Updated Info: GM to Ax Silverado/Sierra Hybrids for 2014?

Hybrid Silverado rear 10 II

Update: 9/5/2012

This is the note GM sent to us (see below) the weekend after we ran this story

"GM is fully committed to developing technologies to help our customers around the world use energy more efficiently and reduce their dependence on petroleum.  Customer needs, vehicle technologies, government regulations and business conditions continue to change and evolve, so GM periodically reviews the real-world customer benefits and financial viability of the technologies we are considering for our global and regional vehicle programs.

"As a result of these reviews, some technologies are pulled ahead, delayed or cancelled. This is a normal course of business. 

"GM does not provide guidance on which technologies will be used in future vehicles."

 

We can't say this comes as a surprise. Reports are beginning to filter about the viability of a continued hybrid program for the new 2014 Chevy Silverado 1500 and GMC Sierra 1500.

According to GM Inside News, there had been some serious, early speculation that the new GM full-size trucks would have a smaller, more fuel-efficient engine and a more powerful electric motor and battery, but lately those outlets of information have dried up. GM Inside News also speculated that some of the technology may continue for models like the Cadillac Escalade but for the rest of the new platform lineup — SUVs and pickup trucks — the powertrain option has been canceled.

The V-8 pickups, more commonly called "mild hybrids" because of their relatively limited two-mode electric assist capabilities, seemed like a good solution when they first came equipped on previous-generation pickups and full-size SUVs. The system could run on full battery power or battery assist at lower speeds (Mode 1), yet it could also assist the powertrain at higher speeds (Mode 2). By using the V-8 as its main power supply, towing ratings and payload capacities remained high enough to accommodate many half-ton buyers.

Current EPA fuel economy ratings for the half-ton trucks (with the 6.0-liter V-8) were 20/23 mpg in the city/highway and 21 mpg combined.  

Hybrid logo Silverado II

We know that many dealers over the past several years have had trouble selling these vehicles because of the modest fuel economy benefits, but dealers were saddled with hefty additional sticker costs, too, sometimes in excess of $5,000. We also know that GM may not bring this new technology and powertrain option into the lineup at the beginning of the new truck, possibly waiting for a year or two before revealing a newer, more improved hybrid system.

The last time we spoke with GM representatives about the two-mode hybrids, they were very optimistic about the use of a new, in-house-built electric motor that would allow for better towing and overall power, as well as better fuel economy. But that seems to have stalled. Of course, we'll also suggest that better gas mileage could be achieved with a smaller trubo-diesel or turbocharged gas engine. 

With the new trucks due out in the next six to 10 months, this is definitely late in the process to think about killing any advanced technology. We'll have to wait and see what the implications of this might be once we know for certain. 

Hybrid Silverado 6.0L V-8 09 II

Hybrid see through pu II

 

Comments

I remember reading an article where they were considering dropping the 2.8 Colorado diesel into Caddy's.

If they do that hopefully they will make their way into your Colorado's.

Also, I have read where hybrid technology isn't the saviour for fuel usage as some smalll diesel cars are returning better fuel economy.

I do think all of your manufacturers are at a cross roads with your 1/2 ton trucks. To meet EPA and CAFE regulations some real radical ideas are needed. You can only lighten a pickup so much before it affects strength. Extensive usage of aluminium is out of the equation because of costs.

Different engines, aero shapes etc for 1/2 ton trucks. Some of you guys won't like it but it has to occur.

The other problem you have is the ever increasing cost of your engine technology. Companies can't afford to design engines every few years. And the "bolt on technology" they are currently using can only go so far. The engines aren't changing.

