burn
Based on this logic, your argument about fuel economy is purely a straw man exercise you use to self-justify wanting a Dmax. You'd be best served to simply say you want one rather than contradict yourself in this manner.
02-21-2013, 10:14 AM #12
I think that is only partially correct. 99% of the time I drive with cruise on, meaning I am getting the best ratio possible mpg's/ fuel. But that does not mean you have to be a siff and not have the extra ummfff when you need or want it (and yes, your MPG's will go down if you floor the petal, that is not specifically a Dmax thing)
However the difference is that a Diesel will handle the abuse over the long term of the petal to the metal better than our 5.3L will in cost of replacing parts and for the 99% of times you are not hitting the floor with the petal, you still are making up much more than you loose.
Lets take vets for an example, we have some of the largest stealer ships on the east coast right here in our area, we also sell more Z06's than most dealerships, how many people that have Z06's in this area buy them to bury the petal every time they sit in the driver seat?
Sometimes you can have your cake and eat it to. With trucks, that is the diesel, not the gassers.
02-21-2013, 10:24 AM #13
In every Dmax discussion you've had here, with me, and with Alox you've justified it with fuel econ ... but also brought up more HP and screaming off-the-line performance. Those two things do not ever mix ... because when you take action to get one (i.e. high MPG) you can't have the other in that very moment (i.e. drive like a nutter). Plainly put, you can't have your cake and eat it, too. (Doing that would entail high MPG -while- driving like a nutter.)
Hearing you talk out both sides of your mouth (not intended to be an insult, by the way) ... wanting maximum fuel econ AND 600+ HP is just strange and unrealistic to me. It's like wanting a Volt to be electric, have unlimited range, and perform like a Vette. (That's an extreme case, but you get the idea.) If you tweak up your HP with mods you ARE going to negatively impact your fuel econ and can't have the max fuel econ ... even when driving nicely.
How so? Well, you could have tweaked/tuned down for fuel econ but tweaked/tuned up for HP, so there's lost fuel econ, right there. Nevermind that it'll likely drink more fuel to get that added HP ... whether it's a gasser, a gasser with an aftermarket turbo, or a diesel with an OEM turbo.
Added power doesn't come from nowhere. You can eek out a little more efficiency with tuning to obtain some power by minimizing waste. But a big bump, like that, is going to cost you some fuel econ, as the system just isn't so grossly inefficient that it'll allow you to squeeze out hundreds of HP through efficiency tweaks, alone.
To get us back on topic:
- What's the base MPG, HP, and Torque of the 4.5L diesel being contemplated?
- I'm asking to see if your 22-25MPG and 600+ HP targets are even applicable on that engine...
Last edited by SurrealOne; 02-21-2013 at 10:39 AM.
02-21-2013, 11:20 AM #14
No insult taken, but you and me both know that gas powered engines are obsolete 18th century technology that has been refined over the years and untill auto manufacturer's want to change, they won't.
The closest "specs" I have found are here:
(Subject to change).
The base MPG on that engine is 24mpg's and its peak is suppose to be 30mpg's (Hence my use of those figures in relation to the truck I am currently driving which uses gas.)
Looking at those specs and comparing them to the specs of my 5.3L, with gas and diesel, you are right, there is a "balance" and there is a point of maximum return when it comes to boosting horse power and getting MPG's and going past that, one or the other is going to decline.
So with the options before us, that 4.5L dmax compared to the 5.3L gas, is in effect, having your cake and eating to.
And we both know that the margin for tweaking both horse power and MPG's is much larger on Diesels than it is on gas engines and the gains are better too all the way around (that peak before decline); you will get a much nicer peak on the 4.5L than any 5.3L gas will ever get. (with less abuse to the engine parts maintaining the integrity of the engine.
Also, Dmaxes are not the same as diesels in 18 wheelers. I remember back in the day if you were at a stop light next to a diesel truck, it was all torque, even accelerating at a normal rate when the light turns green, the diesel will be "chugging" along slowly.
Modern diesels in 3/4 and 1 ton trucks don't have that problem, infact, they are able to have the torque (more torque than they have ever had" and they also accelerate like you are driving an imported german sports car at the same time.
02-21-2013, 11:52 AM #15
I'm not arguing that you can't tweak/tune diesels more. I'm not arguing that they are more fuel efficient. I am simply telling you that you CANNOT have 600+ HP without sacrificing max fuel econ using any of today's GM engines (whether diesel or not) ... and you can't on the 4.5L diesel, either.
