Will GM LD Trucks Have a Diesel Option?

GMCsierra1500_cdauto_50812_4 II

Photo by Chris Doane Automotive

Reports about GM's new pickup truck powertrain lineup and subsequent strategies are beginning to ramp up. We've seen and heard from several sources who can't help themselves from speculating what type of engines will be under the hoods of the new 2014 Chevy Silverados and GMC Sierras. 

GM North American President Mark Reuss has gone on record saying a diesel option is one of the powertrain choices being considered for the new full-size trucks. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that if he's being this vague so late in the game, there probably won't be anything new in the new 1500 out of the gate. But the possibility exists that if one of the other competitors does something drastic, like offering a small diesel in a half-ton, GM will likely have something in the works to compete. 

For now, at least from the various spy photos we've seen, the only truck maker close to having a small turbo-diesel to market is Ram, with its prototypes running around Michigan. The spy photographers have done a great job of following certain test trucks into the fuel stations and catching the drivers using diesel nozzles. Another telltale sign: There seems to be sooty particulate buildup around the bumpers and tailpipe. 

Regardless of how close the Ram 1500 diesel engine is to reaching production — and with the 2013 model just around the corner, we're guessing not too likely for this next model year — the biggest hurdle with these more complicated and emissions-complex engine systems is cost. And nothing makes that point better than Ford's popular and powerful EcoBoost engine, which, in most cases, is about a $1,000 option — and in some cases even less. Now add the fact that diesel fuel is not always less expensive (and in some cases it still costs more than regular), and the tipping point for most buyers to invest the extra $3,000, $4,000 or $5,000 for a diesel (and likely a new transmission) is not there.

Ram1500Diesel.fill2 II

Ram1500Diesel pipe II
Above photos by KGP Photography

Reuss has continued to say he likes GM's two-truck strategy, where the smaller, lighter and more nimble Chevy Colorado will be able to satisfy truck buyers who don't have half-ton-truck work needs and where fuel economy is a much higher priority, as well as having the larger half-ton option. Whether or not that means the little trucks will get a new set of small turbo-diesel or turbocharged engines — and it seems GM has access to some pretty good ones from around the globe — remains to be seen. As for the larger trucks, we're thinking GM is more likely to take a more balanced (just don't call it less risky) approach to its powertrains.

With all the attention the past several years paid to high-performance gasoline engine technology in order to squeeze out higher horsepower numbers and better fuel economy, we can't help but think that practically nothing has been done to GM's aging and often ignored Vortec 4.3-liter V-6. This engine has been in just about everything truck and SUV GM has offered over the past few decades, yet it suffers from a lot of old technology. What if you add direct injection, some overhead cams, some sophisticated intake and exhaust variable valve timing and, just to make it interesting, just maybe offer it with a turbo option?

Clearly, GM is comfortable with turbo technology on modern engines. (You could even offer a four-cylinder turbo version for a smaller truck.) Having a standard or (non-turbo) and performance (single or twin turbo) version of a new Vortec 4.3-liter V-6 could make a lot of sense for a truck-making company worried about the upcoming fuel economy regulation hurdles and still stay true to the company's performance heritage.

Of course, we wouldn't expect GM to show all its cards when the new truck powertrain lineup shows up, but we're guessing they will have a few surprises. Whether that includes turbos on smaller, more fuel-efficent gas or diesel engines would require us to do even more speculation (and there's a lot of speculation here). Still, any one of those choices would make Ford and Ram reconsider their decisions to dump their smaller pickups for the U.S. market, and that could put an entirely new set of options on the table for us down the road. We'll see. 

Vortec 4300 V-6 II

 

Comments

@Lou
Our global mid-size trucks overlap into some of your HD performance areas ie, like load capacity. Believe it or not they do move those loads around quite effectively. I know they don't tow the same, but having that capability and using that capability are two different things. As I said a lot of the HDs I saw were show ponies, like our Ford and Holden V8 utes. These people will probably buy something else for their $50-60k instead of an HD.

HDs with 3-4 litres diesels won't be around for a little while, until they improve their outputs. In 5-8 years 3L, 4 cylinder diesels will be producing 200kw and over 600nm of torque and getting over 30mpg in a mid-size.

All I want is for GM to keep building a HD pickup that out tows Ford and Dodge just like it does now.

@Greg, towing is only part of the picture. They need to focus on body durability big time. We had 3 Silverado's at work we traded off for F-150's because the body durability went into the toilet on the Chevrolet's. They really need to tuck up that frame too on the HD's. It's an eyesore and really diminishes the appearance of an otherwise good looking truck. At least the HD's anyway. I'm not fond of the 1500's at all. Chevrolet really needs to get it's act together and fast. And don't get me started on their poor interior quality. The waxed dipped frames and drum brakes are all valid complaints as well that a new diesel engine won't solve. They need to fix the whole package. If I had to buy a new truck today it would be a Ford instead of a Chevy. I'm glad I don't need one yet. My 97 Silverado is still a world class workhorse and I think it looks better than the new ones. It's built sturdier too. Hopefully the next Chevy Silverado will blow the truck buying community away. I'd really enjoy that! I'd gladly have a new Chevrolet in my driveway again if they were as nice as the Ford's.