Something will give, you guys appear to complain about costs alot. Maybe the 1/2 ton is near its zenith.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ytCEuuW2_A

If GM drops the ball and screws up these new pickups with ugly interiors and/or ugly exteriors, someone better fire every damn fool working in that division!! As it is, they've been extremely slow to make changes and when they've made changes, no one has been impressed. I'm a long-time GM fan, but I'm getting tired of their crap. Dodge is going to absolutely destroy them this coming year and if their new trucks don't impress (probably won't), they're dead in the water. I don't know who is running the truck division, but that old geezer needs to be fired for the mistakes he/she has ALREADY made! These new trucks should have been out a couple of years ago! I hate that the trucks in 2013 look almost exactly like the ones from 2007!!! At least Dodge and Ford have made some significant changes that have allowed them to keep the trucks looking "fresh." GM doesn't have a clue and I'm afraid they're already so far sunk, that they're f*****. Seriously, if you're reading this GM, it's time for a MAJOR overhaul of your truck division!!!

@Chris - I do agree that it does not look goof for GMC. Are they being tight lipped about the next gen trucks because they are "da bomb" or just plain bomb?
On another thread there was a link indicating that GMC was having to redesign the interior of their trucks after photo's were leaked and most people hated them. Some of use were convinced that the dash pads were camo. Judging by GMC's response - those abominations were the real deal. That will teach GMC to use guys like Bob in their focus groups ;)

I'm not a fan of anything GM but dang I actually feel sorry for all you diehard GM fans. I'm not trying to be a jacka** either, it comes from the heart. As long as they have Bob, they will be alright I guess.

IMO, I think gm will quit GMC if ram becomes the number 2 selling truck. Why? GM would still sell more together. So, if GM would quit GMC, GMC buyers would MOST LIKELY go to chevrolet. therefore gm would be number 2 again. heck, gm is hurting itself because right now if gmc buyers went chevrolet it would be the number 1 truck brand. It is like GM is always holding off as long as possible as with the 4.3 V6. My suggestion? Just put the Chevrolet badge on the front of the GMC trucks, and quit the GMC trademark (save yourselves some money LOL!).

@Josh - not really. This link shows some interesting statistics.
http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2009/09/poll-post-1.html#more
Exerpts;
"Their first choice if Chevy went away? Thirty-four percent chose GMC."
"In second place for Chevy owners was Ford (25 percent), followed by Dodge (19 percent) and Toyota at 18 percent."
Those statistics support most of the comments made by disgruntled Chevy fans. To them, the Sierra is not an alternative to the Chevy.

"GMC owners returned the love to Chevy, with a full majority (52 percent) picking the sibling brand, followed by Ford (22 percent), Toyota (10 percent) and Dodge at 7 percent."

GM Corporation would risk loosing 48% or roughly 72,000 customers in the USA if they killed GMC Sierra.

Ram is already the #2 selling truck brand in Canada. The Sierra is #3 and the Chevy #4. The Canadian market is much smaller based on pure volume than the USA but per capita we own more pickups.


@ Luo

I don't by that. I think the numbers are probably skewed because most people assume if Chevy went away that GMC woud be gone too. The GMC to Chevy numbers are higher because losing GMC with Chevy intact is way more likely.

If you just asked, if Chevy no longer made trucks which truck would you buy? I would assume GMC wasn't an option.

GM needs to axe the Sierra period. 2 truck line badges is the dumbest effing thing in the world. This is GM though. Not even a real single brand name in the name itself. Just a figment of your imagination essentially. Whatever badge of the day floats your boat. GM should have just gone out of business. Maybe Chevrolet as a Real Legitimate company should have lived on, then again if the idiots in charge of GM ran Chevrolet, maybe they should die too. Just let Ford and Dodge build the trucks from here on out. Chevy hasn't built a stylish truck of extremely high build quality in years.

The reason they keep GMC around is because they sell. If they got rid of it, they would loose a big chunk of sales.

Personally, I've got two GMC trucks, but if GMC went away I'd probably buy Fords. I've just never been a Chevy fan. I always stuck with Oldsmobile and GMC for my personal vehicles.

@Jack - For the most part you will not have one with out the other but GMC could decide to kill Chevy or vise versa. There are several scenarios that could occur that could finish off only one brand.
This is what they asked:
"We asked these owners, “If the manufacturer of your truck were to suddenly go out of business,” which manufacturer would you buy your next truck from? We got some interesting — if sometimes unlikely — answers."
This is their breakdown of ownership of people surveyed:
1. Ford: 30%
2. Chevy: 25%
3. Dodge: 17%
4. Toyota: 12%
5. GMC: 6%
6. Nissan: 6%
7. Other: 4%
You could be correct but I've seen multiple posts on this site of Chevy guys who do not like GMC trucks. Even if the number was 50/50 killing Sierra would be a big cut in sales.

