What Can We Expect From GM's Next-Gen Small-Block V-8?

GM-Vortec-5300-V-8 II

At a time when new technology and advanced engineering is the price of entry for a new pickup truck, GM has the chance to do something special with its next-generation small-block V-8, called the Mouse Motor by some.

Most reports have the new Mouse destined for the next Chevrolet Corvette and 2014 Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra 1500s. The new motor is getting a lot of press lately about what types of "super science" will be packed into the power plant.

Some of the best speculation we've seen comes from EngineLabs.com, which has collected all the available info from a number of sources in a single story and included its best guesses. Technology such as cam phasing, radiator shutters and active intake manifolds could be in our truck-loving future.

Take a look at this story from Mike Magda as he sifts through the various internet and media reports, and he offers his own guesses at what's coming next.

EngineLabs.com seems confident that a new generation of hybrid technology will continue to play a large role in GM's fuel economy strategy, as well as a pretty good V-6. Some other speculators suggest that the tech advances in the 2013 Ram 1500 caught the GM guys a bit off guard and have them scrambling a bit, but no doubt we'll hear more about that as we get more information. EngineLabs.com suggests we'll hear more by October or November.

 

Comments

How could GM have been caught off guard by grille shutters, airbag suspension, some lighter materials, and an 8 speed transmission? All of those things (except the transmission) have been around forever, and the transmissions with extra gear ratios were obviously coming. I am not a very big fan of GM's, but I really hope that they hit this next series of trucks out of the park, because I like competition more than anything and do not want the lion's share of the truck market to fall into the hands of just two companies. That is never good for consumers.

agreed phillyguy. People are still buying chevys but it sure seems they are falling behind quick.

More PISTON SLAP!!! And an All NEW website dedicated to it!! LOLOL!!! http://www.pistonslap.com/

I agree, they seem to be getting "caught off guard" quite a bit lately. The Ford Ecoboost success, 2013 Ram upgrades and the public reaction to they "new" interior. GM really needs to upgrade their design department as they seem to happy with the status quo. At this point if they really want to turn heads, a diesel half-ton will definitely get them the positive publicity that want.

@ phillyguy,

Agreed phillyguy..More choice is always good..Thats why I never could understand why people say they want a certain car company to go away , I dont I want more of them and all sell well !! Furthermore,it would be nice to have Mopar the 2 nd best selling truck around ,or even better the number 1 as GM (for decades) now Ford has the best selling trucks for awhile now,time for RAM to be number 1 !

I will say this I know it upsets Ford fans most cant wrap their head around this (they easily get confused) GM outsold Ford for decades in truck sales ..yes Ford fans GM with its identical GMC/Chev outsold Ford remember only a badge change on its trucks same truck 2 names..like the Canadian Mercury trucks just a badge same as a Ford.It wasnt until 03 or so GMC finally got different head lights/grill/fender than Chev trucks for decades before it was identical,just a badge.Anywho,more choice is always better..keeps companies from ripping the consumer off !

Now the Ford fan boi's will get upset and say Ford had the best selling truck for decades..not true as GM did until last few years..For decades Chev/GMC trucks were identical only a name change..Something I will say again,Ford people cant understand that for some reason ! LOL !! LOL !! p.s you cant say I am knocking Ford,just telling the truth.. as I own a Ford/GM and Mopar and a Toyota product !!

Let the Mickey Mouse jokes begin.

This Mickey Mouse motor...

I hope the big 3 stays around for quite some time, I really do, good for us customers, but man based on all these reports it seems as though Chevy may come out with some good stuff, problem is, it has already been done by Ford and Ram.

Yes, Chevy's small block has always been known has the mouse motor. Chevy's big blocks known as the rat motor. That's why MOPAR builds mouse traps and rat traps. Chevy's are also known as slow ties in the mopar world.

@ Nitro

Chevy has such a loyal fan base if they could *just* match the offerings by Ram and Ford they would be good to go for several years. My concern is that they will come up well short, and those loyal Chevy fans will finally turn away in disgust. Good for Ford. Good for Ram. If Chevy gets hit too hard though it will probably not be good for us consumers in the long run. I really think it would have been better for everyone if a GM bankruptcy had gone through and Chevy had been spun off as its own stand alone company. I think that Chevy by itself could really be a powerhouse to behold.

