2015 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Review

Chevy 4 II

"The 2015 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 with its optional 420-horsepower, 6.2-liter V-8 Corvette engine now has its once-missing link for performance: an eight-speed automatic transmission," says Cars.com reviewer H. Kent Sundling. The winner of the Cars.com/PickupTrucks.com 2015 Light-Duty V-8 Challenge, the 2015 Silverado was not the most luxurious pickup in the contest, he says, but "its performance moved it up some notches … thanks in part to its new eight-speed."

2015 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 Expert Review

Cars.com photo by Evan Sears


Chevy 20 II


The best drivetrain going in a half ton bar none. Smoked the competition and got better mileage doing it. Great job GM on building a great product that is best in its class.

I am sorry but I am not impressed with the review listed. Again major flaws by cars.com. The new F150 DOES NOT weigh 500 pounds less than the Chevrolet. Using the base weight of an F150 in its lowest weight available is NOT the test weight comparable to the review, are you guys idiots or what, your suppose to be Auto Journalists yet, us Keyboard warriors find huge mistakes every time you post reviews, have someone fact check your reviews to insure you don't come off sounding like a retard.

The GM twins are nice looking pickups. I'm glad they do not have those oversized grilles like some of the others. Would buy one with the 6.2 in a heartbeat except I do not want to start buying premium gas, and OMG they have a high price tag when you want a few upgrades.

Funny thing about transmissions is my 07 has the 4 speed and my brothers 13 has the 6 speed and I have driven his enough that I see no difference other then I seem to get better mpg on the highway. Both are 4x4's with the 5.3.

I used to drive exclusively GM until I realized that the new vehicle I fell in love with just didn't hold up well. I didn't realize it's not "normal" to spend that much money on repairs every year. Once I figured that out and switched brands, life got a whole lot better. I really like how GM vehicles drive when new. I'm hoping someday they'll figure it out and make their vehicles do a better job of holding up to the daily grind. It remains to be seen whether the 2015's will hold up better than their predecessors. Let's hope so. I'm not sure the government would prop them up a second time.

I own a new Denali with the 6.2L and 8 speed and I am thrilled with the towing power and the smooth quiet comfort. It does NOT require PREMIUM GAS. Nowhere in the owners manual doe it even mention Premium gas being required. I use regular gas and it often runs on only 4 cylinders and overall I have been averaging about 21.4 MPG. I couldn't be more satisfied with my decision.

The GM 6.2L V8 with the new 8 speed transmission is the gold standard, one of the best engine/transmission combos ever produced.

Many of these weight comparisons between the new aluminum F-150 and competing pickups seem to be very questionable. The trucks never seem to be comparably equipped. It also seems that when a 2015 F-150 is compared to a 2014, the older F-150 usually has the iron block 6.2L in it while the new one has an Ecoboost, a much lighter engine.

Xpert1, your owners manual says premium gas recommended but not required, meaning, it is tuned for premium gas, why would you not want the full performance out of it just to save a buck?

I think you need to reread that manual Xpert1. They say it is recommended for best performance and the engine can knock if under premium is used. Every review done states premium id recommneded.

No doubt this truck is the king of the 1/2 power wars. The things I don't like about G.M. compared to Ram is they didn't offer the 6.2 in lower trim levels you had to buy the heaviest blinged out models. Don't know if that's changed. Also have a moral issue with the way they handled the ignition problems that killed too many and they tried to cover it up. Also the fire recalls scared me. Having a vehicle burn before is very scary. I am not in the 1/2 ton market so I don't have to decide. My 03 Ram which was the most powerful half ton in 03 recommends 89 octane. I only use it in hot summer weather and when towing. Truck now has 104,000 miles and looks and runs strong. Also G.M. trucks have very thin sheet metal (thank you government). It's just like the new Ford except it's steel. Ram had the strongest sheet metal when I tested all three at the auto show in L.A.


Ugliest interior. The new model cannot come soon enough. smh.