Does anyone commenting actually own one of these Hybrids?

I do not, but I did ride in one that a friend gave me a ride in to the airport and I did not notice any difference between it and other Silverados. Ran and sounded the same to me.

He told me that his gas mileage isn't all that whoopee but that is probably because he hauls loads of new tires for his shop up from El Paso, TX. So that gas-engine is almost always running.

If GM is going to ax them, maybe they're not selling all that well.

@Highdesertcat - I've seen a few hybrid Tahoe's but that is it. Why spend 10,000 for the system when a V6 will give you the same performance and economy. Even the 5.3 is close in mpg. This truck never made any sense to me. Why did they put the 6.0 in it in the first place?

@Highdesertcat
It appears that 25% of all the hybrids that Ford and GM sold was bought by the US Federal government. I don't know how many were bought by State and local authorities.

Also, the rebate when purchasing one ended on 31 Dec 10.

It appears many government and dare I say quasi-government organisations have been buying them.

I have seen some hybrids when in the US, they mainly hung around airports.

Alternative technologies are great, but it has to be both affordable and wanted by the everyday consumer.

Why have them when a 1500 4x4 GM ext cab pickup gets 1 mpg less (22mpg) then a 1/2 ton reg cab 2x2 F150 with the V6(23mpg) all highway.

I myself with a catback and cold air intake can get 23 if I drive careful.

And for all the smack talk about GMC vs Chevy. Those are the same people that ask for Red Angus beef because they think its better then black Angus beef.

My family has owned over 20 GM pickups over a 40 year period. Sometimes we got a GMC sometimes a Chevy just depended on who was giving the best deal. My fav was my dads 77 GMC, russet brown with the white in the middle, sharp looking pickup.

This is proof that harers will find anything to grab on to.

I don't like the current GM's either and certainly wouldn't waste my money on any hybrid but I can still see why this truck was developed especially in context of the automotive landscape several years ago.

How does this turn in to a market share debate for 2014 models that nobody has seen yet? Why is the 2014 GM doomed because the hybrid won't be continued? Please explain the giant leap of logic.

Wy buy an Silverado hybrid with a so little payload ?
Just to go to groccery and say "I have a silverado hybrid" ?
Expensive bragging !
I had a silverado 1500 with the 6.0 AFM, it was a great engine, better economy than the 5.3 in my Suburban (same model year 2007-2008), but it had a real payload. Add the stuf hybrid and you lose all the interest of a 1/2 tons.

I dont know why people think what a truck looks like for so much. All the trucks look desent, I werry about how they run. And I have had 15 new trucks With GM and NEVER had any mayger problems with them.

This is a good decision and it should have been done sooner. If a product is not selling well then it needs to go. Steve Job did this when he retained the reins at Apple. Jobs axed competing and similiar products and trimmed down to 3 products which he then built on those products. This is a good decision.

Throw that in the pile with the 4 wheel steer. Hybrid pickup technology ain't there yet. Most customers won't spring for the huge costs given the marginal fuel economy benefits. Give it 5 years.

I would rather see GM delay the launch of Silverado/Sierra to get the dashboards and interiors right along with some other tweaks than to release a product that is lacking. If GM's delay helps them to come up with a more competitive truck that is good but they need to get it right. I want them to succeed but it is up to them to turn there trucks around. The appearance of the truck is not that bad if they just take out some bulges and get Silverado to look more like Sierra. I think it is wasteful to restyle the entire truck but refinements are long over due. Again take a lesson from Ford and Ram's playbook.

I have a radical idea, in that Chevy should just concentrate on building 1/2 ton trucks and put all they can into them, and then have GMC build the 3/4-1t truck! use the brand as there "HeavyDuty" truck division, sort of like they did back in the day, when you had diff. engines and other drivetrain packages, I remember the big V-6's you could get in the GMC's with HD tranys. That would be outside the box enough to make a diff.