I'm sure gm will come out with some new slogans and acronyms. Maybe they'll become a middle of the road performer withot the best hp, tq, or mpg.

Some companies like Ford and Ram have already done some things. Some companies like to go with fancy items like - get this - a heated steering wheel! Some companies like Chevy are different.

Gary White, lead engineer at GM, told Howie Long that Chevy's philosophy on equipping trucks is a bit different.

Chevy feels that if an item is isn't used A LOT, like DAILY, it does NOT BELONG ON THE TRUCK. Chevy only puts on stuff that GETS THE JOB DONE.

Watch the 1st minute of this to see what their ACID TEST is and how Chevy decides what goes on a Chevy.

Chevy Acid Test (1st minute watch here)
SILVERADO VS RAM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSTXZ3d3D_M

Let's all CHILL until people get a chance to see the production versions of the trucks and not just wild guesses. We believe you will be impressed.

If the 5.3 Vortec motor is in their new lineup its game over for them! LOL

Now the Ford fan boi's will get upset and say Ford had the best selling truck for decades..not true as GM did until last few years..For decades Chev/GMC trucks were identical only a name

-2 different brands DO NOT COUNT!! EVERY brand "GM" had was the same freaking vehicle with a different badge (PATHETIC) for a GOOD 20 plus years!!! You might as well combine Olds, Pontiac, Saturn and all of those other stupid brands into car total sales too for any given segment if you're gonna pick and choose as to which segment your argument is relevant.


Chevy feels that if an item is isn't used A LOT, like DAILY, it does NOT BELONG ON THE TRUCK. Chevy only puts on stuff that GETS THE JOB DONE.

-IE:CHEAP.


That's why MOPAR builds mouse traps and rat traps.

-Hemi's are ELEPHANTS!

I really think it would have been better for everyone if a GM bankruptcy had gone through and Chevy had been spun off as its own stand alone company. I think that Chevy by itself could really be a powerhouse to behold.

@Phillguy, absolutely.

Its not like all the GM guys would shoot them selves if GM made a dohc v8. It really sounds like they are throwing in a ton of stuff in a 100 lb bag with the new engine...

It will definitely be interesting to see what GM finally comes up with. They really need to hit it out of the park. Right now, I'm just not seeing it, but hopefully I'll be presently surprised.

@ Bob Long

I just watched your linked video. What a piece of garbage (and outdated) propaganda. I now dislike GM more than I did this morning. "Just look at the names, Dodge has a "limited" slip, the Silverado has a "locker".... I know which one I would want"...

Seriously what kind of worthless B.S. garbage is that? It is misleading, not informative, and outright wrong for most truck users. They boasted about getting an extra 1 mpg, on a truck that puts out 75 fewer peak hp. Chevy has some balls putting out a piece of garbage propaganda film like that.

They boasted about getting an extra 1 mpg, on a truck that puts out 75 fewer peak hp. Chevy has some balls putting out a piece of garbage propaganda film like that.

@Philguy, and a truck made out of tinfoil. Of course it will get ok gas mileage. It has no strength. Have you seen one of these new so called "Like A Rock" Chevy's that have been worked? Pure junkyard scrapmetal. Nice wavy sheetmetal over the rear wheels there GM. Typical quality control of yours. Pathetic at best. GM should have died. I'd give Chevrolet a pass, maybe. And that's a Big maybe. If they got away from GM and got their act together. Government Motors sucks.

Ram will be in trouble GM and Ford will have all new engines.

A turbo diesel mouse

@Mightymopar

Funny, who has historically the most powerful and fastest cars? GM, those 426's couldn't hold a candle to the L88 or yore... Even today your mopars can't compete!

@Len

Really? So if a company keeps the same engine size yet makes it all new it is game over? Get real and a clue too.

@Philly

How is the locker thing mis leading? It was true, and mayeb still is. Can you get a lockers on a 1500 Ram? If not that is sad, still using the open diffs and "limited slip". I bet there are two wheel drive trucks with a locker that can go futher than a Ram, but correct if I am wrong...