Modern gas engines don't knock. We have had these things called knock sensors for some time now.

There are a lot of gas engines out there that "recommend" premium fuel for best performance but that doesn't mean you can't run plain ol 87 octane in them for the average commute. Knock sensors combined with electronics simply adjust timing based on the fuel being used.

When will they center the steering wheel to the driver seat?

They can and do knock, Sandman. If they didn't there wouldn't be "knock" sensors. You need the knock for the sensor to adjust the timing to eliminate the knock. If there were no knocking, there would be no need for sensors to sense and adjust. How does it adjust you ask? It retards the timing causing horespower loss and mpg loss. The 6.2L is a high compression engine and you can damage it running low grade fuel. There is a reason it is recommended in the manual. Don't believe me? Go read the manual. It doesn't say "for best results", it states recommends then states why.

From the Denali owners manual:

"For all vehicles except those with
the 6.2L V8 engine, use regular
unleaded gasoline meeting ASTM
specification D4814 with a posted
octane rating of 87 or higher. Do not
use gasoline with an octane rating
below 87, as it may cause engine
damage and will lower fuel
If the vehicle has the 6.2L V8 engine
(VIN Code J), use premium
unleaded gasoline meeting ASTM
specification D4814 with a posted
octane rating of 91 or higher. If the
octane is less than 91, damage to
the engine may occur and may void
the vehicle warranty. If heavy
knocking is heard when using
gasoline rated at 91 octane or
higher, the engine needs service."

This article again highlights the fact that the new aluminium F-150 is competitive, but only competitive with "older" vehicles.

Ford really need to do something to lift the aluminium F-150 above the others.

Ford can do it. They produced the global Ranger which lifted the bar significantly for mid sizers.

The 6.2 seems to motor quite well. These engines move the Commodore ute even quicker. Maybe the Chev SS should of been the ute. They might have been selling better.

I do think you will see the combined General Motors pickup sales outstrip any other manufacturer in the US.

GM now moves the largest number of pickups in the US and Ford has been relegated into second.

Ford will slip a little further with Ram slowing down a little.

If the Laramie is the only product FCA Ram can come up with to improve Ram sales, then Ram has a problem.

A Rampage mid sizer is needed, A extra long wheel base Wrangler pickup is needed, with a 2.8 diesel offering, Pentastar offering and the 2.4 litre 4 for both the Rampage and Wrangler. They can share many components.

Owning the newest and greatest pickup truck used to be a way to show off to the neighbors, but with my good looks, charming personality and almost perfect body have rewritten the metrics of achievement.
Our economy has changed, welcome to the new "creative economy" its been happening for the past 6 years, everybody is too busy paying for the increased cost of basic necessities such as food, housing, clothing!
With any extra money we have we spend it on new smart phones and electronic entertainment, a new pickup is the last thing we think about.
A finely curated Facebook page or Instagram feed is often more prized than the vehicle a person drives. "AND" thousands more will see it!

Al - The Denali drivetrain is new this year with the 8 speed. The 6.2L is the carryover. Look at the pricing and availability of these 6.2L GM trucks. They are essentially Halo vehicles. The 3.5L EcoBoost is available across the whole F150 line up. So essentially, the F150 is competitive with the 6.2L (which is the top of the line engine in the top of the line trims) while it romps on the lesser offerings. WHo is playing catch up or only "competitive"?

Also for the umpteenth time, there is no demand for car based UTEs in the USA. Every car based truck has failed. Subaru Brat, Subaru Baja, old Dodge Rampage, to a lesser extent the Ridgeline.........

What works in Oz doesn't always work here despite your opinions and wishing.

The octane talk has been beaten to death, if you got the 6.2 better run 91, 89 at a Min and def not under load or beat on it if running below 91, be smart and run 91.

The review from Cars.com incorrectly lists the F150 in its lightest configuration as its tested weight which is WRONG.