Arguing about GMC or Chevy is like arguing which one is better, Coke or Coke Zero. THEY ARE THE EXACT SAME TRUCK, with only modest cosmetic difference in the front end. And if you ask a lot of Chevy guys, they mostly say the current GMC looks better with the current front end instead of the box look of the Chevy front end. Yet they still would pick a Chevy... what part of this doesn't make sense?

I think even Chevy guys would have to admit this is one area that Ford got right. It didn't make a clone F150 in another badge name and it seperated the styling of the half tons and the Super Duties.

In my opinion and since it's my hard earned money that I am spending. It's the only opinion that matters. The G.M.C. Is a better looking truck then the Chevy with better interiors. I like the G.M.C. Sierra Denali crew in onyx black 6.2L V8 with chrome wheels.

Sandman,

That's not a bad idea. It's got to be a giant PITA to have two divisions making the same truck. GM is pretty much bottomed out with their trucks now so it would be a good time to make a radical change like this with the new models. Obviously, they aren't going this route but it will be interesting for me to see what they have to offer with the new truck.

If I was buying HD today it would likely be a Cummins but wrap a new body around the Duramax/Allison and I could easilly change my mind. It really is a great driveline.

Magnum, I've got friends who owned the Cummins and the Duramax in an HD and they traded them for a Banks TurboDiesel to tow their travel trailers.

These guys I'm referring to are real people. They are members of the Traveling Elk of our Lodge and they spend a lot of time on the road each year.

That's why this Hybrid crap doesn't make any sense to me. A half-ton truck is respectable for most people, but load it down with the Hybrid crap and you lose more than capacity. You lose money, too.

Maybe GM dropping them is a good thing. How many real people, not government agencies, actually own them?

@HemiV8--I agree even though Silverado and Sierra are basically the same truck if I were picking between the two the Sierra is a much better looking truck and the Denali package would decide it for me. GM though should just offer a Denali like package on Silverado and make the front and sides more like the Tahoe because there are a lot of Chevy guys out there that want only a Chevy. Don't ask me why but if thats what the Chevy guys want and thats what they need to give them because that will only make money for GM and Chevy. Ram is doing this as Ford is and that is just plain smart business. That is why Ram is growing and is the true come back kid.

Also guys the auto industry is misreading the Millennium Generation and they are putting there hopes on them. A lot of the millenniums are postponing driving. See the enclosed link below

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/08/31/youve-lost-that-lovin-feelin-eisenstein/?icid=maing-grid7%7Cmain5%7Cdl1%7Csec1_lnk2%26pLid%3D200156

@Magnum - there are those that feel GM Corporation would do better with just one brand. I personally don't have a problem with 2 brands. I have found that over the years I have alternated between liking Chevy's or GMC's better based on the looks. It wouldn't bother me to go out and buy a high end Sierra ie. Denali to get that package. It would bother me if I liked the Silverado much better and could not get a high end package.
My criticism of GM Corporation is that since Silverado is their best seller in the USA it therefore should have the same high end packages that the Sierra has. Market share comes up because GMC is loosing out on a very lucrative segment of the market by not letting the Chevy play in that market segment. Market share also comes up because if GMC were to kill the Sierra they would lose a significant piece of market share. If you assume that the study was correct in the context of killing Sierra: if 52% stayed with Chevy that would mean 48% would leave GM products.
It is the same as Ford killing the Ranger. They incorrectly assumed that most Ranger clients would stay with Ford by purchasing an econobox car, Transit Connect or F150. I do not think GMC would ever kill the Sierra. They are actually making both products more separate and distinct. I like that idea but I do not like the idea that they have decided that the Sierra is "Professional Grade" ie. high end and the Silverado is "Work Grade" ie. low end.
I find that some of the conversations concerning GMC's next gen trucks has crossed over from other threads. I was excited to see the next gen trucks since I assumed that GMC's next gen would be awesome and GMC was just building excitement and keeping the opposition in the dark and off ballance. It is looking more like the next gen will be "average" and a slight improvement. That actually will be an epic failure since Ram's mid cycle refresh is exciting, just like Ford's new engine line up was exciting.