@Blueoval

says the fanboy making up stuff, wavy sheet metal? Tin foil? Why not really just lie and say they have wood beds and plastic engine blocks? Come one man...

Jonnydoe is right, Ram still has the same engines from who knows how long, that penstar isn't anything that should be in a truck, who wants to rev to 5k to get a load moving?

@phillyguy - ignore Bob the bozo. He has used the exact same post "GM only adds stuff that is needed" crap before.
Pursuant to that kind of commentary - if that is their strategy, then GMC had better get used to 2nd and finally 3rd place. One can argue that all one "needs" in a truck is a place to sit, controls, brakes, suspension, box and drivetrain. Even those "basics" can be viewed as lacking.
On must consider the fact that the majority of pickups are no longer "work trucks" but family 2nd vehicles or primary vehicles, and lifestyle (camping, toy hauler, doiturselfer etc) that people want more than basics.
That same attitude ties into the "being caught off guard" comments. An inovator and leader is never caught off guard. They act not react. GMC is reacting to what Ford and Chrysler are doing. If they were the "Leader" it would be Ford and Chrysler caught reacting.
The sales argument only matters to shareholders. For those who use the "combined sales" arguement - have you ever wondered why GMC legally cannot use that "combined sales" argument?
Does it look like GMC will come out with something really good?
I hope so.

So far what I've seen of the new trucks has been a yawn. Nothing compelling. I was looking at some old photo's of the 1988 design. It was a clean break from anything before it, it was cutting edge and for a decade put GM ahead of Ford and Dodge. Why can't these guys put their collective heads together and do that again? Give us a clean sheet from the ground up truck that is as cutting edge now as the 88 was back then? Give us something new, something game changing not an MLU of what we've already had for 25 years. Getting frustrated with GM on a lot of fronts. I am thinking of purchasing an old 1988 1500 ext cab 4wd as the first vehicle in my car collection because it was so far ahead of anything else in its day, its a study in itself of advanced design. GM has to look at Ford and Dodge and exceed everything those trucks offer from the smallest detail up. They need to take a risk and bet the house on something brand new. Chevy needs a 1/2 ton Raptor fighter, a 1/2 ton diesel, a 450hp V8 and a Twin turbo 3.6 V6, they need interiors that are a Malibu based, their own Rambox, etc. coming to the party last with a new truck should give them every single opportunity to blow the doors off the industry but alas, they won't. They will play it safe and give us an updated body, on the same chassis we've had since 1988, and about a 100hp bump for the mainstream V8, they will give us an interior about 3 steps short of the Dodge and Ford. The 4.3 may finally be mercifully put to rest and that's about it. I'm not holding my breath for anymore.

@ Tyler

It is misleading because *very* few people would benefit from a rear locker. Rear lockers are only useful if you are doing some heavy wheeling or rock crawling, and if you are doing that a half ton is a lousy choice to begin with, too big and heavy. A rear limited slip on the other hand can really help some of these high torque motors like the hemi, or the ecoboost, or iforce, or whatever not slip the wheels when pounding it from a stop, a rear limited slip can really help a truck quite a bit when the conditions on the road get nasty. If I were buying a truck right now I would handily choose a rear LSD over a rear locker, since at most I drive through some rutted trails and logging roads at the hunting camp. I would certainly get a 4x4 instead of a 2x4, but a rear locker is a pretty extreme thing to need to use. In contrast I could get benefit from a rear LSD (hoping its a Torsen or Torsen-like diff) every time you are driving on the roads, and especially in lousy weather conditions.

To answer your question about dodge and a rear e locker I have no idea if one is available from the factory. They probably have something you can order from mopar parts catalog or whoever puts out the ram runner components.

In conclusion rear lockers are a fairly serious off roading piece of equipment that next to nobody would ever use. I do more "off roading" during hunting season than anyone I know personally, and you could go anywhere I go with a subaru station wagon or a crossover (provided you choose your paths and wheel placement carefully).

And to add, at the end. I suppose I was particularly put off not so much by the advertising spiel, but because it came from the head engineer. I expect more integrity from someone in his position. Maybe I am just old fashioned. I expect BS from sales and marketing. I expect a straight shooter from an engineer, especially the lead. Like I have said in several other posts, I really do want GM to put out a good product, not because I like them (I do not) but because I like trucks... a lot, and I like competition amongst manufacturers, and I don't want poor management and decisions to cost us a major competitor.