The Ford F150 Supercrew 3.5 Ecoboost 4x4 weighed 60 pounds less than the Chevrolet Silverado Crew Cab 6.2 4x4, those are the facts, not 500 POUNDS difference, the cars.com "expert" listed the weight of an F150 4x2 supercab, engine unknown as the weight to compare.

Sears said "The Silverado we tested weighed 500 pounds more than the aluminum-body 2015 Ford F-150."

I say Bullsh-t, he lists all the numbers generated from the 3.5 Ecoboost, 0-60, towing, FE, this was the 4x4 Ecoboost 3,5, which weighted in at 5560 vs 5620, 60 pounds less all alum a V6 vs a V8 haha.

It is embarrassing to be Ford engineer, ride the short bus to school and get picked on, all that work to make an Alum cab and even compared to the Superior Corvette V8 a steel bodied GM Truck is only 60 pounds more and has 2 more gears too boot, faster, gets better gas mileage, handles better, has better steering and runs a V8 that goes back for over 60 Chevrolet Small Block Technology, compared to pumped in fake elevator music Ecoboost TWIN TURDBLOW, I am surprised Ford didn't add nitrous too, just to make sure they would beat the Good Old V8 along with Job 3 Cheat Engine Tune and Avgas LMAO.

Chevrolet 54310
Gears 3,23
Weight 5620

0-60 5.92
0-60 loaded 7.09 1240 pounds
1/4 14.34
1/4 loaded 15.36 1240 pounds
Unloaded Chevy 6.2 19.8 MPG
Braking 60-0 133.7 unloaded
Trailering Chevy 6.2 10.2 MPG 6,700 pounds
Braking 60-0 132.2 loaded with 1240 pounds
Davis Dam 19.92 6,700-pound trailer

Ford F150 60880
Gears 3.55
Weight 5560

0-60 6.22
0-60 loaded 7.02 1080 pounds
1/4 14.84
1/4 15.50 loaded 1080 pounds
Unloaded 3.5 Eco boost 18.5
Braking 60-0 133.6 unloaded
Trailering 3.5 Ecoboost 11.1 4,200-pounds
Braking 60-0 135.3 with 1080 pounds
Davis Dam 20.76 6,800-pound trailer

When is there going to be a comparison with the 5.3 which is GMs volume seller against the ecoboost or 5.0. Not very many people have the 6.2 and you can't get that in a plain GM.

I agree the chevy is closer than 500 pounds to the f-150. But how great is lighter weight really? In comparing tractors the heavier the better in my experience. The heavier tractors are built beefier and stronger. I think to a certain extent that may also be true for pickups. You can only shed so much weight before you sacrifice durability. I think chevy has taken it too far. Their sheet metal is too thin. They have sacrificed durability in the name of weight savings. Ford has said with the use of aluminum they get to keep durability while still saving weight. I bet when chevy introduces their aluminum pickups in a few years they will be lighter than the fords. Sacrificing durability to save more weight. Not to mention the less steel they use, the less it costs to manufacture the trucks.


Ford is built without using your tax dollars! If you support America and capitalism, then buy a Ford F150. If you support socialism then buy GM. Remember Ford never flew to Washington and begged for a bail out to support the UAW. The real insult from GM is the fact that they still filed for bankruptcy while lying to the American people about it's ignition problems causing deaths across America.

I am a RAM guy,but I like the new GM trucks..the 6.2 is a real monster..

I would like to see a GM truck with a 6.2,4.10 gears and 8 speed..that would really go...5.3 0-60 13.99 in the 1/4 ? Pretty close I would bet..

Now,being a RAM fan..They better offer a 6.4 to match or beat the 6.2 GM !

Congrats GM fans,you have a real gem on your hands...I don't like what Ford did with small 6 cyl and twin turbo's...Nothing beats a big V-8..it doesn't need to work hard to get power,doesnt have to rely on exensive Turbo's to make it move...Now,if people wanted to you can turbo up the 6.2 and have a total monster !!