@sandman4x4 - I'm not sure that would work since we see many people complain about Sierra.
It makes sense to me though.
Have the Colorado as the light capacity, high mpg, budget concious entry level truck.
Silverado could be the 1/2 ton line with mid to high end trims,
Sierra could be the 3/4 ton and up HD line.
What would GMC have to loose?

Highdesertcat,

The Hybrid Silverado is a collosal waste of money, no doubt. I'm only defending it's idea and concept at the time.

I have a 2003 400,000km Cummins truck and outside of ball joints and tie rods is stout. The interior is cheap as can be but it's held together very well. I have several other trucks of other makes as well.

In 2003, there was no other diesel pickup worth buying in my opinion despite knowing the Dodge front end and lift pump issues. Today, it's a different story and it would be Ram or GM as far as diesel goes.

GMC is a weird thing. They sell more trucks here in Canada but there's still a lot of Silverados. The oposite is true in the US. I don't have the answer as to how they get around the two name plates but IMHO it's not worth speculating until the 2014's come out.

I'd like to see them come up with a total knockout as far as options and powertranes. It's their's to loose so anything short of a big leap from what they have now will be a failure.


The US manufacturers are using the hybrids to assit in maintaining a higher mpg average across the board.

I do believe some of the hybrids are a waste of time. But I do think hybrids are only really useful in very small vehicles.

The US government has given the auto makers a considerable amount of subsidies to the manufacturers and then became the largest customers of these vehicles.

Lou,

I agree with what you say but there is really no difference between a Denali and a high end Silverado or Sierra. It's a very minimal package and something they slapped together to create a higher end trim.

The packages Ford and Ram have are great (I'm buying a new Ram this week) but I'd rather see a high end model that allows the buyer to create what they want the same way Mercedes or BMW does.

When the cost of a pickup is as much as it is right now being able to create your custom truck from the factory is the next step. It used to be like that anyway.

I'm not a fan of expensive trim options even though I'll buy one lol

Give me the choice and I'd rather spend the $$$'s on something that I can build myself to my liking.

Big Al,

Exactly.

Hybrid trucks are not mainstream and never will be. Real life fuel economy and inovation that allows for seat of the pants power and slightly better economy is what will work in NA.

We just don't want smaller trucks even if it means ridiculously low payloads and hitch weights on the existing products. Most of us aren't buying trucks for this purpose anyway.

HighdesertCat: what do you mean they traded for a Banks Turbo Diesel? Banks doesn't make the engine, only the Turbo charger set up, and you can install them on a Cummins, Duramax and I believe a PowerSTroke, even on the old 6.5-6.7 GM diesel that came before the Duramax, and when you go that route you can get big gains in power and economy! but you still have to start with a basic engine. I am thinking about using there set up for my Ecco-Boost, you know the CAI set up! and I hope they would also come up with a tuner for it, I could see an honest 400hp-450ftlbs with the products they make, you pay for it, but you get what you pay for, the Cummins set ups they make you can get well over 600hp for the street! thats the beauty of the pre6.7 Cummins you can get a lot out of them, and the Duramax has been know to getover 550hp !!!and better mpg, IF you can keep you foot out of it and use the C/Contl.

I could see a hybrid truck working... in theory. The massive torque delivery of electric motors certainly could provide advantages to a truck. Additionally being able to recapture braking energy could help quite a bit for those that do a lot of stop and go in the city.

Nevertheless the technology just doesn't seem to be mature enough to be successful in a truck application yet.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if there is a lot more to this story then what has been reported so far.

@phillyguy
Its not that it will not work, its the cost of it all.

If the government has to subsidise an industry then its not viable.

It's ironic that your farmers are subisidised to grow corn to reduce your reliance on crude oil, which contributes to your debt. Then everyone wants to drive V8s??

This is paid for by the tax payer. Yes your gas is cheap, but how many tax dollars are being spent subsidising the oil-auto manufacturinng industries. Then look at the real cost of your gas and cars. And you wonder why the US is going broke. For a free market economy your governments (GOP and Democrats) don't do very well.