3L diesels are already putting out 200kw/600Nm

Mercedes 195kw/620Nm
BMW (triple turbo) 280kw/740Nm

@Alex

I'm sorry, I was refering to affordable engines for the commercial vehicle market. As I mentioned before, luxury vehicle technology transfer occurs, but not for a while.

I think Mercedes, BMW, Audi and a few others are already at 200kW/600Nm (260 hp/440 lbs of torque). Mercedes has a massive heavy truck and commercial division that can use their tech as does Fiat.

I know that a typical 1/2 ton or 3/4 doesn't need to have a motor that last 1 million miles so I think the higher tunes combined with the compact graphite iron blocks will allow for high power and decent longevity (ie 300,000 miles or so)

I personally think that 3.0 liters is goign to be too small for 3/4 or 1 ton trucks but a regular and possibly heavy 1/2 could use that size very well. the larger trucks likely would need something 20% larger which could be managed using the same block to save engineering costs.

@mhowarth You hit the nail on the said when you said Offer the 4.5 across the entire range, and they will sell a lot more trucks. This is what I think they will eventually start to do. They know just like you did.

I think that 4.5 is the perfect size based on the 4.4 in the Range Rover. It gets the same fuel economy as the 3.0 V6 in the Range Rover Sport.

I think a 4.4 or 4.5 is too big for a 1/2 ton. It would certainly be the premum motor for sure but it is overkill considering it would likely have 350 hp and 550 lbs of torque. It would take a tranny upgrade which I think the auto makers would like to avoid to keep the costs down.

I think something inbetween 3.0 and 4.5 will work well. Say 3.6L. It would have 285-290 hp and 450 lbs of torque. That is a real sweet spot for an overlap of a 1/2 ton and 3/4 ton. That and a good 400lb weight loss in both sized trucks ;)

Does no one recall that GM has a smaller diesel sitting on the shelf and ready to launch?

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2010/06/gm-ponders-reviving-45liter-duramax-v8-diesel.html

http://image.dieselpowermag.com/f/10608638/0810dp_03_z+2010_duramax_4500_diesel+gm_diesel_engine_family.jpg

@mhowarth and Alex

Here is a German diesel that can be retro fitted to a Cessna. 100 cubic inch replacing 320 cubic gas engine.

"Their first engine, a 1.7 litres (100 cu in), 135 hp (101 kW) four-cylinder (based on the 1.7 turbo diesel Mercedes A-class power unit), was first certified in 2002. It is certified for retrofitting to Cessna 172s and Piper Cherokees which were originally equipped with the 160 hp (120 kW) Lycoming O-320 320 cubic inches (5.2 l) Avgas engine." I copied and pasted this from an article, and this engine is 10 years old.

Props need torque. Cubic inches in diesels is not as significant as gas engines. I'd hate to see the price of this diesel engine.

A 3 litre diesel will shift a HD truck (more slowly). Just look and see what power/torque F-250 etc where delivering in the 70/80s and they worked.

@mhowarth - I have to agree. Do we really need 4.4 or 4.5 Litre diesel engines in our trucks? People want to be able to cruise at 80 mph pulling 10,000 lb regardless of the terrain. Learn how to think while you drive is all I have to say to that. Sure, I like my 315 hp truck, but I managed quite well for 15 years with 195 hp in 3/4 ton.

@Lou
If West Texas Crude is $150 our Tapis will be $180-200 a barrel. China and the BRICS are expanding rapidly.

The reason I believe the mid-size (global) trucks will take over your market is VW invested over $3.5billon in the Amarok, GM/Izuzu who have little money invested over $2billon into the new Colorado, I believe Ford/Mazda invested over $3billon into the T6/BT50 and who only knows how much Toyota is investing into the new Hilux. Why? The NA pickup market is getting band aid fixes with no real improvements other than Ford dropping a blower on an engine.

The Japanese mini trucks scared NA enough to implement the chicken tax and they would have been a lot less competitive than the global pickups. Imagine what our global trucks could do, they would impact all segments of your pickup market. That's why they aren't released in NA (yet). They would transform your market. But Detroit is broke and tooled to manufacture light trucks.

The issue I see with HDs is ther requirement for real truck drivetrains and chassis etc, where light trucks can subsitute automobile parts.

HDs used to be more closely aligned from and engineering perspective to your half tonners as well, but NA has created a niche market with HDs.

Hello...