$5.9 Billion dollars in Government loans ! And $25 Billion given to them..

$25 Billion dollars given to them by the energy department to build fuel efficient cars..this is why Ford went small motor and European vans and European based cars..

Not 1 Ford car is American,all European ! Only the F-150,250,350,450 ect trucks are American..Ford cars are not American !

This is why Ford has V-6 eco boost engines..they made the deal with the government,otherwise they would have 450 horsepower 6.2 V-8's in the 150 !! And its cars would have V-6's instead of 1.6 4cyl in the Fusion..

Ford did fly to Washington and they did ask for a bailout,they attended the meetings,but they got money without going bankrupt...

Ford got loans and FREE CASH (taxpayer cash) More than Chrysler !! Chrysler paid it back !!


Direct-injection engines improve performance and save fuel, but at a price.




"Ford didn't need the money itself -- it had previously arranged a multibillion-dollar line of private credit."

Hotrod, even your own article states that the money was a loan. Loan incur interests which means no money was "given" to Ford. Do more research before believing whatever propaganda you've heard from other manufacturers. Truth is that Ford secured loans before the 2008 market crisis.

I am a Ford guy...70 Mach 1 and even a 59 Edsel Corsair....got lots of Ford trucks.....do not like the Ecoboost...and all the sophiscated hardware that goes with it....when these trucks age....the will not hold good resale valve because of all the potential problems.....having to replace two turbo chargers will be costly.....and problematic.....Ford is determined to force the boost on us..and demote there great 5.0 v8...Example they say the 5,0 didn't improve gas mileage even in new alunium...I betting it was better,.....Ford wanted the Boost with high price tag...I salute Gm and Chrysler for using ..pushrod technology....simple and more reliable....Ford should answer the Epa why the 5.0 didn't improve at 500 lbs less weight

@chase Using premium fuel in an engine designed for regular gas will achieve little if no benefit


very good post!
very good post !

You're exactly right!
The Chevy and Ram V8's are getting 19 MPG WITHOUT using lightweight aluminum and the turbo's are still causing problems with the F-150
The 2009-2010 F-150's with the 5.4 V8 matched with the new 6 speed transmission gets BETTER gas mileage than the 2015 F-150 with the 5.0 V8.
The Silverado with the non-turbo 4.3 V6 has matched performance numbers and BETTER MPG's than the F-150 with the 2.7 Eco-Boost.
I can go on and on with more but the bottom line is Ford ruined the F-150 and they are using their good past reputation to shove their new crap down our throats!
The new F-150 is worse than the older F-150

The only thing I don't like about these trucks is that you have to spec one pretty loaded up to get the 6.2L.

Well, its nice that GM found two trucks with the 6.2/8-speed combination to drive. And it's even nicer that one of those trucks had the max trailer tow package. Meanwhile, in the real world where most of us live, you cannot find a GMC/Chevy with the 6.2 and the max trailer tow package. Not only that, you can't even order one! GM's excuse is "supplier issues."

Last year, the 6.2 engine with or without the max trailer tow package was as rare as my steak, which is cooked just enough to keep it from walking away. GM's excuse then was that they didn't anticipate the demand for the bigger engine. Seriously? Did anyone from GM actually drive the 5.3? Everyone who has tested it agrees that it feels like a slug.
I drove it last year and it felt the same way. I also drove a '14 6.2, and it successfully bridged the awkward gear spacing of the 6-speed box. For a very modest amount of extra $$ and virtually no fuel economy penalty, who wouldn't want the 6.2?

I drove a 6.2 8-speed this year, and it's terrific. Too bad I cant' get it with the max trailer tow package, because I need the 400 lbs. extra payload that it brings.

But leave it to GM to screw up a good thing.