Wouldn't it have made more sense to increase fuel tax to recoup these costs. Then more people would be driving smaller engined vehicles that use less fuel, and you still would be expanding alternative energy sources by spending the fuel tax into research and subisidies. If you can afford to drive a V8, so be it.

This is what I have been trying to say about how the US auto industry and government regulation is different to the rest of the world. This is part of the problem with the Big 3, their hands are tied behind there backs as well as unions, bad management etc.

That is why the US is spending 38% of GDP by the government and collecting 27% back in tax. Not very smart.

There isn't to many part of the American Pie that your government hasn't got its finger stuck into.

the reason i started the why keep gmc thing? gm looses a lot of money for stupid reasons, mainly keeping crap that doesn't matter. i still can't get over the fact they were bold enough to axe the legendary Camaro in 2002 and keep GMC, the Avalanche, the Hybrid trucks, they just got rid of the Northstar (finally!). when chrysler realized the PT Cruiser had to go, it went.

@LOU
i believe the statistics, and the fact GMC people are not Chevy people, however the market would eventually level out and people would have more faith in GM as well for finally being bold and taking the high road, so to speak. the less brands there are, the less options there are and the GMC customers would have to squeeze in somewhere. and like i said DON"T QUIT THE GMC TRUCK, JUST QUIT THE GMC TRADEMARK (PUT THE CHEVROLET BADGE ON THE GMC AND SAVE YOURSELVES SOME MONEY GM!). DOING WHAT I JUST SAID WOULD DEFINITLY MAKE CHEVY FANS HAPPIER BECAUSE THEY GET A BETTER LOOKING TRUCK, WHILE GMC FANS DON'T CARE ABOUT HERITAGE AS MUCH AND THEY KEEP THE SAME TRUCK JUST WITH A DIFFERENT BADGE. IT IS THE REVERSE OF THE DODGE/RAM THING, BECAUSE IT WOULD CAREFULLY AND SLYLY MERGING BRANDS. THINK ABOUT IT!

@ above

lol i forgot the 4.3!

@Josh - GMC does need to do what Ford has done - Focus on the 20% that makes them 80% of their money. Ford is working on paring down to 20-25 nameplates globally. That means a large number of badges have died.
Did your italic's key get stuck? LOL
GMC does need to be the "mother company" not the "motherf--ker" of a company;)
I doubt that they would have the corporate will to do what you suggest.
Their mediocre financial performance globally suggests that they need to change how they do business. They need to stop focusing on being #1 in sales and focus on being #1 in product quality, #1 in giving customers what they want, and #1 in profits.
You do not need to be #1 in sales to make the most money.
You do not need to have 100 badges to give the customer what they want.
You will not loose profits by making quality products.
You will lose profits if you take shortcuts and spread yourself too thin.

Right on dude!

Josh for president........... of GMC.

sandman4X4 | Sep 1, 2012 6:46:17 PM, maybe I should have written that these guys traded their Dodge or GM trucks for a Ford 250 or 350 with the Banks TurboDiesel factory installed.

The guys with the Cummins told me of oxygen-sensor problems and they had several warranty claims regarding that during the warranty period. So they traded. Lost a lot of money, too.

I don't know why the guys with the GM trucks traded theirs, but they did. None of them would be candidates for a Hybrid truck, though, since they tow very large fifth-wheels for at least 6 months out of the year.

I always saw a hybrid-electric truck as an exercise in futility, even in the half-ton class. If someone has to worry about fuel economy, mpg and rarely tows, they can get by with a normally aspirated V6. For a little more pep there's always Ford's EcoBoost.

And even though many of my previous trucks were six-cylinder, three-on-the-tree trucks during my early years, I can't ever see myself going back to a V6 or a stick shift in my truck. And a Hybrid-electric is totally out of the question.

For me, size matters. The bigger the engine, the better. There's no replacement for displacement. Maybe when I trade my Tundra 5.7 in a couple of years, I'll get a Raptor with the Monster Motor.

I've got a friend that owns one. It rides pretty hard on the road but it does rock-crawling real good. It all depends on what you do with it.