I hope they do good with this motor.. I just wished they didn't push back the 8-speed like they did.. I heard they are just now offering more 6 speeds instead of the 4 speeds in the newer models.. I don't want them to keep on having to play catch up.. Dodge/Ram has picked up big time after the bailout and the fiat deal. GM has been long due for a new truck..

From what I see, is that Ram has a 5.7 hemi offering 390 horsepower with 20 mpg almost and offering an 8-speed auto next year.. so guessing around 21-22 mpg. That is a lot better than than only having 5.3 offering 315 horsepower with 21 mpg.. I think GM is trying to play it safe with their trucks. They use to be always more powerful than a ford back in the day, now ford are offering a v6 with more power and torque than their bread and butter v-8 ( i know its twin-turbo and d/i), and their 5.0 dohc has more power too.. What I'm saying is I am hoping they are trying to be class leading rather than playing it safe. Bring out the baby duramax if it is just sitting on the shelf, I know they canceled it but it's already been built just pushed to the side.. Do something different instead of just offering a TTV6 and an 8-speed transmission, all the other guys are doing that.. Innovation is what really attracts buyers.. I like Chevy's, I want to see them exceed..

@Tyler: You are a funny guy! I give you credit, you make me laugh! Those L-88s if they did happen to beat a Hemi, it was cause their STREET version had more compression, like 12 to 1 while Mopar used 10.5 for STREET and 12.5 for race. Even in cams, Chevy needed more cam for their so called street cars, while Mopar had a race engine that blew the 427s away! So Tyler, how many 427 are NHRA record holders? What is the fastest super stocker? Give you a hint, the engine was installed in Darts and Barracudas.

Fast forward to now. The 6.2? Yeah, more power then a 5.7 Hemi, it also has to be revved higher to get it's max torque, and it must have premium gas! Inch per inch it's not as good as a Hemi, and even Fords outdated 6.2 beats it (hows that, a direct comparison!) The 5.3? Gets a broad power curve, too bad it's hardly enough, and the Chevy in the 30K shootout couldn't even match the mileage of the bigger hemi in a heavier truck! Can you say behind? I did have a 2006 Chevy 310 hp aluminum 5.3, but there was so much downshifting going on (I bet Johnny Doe would love that!) and pinging from the engine, and poor build quality! I now have a 2010 Hemi which doesn't have to do near as much downshifting. Of course I am comparing two differant gear ratios, 3.42 and 3.92 but the Chevy has a (lack of) weight advantage, having no real B pillar, an aluminum block, smaller tires, and alot less going for it in a wreck. I imagine the Hemi would need one less gear then the 5.3 the majority of the time.

The big way Chevy makes mileage is simply by slowing the engine down, they been doing it for years. And leaning them way out. Just like my friend has a 1998 or so Buick Park Ave, it has 3.05 gears and a .7 overdrive, while my 96 Chrysler LHS has 3.66 gears and a .69 overdrive, and the Buick 3.8 barely makes more torque @ a higher rpm then my 24 valve v-6 3.5. Mine does it at 2800, the Buick at 4000 RPM. This typical gm combo of mismatch means it can't hardly go up an incline without a downshift while my LHS keeps motoring! Lol GM, keep building bigger cause you can't make it run right!

If Chevy is gonna play the "small tire-245/70R17- low gear - 3.08 to get mileage, Ram might as well beat them at their game, cause the Hemi makes more low speed power then the 5.3 They could be going with a 2.94 gear and a smaller tire in the mid 30" range, less rotaing weight, on two wheel drives. It would work. it works for Ford too. Maybe they are saving different gears and a diesel for 2014, so when Chevy brings out their new "stuff" they can beat them again! Maybe the 6.2 Hemi will be in 1500 RTs and top of the line, and 2500s.