Having your cake and eating it, too, would be having max fuel econ AND the 600+ HP you want on GM engine -- at the same time (i.e. as you put the pedal down to use that 600HP). It's not possible. You could shift to a fuel econ tune for fuel econ ... and then to a power tune for HP ... on demand as you needed/wanted them. But that's switching between cakes and eating a bit of each ... not having your cake and eating it, too.
So, I still want to know base HP on the 4.5L ... and whether it can be reasonably taken to 600+ HP with just tweaks/tunes. That, too, seems an unlikely goal...
02-21-2013, 12:04 PM #16
- Join Date
- Feb 2010
- Lucedale, MS
- Blog Entries
When Diesels are quite like gas engines and don't stink I may consider such a change but for now I will stick with my 5.3 it has more power than I have ever needed and I get 17 MPG and 19 on the highway. Maybe not the best but great for me because my 5.3 is not loud and doesn't stink. Also every time I have ever had to buy diesel for a tractor, truck or anything I would have to go and wash my hands before driving again because the pump nozzles are always oily. I say if you like or need a diesel get one, hell buy you a Dodge if you want but for now I will stick to good ole gas.
02-21-2013, 12:22 PM #17
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Northern GA
- Blog Entries
When you cut out dpf and your egr and run a straight pipe with an intake and the banks six gun. also remove urea you can get high 30s on the lml Dmax. At the same time you can get can get tons or torque. All the EPA stuff hampers MPG2009 chevy 1500 z71 4x4
2.5 ccm level,2.5 inch rear blocks 305/60/18 coopers stt,Debadged,10 series flow w/dual exit in front or right rear tire, KN CAI, diablo InTune, 18% tint all the way around ,spec-d euro headlights with black housings,winjet smoke LED tail lights,putco LED third brake light smoked, fab fours front bumper with 10k warn winch, RK sports ram air hood
1965 c10 swb, zz4 350 with the hot cam and fast burn heads and a 780 Holley on top, richmond super street 5 speed,restorod
02-21-2013, 01:41 PM #18
My 02 Ram Diesel - 25mpg highway
my 06 Ram Diesel - 18mpg highway
my 10 ram Diesel - 16mpg highway
From 02-06 the only thing that changed was the federal emissions equipment. Same engine size same truck size/weight/gears. :( in 10 the engine was bigger, used more fuel was rated for more HP but had MUCH LESS umph towing.
my 12 Silverado Diesel - about 20mpg highway (interstate)
but struggles in economy in town and for some reason the colder the weather the less mpg I get. Better than my last two Dodges but sad 02 technology is better than any of them with 2010 + because of all the crap now choking the engines. :( Sure you have less emissions but use more chemicals etc. doing that and use MUCH more fuel than you would be. Which is better for the environment? The 02's emissions were fine, it didn't smoke and I'm sure was still less than a gas engine.
- - - Updated - - -
..as for considering Dodge.
Look at my last 4 trucks and see what they are. Then wonder, why didn't he get a Dodge again in 2012? Why is he on the Chevy site? hmmm ;)
Last edited by E_HILLMAN; 02-22-2013 at 02:06 PM.Buy Made in USA, The job you save just might be your own.
02-21-2013, 01:50 PM #19
02-21-2013, 04:38 PM #20
Of the 2, which one will have higher mpg's and an engine that will take the upgrades for the long term
if you are taping the the pedal in either truck, they will sip gas/diesel. If you jam the pedal to the concrete, the mpg's will go down, the percentage will be allot less in the dmax. I will have to find a site that does a side by side comparison of equally upgraded silverado's.
Either truck at 600hp will not give you 15mpg or 24mpg. The 5.3L might hit 8mpg's @ 600hp...... the diesel might get you 12-15mpg's (24pmg's being the normal bottom end.
By Enkeiavalanche in forum Chevy Car ForumReplies: 12Last Post: 04-11-2013, 10:04 PM
By Enkeiavalanche in forum Chevy Avalanche Forum (Escalade EXT)Replies: 1Last Post: 04-02-2012, 11:26 PM
By Enkeiavalanche in forum MA - Massachusetts GM OwnersReplies: 0Last Post: 08-09-2011, 06:42 AM
By Enkeiavalanche in forum North America - Northeast USAReplies: 17Last Post: 12-18-2010, 07:25 AM
By Steve in forum The Coffee Shop ~ Chit ChatReplies: 0Last Post: 09-07-2007, 10:22 PM