• Welcome to The Truck Stop! We see you haven't REGISTERED yet.

    Your truck knowledge is missing!
    • Registration is FREE , all we need is your birthday and email. (We don't share ANY data with ANYONE)
    • We have tons of knowledge here for your diesel truck!
    • Post your own topics and reply to existing threads to help others out!
    • NO ADS! The site is fully functional and ad free!
    CLICK HERE TO REGISTER!

    Problems registering? Click here to contact us!

    Already registered, but need a PASSWORD RESET? CLICK HERE TO RESET YOUR PASSWORD!

2020 GMC HD

That first gear is a solid respectable ratio for hard work and off road. And from 1-2 making that jump I think is perfectly acceptable for the advantage in grunt power.

But Having 10 gears, I am a little disappointed they didn’t flow more evenly, and mostly disappointed that the final od ratio didn’t follow suit in the nice rpm drop of 8-9.
 
BIGR said:
Serious grunt for sure taking off.

Chevy is claiming to tow more weight, but all Ford has to do in the new truck is put a rear end gear close to 3.73 or 3.90, heck the 4.30 gear, then what advantage does GM have?
Maybe I am missing something, but both GM and Ford are sharing the same 10 speed, supposedly. The advantage of the 6 speed Allison transmission GM had over Ford is gone?
Click to expand...
The engine and power isn't the limiter, it's brakes and chassis that are the limiters, and they're all touting ridiculous numbers for 1 ton trucks as is. 35K+ towing is a load for even a 1.5 ton truck, let alone a 1 ton. And the allison was a selling point, not an advantage, hence why they paid allison to certify there trans so they can continue the allison marketing. The 6r140 torqueshift from Ford and Dodge's aisin have both proven just as durable as the allison.
 
THEFERMANATOR said:
The engine and power isn't the limiter, it's brakes and chassis that are the limiters, and they're all touting ridiculous numbers for 1 ton trucks as is. 35K+ towing is a load for even a 1.5 ton truck, let alone a 1 ton. And the allison was a selling point, not an advantage, hence why they paid allison to certify there trans so they can continue the allison marketing. The 6r140 torqueshift from Ford and Dodge's aisin have both proven just as durable as the allison.
Click to expand...
Great info and makes a lot of sense, stopping power and the ability to handle the load is a very important for sure. I see people hauling excessive loads for the vehicles that their operating and I just shake my head.
 
HUGE brushgaurd. Lots of pipes across the front end and some large pieces of small hole expanded metal...

Pics to think about:
Couple tractors with the right mesh, and some options from flat faced to match To the obscene on the dodge..
But the best one here is the old Chevy. Add that to the front with the mesh from the red tractor behind it and I promise no one will notice the grille/ headlight abortion gm made.5590955910559115591255913
 
Will L. said:
"The newer Dynamic Fuel Management (DFM) is a more sophisticated system that can skip cylinder firing order in up to 17 different ways."
So new problems to be found...
Click to expand...
The idea is to vary which cylinders get shut down as to minimize ring wear and oil burning. This way it's not just the same 4 shutting off. They can vary them in a sequence to prevent a cylinder from shutting down for too long.
 
THEFERMANATOR said:
The idea is to vary which cylinders get shut down as to minimize ring wear and oil burning. This way it's not just the same 4 shutting off. They can vary them in a sequence to prevent a cylinder from shutting down for too long.
Click to expand...

Yes, but here is the thing..
If you know doing “X” causes more ring wear, why do it. So now it will be more balanced, which yes is an improvement. But still, you are wearing it out faster.

It’s like they completely ignore the fact that semis using jake brakes are expected to have a 25% less life. But trying to stop 80,000 lbs, the engine is sacrificed for less down time of constant brake jobs and safer stopping in extended downhill use.

Dead cylinder technique wether under compression or not is always proven to wear out faster.

Frickin stupid. Add turbo(s). Pay koneig for the electric valve system, ceramic coatings, more accurately build the air chambers for flow, etc There are so many places they can improve efficiency. But instead of actual investment in things they use bandaid hackery on a 1960’s technology. Then do more of what they really want- get the engines back down to a useable life of 150,000 miles between rebuilds.
 
I get your point Will, but even with the previous fuel management shutting down the same cylinders repeatedly the modern vortec engines last well over 150k, even if they do use a bit more oil. Say, a quart in 1500 is normal for the wife's 07 Tahoe at 130k. Plus, it's an economic thing that makes sense for them to do some relatively minor programming to aid in meeting fuel economy mandates instead of major mechanical additions that cost a bundle but STILL won't get the MPG requirements.
 
1 quart in 1500 miles isn't normal imo. My wifes 2001 k2500 we sold with over 200,000 miles on it only got oil changes every 30,000 miles on conventional oil. 6.0 ls with none of the nonsense- NEVER added a drop of oil.

in the gmt 400 trucks in the fleet - the gassers only here- some were on programs to monitor things for GM, so they would get 3,000 mile oil changes. but we had around 25 trucks that did around 100,000 miles per year run 24/7. they got oil changed @ 10,000 miles. NEVER oil added.

The only reason the 6.5s use oil is the lack of a catch can system. We built our own catch cans on some of the 6.5s where we wanted long oil life testing for conventional vs synthetic for 76 oils. they did use oil, but it took 10,000 miles to burn 1 qt.

I agree yes the new engines will run 150k and beyond unless they really goof something. but this isn't just generic valve timing. cylinder deactivation is not good for any engine that I have ever seen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top