If you knew anything about the Pentastar, you would know it hits 90% torque at 1800 or so rpm all the way to about 6K. GMs? Old 4.3 that couldn't cut the mustard as the biggest engine in v-6 shootiut. Altho an 8 speed woulda helped it as well, but it's kinda like fixing stupid. You just can't do it. So GM is last to the table with a modern day v-6. The 6.2? Making more power only cause it's bigger. Ram sits there wondering if it's the right thing to drop a Hemi 6.2 into a truck, just to quiet some Chevy and Ford folks up! Ford? Maybe an Ecoboost 5.0 someday.....but for the most part, you see what Ford has to offer1

I hope GM can produce a good pickup for you guys. The add on technology currently employed will only go so far and need to be replaced with something innovative.

But with the Volt losing upto $49 000 per vehicle sold, GM's money that could be spent on design is going into other areas to make up for bad decisions again.

It also seems your manufacturers aren't designing new V8s so their demise is almost assured. Why not design a new smaller and efficient V8 from this century.

If GM keeps on going the way their heading they will go broke and be sold to a foreign business like Chrysler.

There are only a couple of vehicle manufacturers other than the Chinese who can afford to "fix up" the damage done to GM. Toyota and VW comes to mind.

@Big Al

Holy Crap is that number accurate or just some hyperbole on your part? I knew the volt was supposed to lose money but had no idea it could be in the $49K range. Oh man if that is true that is just an enormous waste. I know they only sell a trickle of them, but what a stupid concept to sell something for less than half of what it costs.

@phillyguy
Unfortunately, it's not hyperbole, Big Al's number is accurate.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/10/us-generalmotors-autos-volt-idUSBRE88904J20120910

@phillyguy
I placed the link for this Rueters story accidently in the NFL article.

Like I stated and I know I will be criticised for what I say, but most V8s in NA are "old hat" with bits bolted on. Instead of investing in BS stuff for the greenies the car companies should be investing in technology that is usable to the general public.

I think its about time the government stops subsidising the auto industry, even in Australia the government subisidises, but very little.

Its the tax payers who foot the bill and/or these corporations are sold off. The unions have to realise that also, and have more efficient work practices.

You guys have to start to pay the "real" price for your products or you will never rise again. Living on credit is not good in any instance. You might laugh at what we pay for vehicles but maybe its a truer representation of actual costs.

Wow, that is just amazing. $90K to build a crappy chevy volt. I will be the first to say that "in theory" I can see how a hybrid drivetrain could work well for trucks, if they could help save energy in the city, and give mega torque at low RPMs. But wow. If a volt costs $90K, and its batteries take up tons of space, can you even speculate on what it would cost to even try to adapt volt level technology to a truck? Ha! That ain't going to happen for a long time... if ever.

I am secretly hoping that Honda goes the whole 9 yards with their "earth dreams" setup, since one of the design ideas was rear electric motors with front axle driven by a gas motor. Keep the Ridgeline around and work the kinks out of that system in the Ridgeline, or pilot, or whatever. I would love to see ten years from now a hybrid setup like that duking it out with a nice smaller diesel as well our typical every day gas only motors.

Here is the Volt cost link.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/10/us-generalmotors-autos-volt-idUSBRE88904J20120910

Never found a motor that sounds better or lasts longer then my 5.3L. Everytime I blast past a Ford or Dodge they start to cry with shame.

Now I sound like all the other people on this site.

I do know I never had to worry about water running into my spark plug holes and causing problems.

@Bob Long: The more of Gary White I see the more I am convinced he doesn't know much about trucks, kinda like Howie.

He's talking about Rams having more squat the a 1500 Chevy, yet the Pickuptruck.com light duty shootout in 2008 put 650 pounds on all the trucks hitchs and the Chevy was 3.5" vs. Ram 3 5/8". So a whole eigth inch? Wow! Rather moot!

Next he talks about Ram not downshifting when you hit the brakes going down hill? Pretty sure mine does that in tow haul, but it's a 2010, after that video was put out. But Chevy does need help, the 30k shootout that Chevy couldn't stop for nothing!But I guess the Chevy NEEDS the gearing help more with it's aciant drums!

Then he talks about 6 speeds, technically the Ram had a 6 speed since they used 545-RFEs which is what? 3 or so years atleast before Chevy had a 6 speed? Although the Dodge 545 ratios aren't so well spaced. Neither is the Ford/GM 6 speed ratios, when you compare them to a Tundra 6 speed, of course better yet, a new 8 speed!