I'm easy! But it is going to be hard to find something that is better than what I have now.

Were I to trade today, I would gravitate toward another Tundra 5.7, but this time a Limited 4dr 4x4, in White. I don't need the long bed any more, and I don't tow nearly as much as I used to. Now I'm looking for class and comfort. And the Tundra Limited has it in spades. A real gentleman's truck, that one.

@Lou-I think that Josh and you along with some of the rest of us should be on the GM truck product team and help them get it right. I would be willing to do it for free if it would help them get back on track and repay the rest of the money they owe the taxpayers and to keep jobs. I think all of our input is better than what they have now and in the prior blog about the Colorado I say that maybe GM should have independent focus groups of truck owners to evaluate interior and exterior changes along with other changes. If anything I know we all could come up with a more desirable product.

HighDesertCat:: from what I read in Diesel Power mag. you just can't get reliable power out of the PowerStroke, unless you change all the head studs and the con-rods first, then there is something on the older ones that have hydinjectors? that means yoou have to change the whole system, and then you still can't get the same amount of power as you can from the Cummins or DuraMax, either for the road but expecialy for truck pulls and drags, the only engines that pull the big #'s are the cummins and a few Duramax, out of the 12 tested last yr. 7 were Cummins 4 Duramax and just 1 Powerstroke, and the higest was over 1800hp!!! from a 12 valve Cummins! the most you will see out of the older PS is around 1100hp, there are some guys that are building the new 6.7 PS and are have good outcomes, but by and large the Cummins is the best for high power both on the street, and comp. They have some street legal Mega cab Rams pulling 12 sec. 1/4 mile times! and a couple of them do that with the tow vehicle! after they have towed their race trcuck to the races, and them tow the race truck home! all with the same trcuk that runs in the 12's! there is one guy that has driven the same Ram like that for 3yrs. now! with no problems, yea at first he went through a lot of parts, but now he has it dialed in and it's a monster!, all the problem he had in tha past was because he ran with nitrous, not anymore! I will try to dig up the issue and post the #'s here.

Hybrids are useless,expensive waste of money...Good luck fixing these hybrids when they break down..it is very expensive.

We have enough oil to last several hundreds of years,why are we rushing into these unproven expensive technologies...work on them,get them reliable,cheap then maybe people will buy them.You know if people use little amount of gas say your truck gets 60 mpg...you wont save money at the pump,because the price will be up ten fold,as electricity as people will depend on electric cars so home,car charging will be extremmely costly !

@Clint Eastwood RULES !--There is more oil than they let on but having worked in the industry for years the large amounts are in difficult areas to drill like the Artic and deep sea which increase costs considerably along with difficulties of drilling in the Artic which are extreme cold and increase equipment failure. A lot of Americans think that you can just drill and it will be available tomorrow. The easy oil finds like the easy money's days are over. Sorry to break the bad news. It takes years to go from leasing mineral rights to production. Presently we have no shortage of oil because the US has become a net exporter of petroleum products. The World market will readily buy what the US doesn't use and like Big Al from Oz says we in NA live in our own fish bowl and we pay little attention to what is going on in the rest of the World unless it is to put troops in the Middle East and to mention the European debt crisis. We will eventually have to conserve anyway because the days of cheap oil are over. Why sell gas for $3 to $4 in the USA when you can get twice that overseas. We do not have an inalienable right to plentiful and cheap fuel unless you would like to nationalize the oil industry and I have not heard any political party endorse that. Maybe a good course in Economics 101 would help you learn about the market place and the law of supply of demand. I agree with you about Hybrid technology in trucks at the present this is more feasible for small cars than trucks and suvs. Big Al is correct that diesel technology might be the answer and possibly a mild hybrid that is not as pricey but I think diesel and turbo charging and direct fuel injection are better choices. If the real Clint Eastwood wants to talk about energy I would be willing to sit down with him and have a nonpolitical discussion about the oil industry and production of oil a subject that I know a lot about and have more knowledge about it than someone who starred in Spaghetti Westerns. Not anything against Clint I enjoy his movies but if he decides to speak to an empty chair about energy policy I am willing to sit down with him and have that discussion along with a discussion of economic principles and how markets work. "Go ahead Clint and make my discussion."