You can keep the push-rods and lifters, today I parked next to a 2006 chevy silverado 1500 z71, and on my way to my truck a 2007 Toyota Tacoma (with a DOHC engine) guess what I heard???? TICK, TICK, TICK, TICK, TICK, TICK, TICK!!! PROBLEM, clogged oil passages leading to the lifters!!!! DANGEROUS AS HELL!!!! Case and point; see the most durable engines have the least amount of moving parts in the block!! DOHC AND SOHC engines have pistons, connecting rods, and crankshaft movement. Where as the great push-rods engines have, lifters, push-rods, and camshaft movement, which need many internal oil passages to feed all those bearing surfaces!!!

SEE even GM and Dodge have abandon the use of push-rod engines in there cars!!!



Al - Like I said in another comment, maybe you need to go to Dearborn and make an appointment with Alan Mullaly to let him know that the Ecoboosts are such time bombs seeing as you know more than their engineers on how it is built and somehow seem to know more about durability than their own in house torture testing. I'm proud you found an internet article that matched your speculation of how the EB was engineered and functions.

I do know what a Halo vehicle is and the 6.2L GM 1500's fit the description to a tee. High priced, low volume vehicles, with an exlusive tranny designed to draw interest to the lesser vehicles and the brand in general. Two people in the comments here have both stated that 6.2L GM 1500s are not just sitting on lots waiting to be purchased. They are extremely limited in availability and pretty much produced to give GM some broad asterisked bragging rights. Asterisked meaning like when you read that the "class leading mpg" was actually acheived with a stripped regular cab 2wd with a V6, not the actual model you want to buy. Also note that it took 2 extra cogs in the transmission and premium fuel to beat the 3.5L EB running a 6 speed and running 87 octane. In effect meaning that the "close mpg" is not all that close when you look at the price you pay per fill up. Premium fuel is $.20-.30 more per gallon.

I'm not sure what planet you are on that the GM 4.3L V6 out performed the EB 2.7L. Perhaps you confused it with the discontinued NA 3.7L Ford had or the NA 3.5L. The 2.7L outperformed the 5.3L in all the tests I saw.

Jimmy - Running high test can and does increase performance if the engine is designed to make use of it. Ford states that they made their numbers using 87 octane, but using premium will improve their numbers. When towing, my Titan gets better mileage on premium than 87 octane. The same 5.6L engine in the Infinity QX56 gets better performance numbers than the Titan/Armada with the same 5.6L. The only difference? The Infinity owners manual specifies using premium, Titan/Armada manual says 87 octane is fine. This is before the QX went to direct injection.


I have own 300 6 inlines, 302,351W, 460 385 series engines..351 Cleveland 4 v head....,,,two 5.4 Modulars.. F150,,E 250, f 750.Ford work trucks for business.yes I have had no problems with lifters and pushrod ,most all went over 200,000 miles..great reliable engines....Modulars SOHC spark plug....Cam Phasers issues,, head gasket issures..,We do a lot of our work on these work trucks.....I know

If you read the last link and the cut and paste in my last comment you'll understand why Ford wants EcoBoost drivers to use premium gasoline under certain conditions.

Read the article on low rpm pre-ignition, under load.

Tell me what dictates what octane fuel to use in a vehicle.

It isn't compression. What is compression?

It's pressure. Pressure creates heat, hence at a higher throttle setting with more fuel entering the combustion chamber, even at low rpms heat will build up from the pressure within the combustion chamber.

More fuel that combusts the more heat generated by the pressure it develops. The next time your in your shed start up your dads compressor and feel the heat in the outlet line that leads to the compressor tank or feel the heat build up at the compressors cylinder head.

Compression creates heat and added with fuel expanding creating pressure again increases heat.

Even a lower compression engine will have a pressure build up with more fuel combusting at lower rpms.

A higher octane fuel when it is combusted expands slower than regular. This slow expansion is cooler, but it's energy value is the same as regular. It's just the pressure is applied to the piston crown slightly longer.

The slower and more controlled combustion rate also reduces the pre-ignition or knocking. This in turn allows you to run higher combustion pressures and increase the torque.