Even with the 6 speed/older Dodge trans the Ram managed better mileage then the lighter Chevy that was running less gear, less power, and tires that get better mileage! GM fails again!

@Mightymopar

Funny, who has historically the most powerful and fastest cars? GM, those 426's couldn't hold a candle to the L88 or yore... Even today your mopars can't compete!

Tyler, You need to wake up and smell the cold coffee.

MOPARS HAVE DOMINATED THE RACE TRACKS FROM THE 50'S BEFORE CHEVY HAD A V8. DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT DO SOME NHRA HISTORY. EDUCATE YOUR SELF.
http://northeastdragreview.com/2012/08/25/mopar-hemi-challenge-on-tap-for-indy-2012-a-look-back-and-a-preview-of-this-years-event/


Sometimes the best product isn't the newest, but the one that perfects the next-newest. Cutting Edge has its risks, which we've seen with both Ford and Ram so far. If GM can make theirs the more reliable while maintaining some parity with the newer models from the other brands, then GM really comes out ahead. For years GM was praised for having the longest-running trucks and honestly that kind of reliability far outweighs the speedsters that break down frequently.

@ Tyler, With the exception of the Super Stock and
Stock categories, automotive drag racing in
the 21st century is essentially dominated by
three types of engines: the aftermarket engine, based
on the late-model Chrysler Hemi, for Top Fuel and
Funny Car; corporate and aftermarket versions of
small- and big-block Chevrolets; and the relatively new
Pro Stock Dodge Hemi.
The factors behind the reduction in type and brand
of engines being used vary from traction potential to
economics. Ever since the early Chrysler Hemi
emerged on the scene in 1954, it was far and away the
most powerful, but it offered no distinct advantage
because the tires at the time simply could not provide
enough traction to handle the extra horsepower.
Consequently, you could go to any drag racing
event in the 1950s and early 1960s and see Top
Eliminator entries powered by a wide variety of
engines, including small-block Chevrolets, Buicks,
Oldsmobiles, Pontiacs, Mopar wedges, and even such
luxury-car engines as Cadillac and Lincoln.
“You have to remember that in the old days, the
dragsters smoked the tires for the entire length of
the run,” said Dale Armstrong. “That meant that just
about any type of engine, if it was prepared properly,
was good enough to get the job done. The initial
appeal of the Chrysler 392 wasn’t its power but
rather its serviceability. It was a very easy engine to
work on.
“But when better tires came along in 1967, along
with the slipper clutches, power became a bigger
factor. The late-model Chrysler Hemi, which was
introduced in 1964, took about three to four years of
development work before it had a significant power
advantage over the old 392. But when that happened,
everyone started to switch over.”
Funny Car teams, which arrived on the scene in
1965, were initially more reluctant to switch to the
Hemi because of the fan appeal associated with
running the same brand engine as the body style.
Chevrolet diehards like Bruce Larson and Kelly
Chadwick always ran big-block Chevy engines in their
Camaros or Vegas. But when the most popular
Chevrolet hero on the match race trail, “Jungle Jim”
Liberman, switched to a Chrysler Hemi in 1969, most
other teams followed.
http://www.nhra.com/userfiles/file/ndlivefiles/features/Engines.pdf

@DWFields - valid point but how reliable is cam in cam?
Wouldn't it be better to step away from GM small block orhthodoxy and go to OHC?
Do you consider DI a cutting edge risk?
I doubt that GMC can gain much more out of their current small blocks without "risking" the use of new technology.
The worry of alienating traditional SBC fans/customers is a false worry. Grassroots hotrodders and racers have decades worth of SBC engines floating around.
Ford seems to be a prime example of that "fear of technology" reality. Their V6's handily outsell their V8's. The 6.2 has a piss poor take rate and it is as traditional as it gets without sticking a cam into the block.

@Hemi V8
You forgot to mention that the NHRA was lobbied to prevent the Australian McGee top fuel V8 engine from being allowed to compete.

Remember it kicked the Hemis' butts.

So how good are Hemis???

They operate in a protectionist environment with no real competition. Because they race to a fomula. It's like saying we will have pickup races, but only F-150 Raptors can race, then claiming Raptors are the best, quickest and most reliable.