A green nozzle does not mean it's a diesel!

@Oxi, that was a diesel! Just accept it and move on.

@Big Al, I believe the mid-sizes you pointed out were not singled out for the US market. They are for other markets where a mid-size is the biggest pickup segment. They pay more for mid-sizes than North America does. With the $50k, they want as much towing, payload, and best fuel economy mix. I believe North America will continue with full-sizers as the bread and butter, but they will continue to compete on fuel economy and technology. If mid-sizers were close to outselling full-sizers in the US, I might agree with you, but the manufacturers are not going to force a change in consumer trends.

"With all the attention the past several years paid to high-performance gasoline engine technology in order to squeeze out higher horsepower numbers and better fuel economy, we can't help but think that practically nothing has been done to GM's aging and often ignored Vortec 4.3-liter V-6."

The only reason the 4.3L V6 is still around is because of warranty claims, or lack of them. The next gen half ton from GM will have a variant of the High Feature V6 as the base engine. I remember reading on a GM fansite that they looked at doing a V6 off the LS tooling, but simulations and tests suggested it wasn't worth it.

I would LOVE a half ton option from either GM or Ford with a small V-6 Diesel with a few turbos on it. You could pull 30-35 miles per gallon probably and have the torque when you need it. It would be a beast. Please Ford or GM, bring the diesels to the US.

Oh I see ram beating Chevy,NOT! I owned a RAM,98 to be exact. 5.9 and HD 4 speed auto. 150k miles and that thing could not hit 12mpgs in town,and the trans melted as well. My 93 Chevy with its 5.7 engine and auto trans ran till 230k miles before the original trans went,and I could consistently hit 17mpg in town. Both were the same over all body style,4x4 and such. Dream on. Your dodge crap transmissions cost 5k to replace? Lol I could buy 2 better GM autos that last 1.5 times longer and still have $1500 in the bank. NO GUTS NO GLORY DAM RAM JUNK. That's your slogan. Ford,nah. I drove an eco boost,I think the 4.3 can beat it. As far as ford HD trucks go,my job had a 2006 Chevy 3500 duramax,Allison auto with 330,000 miles,no overhauls just normal maintenance. We bought a 2011 ford F450,new 6.7 liter diesel and Allison auto in it. Had 4.10s in the axle over the chevys 3.42s. The Chevy out tows it,out runs it,gets better mileage,and the ford has been in the shop with major issues,new radiator at 5k miles as it decided to leak( typical ford),turbo quit at 10k miles ( old guy drives it on a route,doesn't get beat on) and the DEF emissions crap quit too. In 15k miles that truck has been in the shop as much as the Chevy has for normal maintenance. So,ford and dodge boys,quit your crap. K came here to read about Chevy stuff,not about how your rotten F series and RAMs are supposed to be so good, I haven't seen it yet,and I've owned one of them.

I would love to see a new fullsize SUV with a diesel regardless of 1/2 or 3/4 ton. My '03 Excursion is at 250k and will be looking for a replacement soon. I have 3 boys so I need the room for them and their friends.

Chevy did turbo the 4.3 they put it in the syclone and the tyfoon.
For all you ford lovers all I can say is remeber the 6.0Lor the 6.4L diesel why do you think international no longer sells engines to Ford? Why did Ford have to build a turbo V6 just to compete with the MPGs that chevy can achieve with a naturaly assparated engine?
Chevy did have rear disc brakes but exchanged the rear disc brakes for drum brakes because extensive tests have shown that rear drum brakes stop as well as discs yet cost half as much. Bottom line is that chevy builds a very good product but Ford and dodge lovers are just too close minded to appreciate it.

@william snyder - your post is funny both grammatically and in content.
How do you explain GMC putting discs on the 2014 trucks?
You'd think that a company coming out of bankruptcy would want to continue to maximize profits.
Try this on for size - all of my friends that owned 1/2 ton GM/chev trucks that had disc brakes back in the day had nothing but problems with them and GMC was refusing to warranty them.

I do agree that the 6.0 PowerStroke was a joke. The 6.4 was a pig on fuel. No one I knew complained about reliability issues on that one.

Chevy does make a decent truck but ask yourself this - why did Chevrolet (alone not combined) go from easily outselling Ford to still being in second even with combined sales?
Their drivetrains have never been the problem, the rest of the truck is the problem.

As you have pointed out, a fan is always too closed minded to appreciate it.



Post a Comment

Please remember a few rules before posting comments:

  • Try to be civil to your fellow blog readers.
  • Stay on topic. We want to hear your opinions and thoughts, but please only comment about the specified topic in the blog post.
  • Your email will not be shown.

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

Home | Buy or Sell a Truck | Forums | News | Special Reports

Powered by Cars.com. By using this site, you agree to our terms of service | © 2011 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us

Visit our partner: MovingTruck.com