Remember my comment regarding how the diesel can provide more torque at lower rpms due to the fact it combust slower than gasoline. Well, premium gas combusts slower than regular.

So, now we go back to the EcoBoost. At low rpm, producing high level of torque require a significant amount of fuel. This fuel is creating a lot more heat.

With regular gasoline combusting at a much faster rate is likely causing pre-ignition. Also remember the fuel must be delivered and ignited prior to the piston reaching top dead centre.

With premium and it slower combustion rate allow the piston to reach top dead centre without much expansion of the combusting fuel - air mixture trying to force the piston back down it's compression stroke. This is the pre-ignition or knocking.

That's why and how you can destroy connecting rods, rings, etc with the use of incorrect octane values for your fuel.

This is why Ford wants EcoBoost operators to use premium when the engine is loaded.

Loaded can be driving you pickup empty using lots of throttle.

Exerpt from 2015 Ford F150 owners manual:

"2.7L and 3.5L EcoBoost Engines
We recommend regular unleaded gasoline
with a pump (R+M)/2 octane rating of 87.
Some stations offer fuels posted as regular
with an octane rating below 87, particularly
in high altitude areas. We do not
recommend fuels with an octane rating
below 87.
To provide improved performance, we
recommend premium fuel for severe duty
usage, such as trailer tow."

Thats funny Al. I see GM stating to always use 91 or higher octane for the 6.2L, yet I see Ford RECOMMENDING 87 octane. They then state for improved performance they reccommend premium for severe use. They don't state must run or that damage will occur if you dont run premium. They state for best performance in severe conditions like towing. Doesn't say a heavy foot on the gas pedal with an empty truck is considered severe use either.

Once again, I am sure Ford would love for you to stop in and explain how inherantly flawed the EB is since apparently their engineers, per your "expertise" are clueless as to how engines work and how the combustion process happens.

FWIW if all these heavy hauling and towing tests with the EBs we are seeing are being done running 87 octane, they are apparently running the least efficient fuel and not the octane Ford recommends for when you load up the truck and work it hard. So perhaps the performance gaps between the 6.2L GM V8 and the 3.5L EB are alot narrower than it seems if the tests get run with the octane Ford recommends is used under those conditions.

@Keith CT,
Do you know why that is? Also and engine under load is under load irrespective of what is causing the load. So if you are driving your F-150 hard that is still loading the engine.

What is a severe load? It doesn't exist. A load is a load.

Why does the EcoBoost when not under a load is able to use a lower octance fuel? Read what I wrote above.

Why would the 6.2 have a requirement to use premium or a higher octane fuel.

Does this make for a better engine by Ford? If you think this makes for a better engine by Ford, please explain why.

Why is this a Ford vs Chev debate when discussing physics?

It isn't.

Now go out to your dad's shed start up his compressor and feel the heat generated by pressure.

Loading is counter action to the turning of the crankshaft.

Towing when approaching the maximum limit of a vehicles tow rating is most definitely applying a greater load than simply hooning an unladen vehicle.

The 2.7 is absolute gem of an engine, the new twin scroll turbo's have barely a hint of drag and this air pump pulls like a beast.

We all have opinions just go drive one for yourself.

@Alberta Oil,
Why is the EcoBoost a better engine than the GM 6.2 V8?

I asked Keith CT to explain why HE considers this so.

Your comment is akin to his, because it's a Ford. That's a relatively or a completely inane reason.

As for the 2.7 EcoBoost. It's better suited to a much lighter vehicle, not a heavy pickup.

As for loads, I already discussed that. Go and read my comments on basically how an engine works.

Al - Last I checked the only heat generated by my compressor was the electric motor and some minimal warmth on the piston sleeve. Their air might be slightly warmer than the air it takes in to pressurize. Probably why they have heaters to warm and dry cold air on the large compressors that supply shop air. If simply running a compressor generated a lot of heat then warming the air would be superfluous.