They are only used because of the infrastructure cost in maintaining and manufacturing the engines. These aren't true Hemis, at most they might be distant cousins of a Hemi. Like a Fiat Ram 1500 is a Ford Model T. The Ram started somewhere didn't it.

Remember the NY Times article I posted. The Top Fuel engine uses no Mopar or Chrysler parts. And the parts aren't interchangable with a Hemi.

Remember I will tackle all of your crap and take over from Lou.

You do a great diservice for the Fiat Company.

says the fanboy making up stuff, wavy sheet metal? Tin foil? Why not really just lie and say they have wood beds and plastic engine blocks? Come one man...

@Tyler, the Silverado does have wavy sheetmetal over the rear wheels on the bed. I didn't pay attention until it was pointed out here and now I notice it on every Silverado I see. The sheetmetal is very thin and wavy on these trucks. Lot's of current Silverado-Sierra truck owners complain about it on GM's own truck website.

http://www.gm-trucks.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=119648

As for the new engine, I hope this one is a winner. The SBC is truly my favorite V8 of all time. Particularly the old one. The LS would win huge with me had it not had the piston knock issue. I have issues of Hot Rod showing this motor making well over 1k hp on the stock rotating assembly all day long. Very impressive piece of engineering. The piston knock issue is where it all goes wrong for me. GM was obviously is cost cutting mode yet again on a critical piece of the vehicle further damaging Chevrolet's reputation of old.

Are you going surpass Ford or just catch up to them ???

Regardless of all the speculation out there, I hope that GM will choose a lighter all-aluminum block&heads design along with DOHC and 3, 4, or 5-valves per cylinder instead of pushrods.

DI, GDI or TGDI are all options, but the design infrastructure is what matters, as in get away from cast iron and pushrods in the next-gen small block V8. Lighten up!

I'm no Ford fan, but you gotta hand it to Ford! They're lightyears ahead of GM in everything pickup truck. Maybe that's why they're the best selling vehicle in America for decades.

I drive a 2009 Tundra 5.7 Limited 4-door 4X4 now, just so you know, but I've owned Fords, Chevies and Dodge pickup trucks over the years.

Getting GM trucks into the 21st century should be Job 1 for GM! Who cares about Corvette? So few people buy them that they are classified as a niche, and instant classics.

Using that same de-tuned hi-tech engine in trucks is where it's at. That's where the money is.

@Lou
Once they work out how to manufacture solenoid operated valves cheaply you won't need cams.

Formula Ones are using them.

Imagine any "profile" and lift option. How efficient could an engine run.

I also notice alot of remarks regarding the thickness of the sheet metal on the Chevs. All pickups will be getting lighter and that is an easy option.

I do know that my Mazda has high tensile "thin" sheetmetal. It seems to work okay so far.

But high tensile steel has more carbon and is prone to corrode quicker so surface finishing would be more significant.

@TRX4 Tom chevy trucks had a 6 speed longer then dodge trucks had its 545RFE 5/6speed trans.

545RFE 2001–2011 Jeep Grand Cherokee (4.7L, 4.7L H.O., 5.7L Hemi)
2002–2007 Jeep Liberty (Diesel applications)
2003–2011 Dodge Ram (3.7L, 4.7L, 5.7L Hemi)
2005–2011 Dodge Power Wagon
2003–2011 Dodge Dakota (4.7L, 4.7L H.O.)
2003–2011 Dodge Durango (4.7L, 5.7L)
2006–2010 Jeep Commander (4.7L, 5.7L Hemi)
2007–2010 Jeep Wrangler (2.8 L CRD)
2007–present LTI/London Taxi Company TX4

The allison was the same way reprogram so it could use all 6 gears, and this came to be in 2001 with the duramax 6.6L/6.0L and 8.1L engines. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1ByVBBfEXWk&feature=plcp here good video on the allison

Allison 1000 transmissionThe 1000 series (and similar 2000 and 2400 series) is a line of automatic transmissions for on-road trucks. All are 5 or 6-speed electronically controlled units and are manufactured by Allison Transmission in Indianapolis, Indiana as well as in Baltimore, Maryland.