@Sandman4x4 - A while back I had a discussion with a guy who was a heavy duty mechanic. He also happened to own a 6.0 powerstroke. He was very candid about the weak points on that motor. He had said that the oil lines to and from the turbo weren't designed well enough to flow sufficient oil. That was one weak spot. Another problem was as you mentioned weak head bolts. He actuallt felt there should of been more built into the design. I can't recall everything he had said but changing out the oil lines and leaving the engine basically stock was the best way to get reliable life out of the motor. He says he has never had any problems with his.
It is interesting about the Cummins. I had read that there were some bad blocks that were made in Brazil IIRC. The best Cummins block were actually cast in Mexico. The density and composition of the metal in the block makes it very tough.

Silverado could be the 1/2 ton line with mid to high end trims,
Sierra could be the 3/4 ton and up HD line.
What would GMC have to loose?

@Lou, they'd lose me. I buy Chevy HD's period. No way in hell would I buy something with a GM"C" badge. I've been a Chevrolet man my entire life owning many Corvette's, Camaro's, Chevelle's and my current 56 Bel Air but I abhor GM as a company. I've hated their multi brand nonsense from the very beginning. I do agree with you about the professional grade and high end interior BS. Why is it that when it comes to race cars Chevrolet will go head to head with Ford and Dodge but when it comes to Trucks, GM forces Chevrolet to back down like a bunch of low class pussies. I can't tell you how many times I've about left Chevrolet for Ford over the last decade or so because of this. Where's the Chevy All Terrain? Where's Chevrolet's Denali? Why the hell did Chevrolet get stuck with this latest but ass ugly design of a truck? Government Motors can go to hell for all I care. I only care about Chevrolet. And if some idiot at RenCen thinks Chevrolet does not deserve to compete head to head with Ford and Dodge in and on ALL areas and levels, I'm sure as hell not going to reward their stupidity with a GM"C" sale. All and I mean ALL of my purchases will go to Ford from here on out.

@MarkHeath, @Lou--I think GM if they do not already do it need to have some of their own people read these blogs. I am guessing they don't read these blogs or they are blindly choosing to ignore them. What you said Mark is a common and repeated comment about Chevy trucks and for a corporation not to pay attention to comments from truck owners such as yourself defies logic. Maybe GM is too entrenched in their corporate culture and someone needs to take a big broom out and do a clean sweep.

@Lou, Jeff S & MarkHeath
I would hate to be the one choosing some of the more tangible comments.

I would hope they look over the one eyed brand supporters though.

99.9% percent of pickup buyers probably don't realise this site exitsts. The pickup enthusiast is more than likely to be on this site. And from what I can gather half of them are fanboys.

As you can tell I don't care about brands, I care about the overall health of business, countries etc. and I love all mechanical things.

Lately though the input quality has improved on this site, which is great.

@Jeff S
The problem with this oil is the cost of recovery. In Australia we have mines that open and close because of the cost of recovery. The market dictates what is profitable and what isn't.

If the economies around the world collapse many wells would be shut down because of the costs to recover outweigh and profit, until it is profitable again.

The NA market would then be more reliant on imported oil, abeit less.

Your ethanol program might even take a hit. Brazil used to be nearly 100% ethanol, but since the discovery of oil this has been reducing.

@Jeff S It don't take years to file for a drilling permits or to write up a contact to land owners to share of their mineral rights. Where I live and from what I know there is still room to drill easy wells and frack different sands. Then you throw in the Marcells Shale Nautral gas patch, and the nautral gas companys struggle to keep up with low end gas wells here now. Nautral gas companys are building pipe lines in circles as we speak just to store nautral gas because they can't refine it fast enough. All this jacked up oil is bull s%$t from wanna get rich wall street retards.



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 | News | Special Reports

Powered by Cars.com. By using this site, you agree to our terms of service | © 2014 Cars.com | Privacy Statement | Contact Us

Visit our partner: MovingTruck.com