Compareing the 5.3L Chevy and the 5.7L Hemi is kinda pointless, the Hemi was updated in 2009 if I remeber right. The 5.3L really has not change much since 1999. When this new 2013 or 2014 5.3L comes out though you Hemi boys best hang on to some solid cause it's going to blow you're doors right off LOL!

LOCKERS ARE NOT ALWAYS BETTER THEN LIMITED REARS. The Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra both had locking mechanical rear differentials that engaged automatically when wheel slip hit a certain rpm. While both pickups performed excellently in the autocross, they were challenged by the wet surface and fishtailed backward as power was applied. We had to put both trucks into 4-High to get off the basalt.
http://special-reports.pickuptrucks.com/2008/11/extreme-tractio.html

These DI LS engines will raise the standard for power and economy, watch and see. I don't think GM will go the Ecoboost route, they have something different in the works (and if you were wondering why the hybrid trucks and SUV's were dropped.....).

The Forbes article on the Volt was speculation, read the whole thing. What most of you fail to realize is new technology is rarely profitable at first. Toyota lost a lot of money on the first gen. Prius (the Japanese gonvernment helped them quite a bit I am told) and look where they are now. A lot of the technology pioneered in the Volt could very likely be mandatory in meeting future CAFE requirements. And guess who holds the patents?

As far as the history of the second generation Chrysler Hemi's, it is just not relevent anymore. I am a Mopar guy of the highest order and you fanboys have no doubt read articles on cars I had a hand in building in the various Mopar publications. Ever owned or driven something with a 426 Hemi or 440 6-Pack in it? I have. Yes, they were incredible cars, but they are in no way related to what Chrysler (or Fiat?) builds today.

The new Ram is a really nice truck, but Chrysler better get that 'Pentastar' V-6 sorted out quick. I think their cylinder head problem is a much bigger issue that the early LS piston slap issue was. I have a 2001 Chevy Silverado 6.0L at work, and it has had the slap issue since day one. Never did anything about it. That truck has a ton of miles on it, and has never had any oil consumption issues. It has also outlasted many a Dodge and Ford in our fleet.

ENOUGH SAID!!!!!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eIU0tFA3bKM&feature=related
TWO KINDS OF PEOPLE, THOSE WHO HAD HEMI'S AND THOSE WHO WANTED HEMI'S.

Sine this is a engine story heres a video 6.4L Power Stroke owners should watch it will save you money and a head hurt. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLsDTW5Y8Ao

@hemiV8 - dude! I've said this before and I'll say it again - Do you proof-read what you cut and paste?
The F150 and Tundra were the only vehicles in the test to make it up the hill in 4x2.
The e-locker GM/Chev and Nissan needed 4x4 and so did the Ram with limited slip.

So what was your point?

All we can learn from that test was that Ford and Toyota have a better designed traction control system (limited slip, and traction control) versus Chevy/GM e-locker and traction control versus Ram limited slip and traction control versus Nissan.
One could argue other factors like frame design, suspension layout/design, tires etc.
THey arged that the Tundra and Ford were heavier therefore provided better traction BUT the laws of physics dictate that yes, there may be better traction but one must move a heavier amount of wieght up the same hill.
If weight equated to traction - I would never see loaded transport trucks spun out on hills in the winter.

@Philly

How is the locker thing mis leading? It was true, and mayeb still is. Can you get a lockers on a 1500 Ram? If not that is sad, still using the open diffs and "limited slip". I bet there are two wheel drive trucks with a locker that can go futher than a Ram, but correct if I am wrong...

LOCKERS ARE NOT ALWAYS BETTER THEN LIMITED REARS. The Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra both had locking mechanical rear differentials that engaged automatically when wheel slip hit a certain rpm. While both pickups performed excellently in the autocross, they were challenged by the wet surface and fishtailed backward as power was applied. We had to put both trucks into 4-High to get off the basalt.
http://special-reports.pickuptrucks.com/2008/11/extreme-tractio.html

FURTHER MORE TYLER YES YOU CAN GET FRONT AND REAR LOCKERS ON THE 6.4L HEMI POWER WAGON.

P.S. Lou, are you kidding me? Watch the video and see my point when the G.M. tries going up with the rear locker. Fail!



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