Why do I feel the EB is better than the 6.2 you ask? Simple. Like most GM engines it makes it's power at high rpm and when compared to other v8s they tend to run low on torque. That's why Ford did so well competing with the 5.4L versus GM's 5.3L. The reason the 6.2 suddenly looks like a world beater is pretty simple. They hooked it to a 6.2L exclusive 8 speed tranny. Bear in mind that RAM also made good mpg gains using 8 speeds with the Hemi. Ford has a 10 speed tranny coming out. Put the 10 speed up against the 8 speed and suddenly GM is sucking wind again. Ask yourself this. If the 8 speed from GM was so awsome, why is it in only 2 models?? Both of which are extremely limited production. Simple. To give advertising bragging rights. Seeing as most buyers if the stock with GM after the bait and switch, will wind up with the 5.3L and the 6 speed. Meanwhile you can get an EB or a Hemi in almost every trim Ford and Ram manufacture. So, do you want an affordable truck you can buy off the lot and almost match GM's 6.2L or do you want to try and find hen teeth by looking for a 6.2L then pay top dollar because the only way you can get it is in a Denali or loaded to the gills?

I didn't say the GM 6.2 was awesome. You assume too much. Learn to accurately assess. This makes for better judgment.

Most of what you've put in front of me has no relationship into why you think the Ford engines are better. If you are basing your assumptions on reviews/tests and Ford propaganda and daddy, then you might make an error, but again you might make the better decision. At least daddy's decision to buy a F-150 is based on better judgment.

You haven't even come close. Learn a little prior to making a purchase. You might still end up with a Ford, but a least you can make a better decision in buying the Ford when you get your license. If daddy drives a Ford, maybe junior should look at why and not "just because daddy does, junior does".

Become indepent, this is a part of growing up.

Your comment only illustrates you don't have a clue and have your compressor looked at. As it not doing well if it's only getting "warm".

Again, why is the EcoBoost better than a GM 6.2? Without your Ford brand bias.

Nope, I just drove both engines.

I love the torque curve on the 2.7, under 3500 rpm it's just a more responsive engine than the 6.2 to me.

6.2 is a lot stronger on the high end of the power band but that's not where I do most of my driving.

I stand by saying the 2.7 is a real beauty. Yes it's made by the Ford motor company but so what? I'd love this engine if had Tarrant or Orbital written on the valve covers.

In the end I put my money where my mouth and bought a truck that has one.

Just drove to Banff on Saturday and got 10.4 L/100km with the cruise at 115. As for power it pulls like a freight train.

I don't expect my opinion to change anyone else's, it's the internet and we're all full of crap. I just love how my truck drives and it's that simple. No relativism or absurd reasoning involved.

I sold Ford's for 14 years and GM products for 8 years. There are advantages and disadvantages to all brands and designs. Most of the people in this discussion have their bias and closed minds. First of all Ford did not take a bailout for two reasons, they mortgaged the company buildings, factories and even the name before the financial meltdown in 2008, also if Ford had taken the bailout it is very likely that Ford family members would have lost control od the company. General Motors and Chrysler didn't have that problem. Next the reason that only the GM 6.2-liter V-8 has the 8-speed transmission, is that GM is not up to capacity yet, when the 2016 models come out, you will see the 5.3-liter V-8 get the 8-speed also. buy the way the 6-speed that GM and Ford used in their pickups was co-developed by both companies, just as the coming 10-speed is being co-developed by both companies. Ram on the other hand buys their 8-speed from a supplier, it was not developed by them and neither was their either of Diesel engines. As far as fuel economy is concerned, we have seen many one and two year old Ford F-150 EcoBoost pickups traded in by people who tow a lot. Why?? They all give the same reason, when towing the mileage on the EcoBoost drops 40% to 50%, Finally if Ford's are so damn reliable (they have been the number one selling pickup for 38 years), then why does Polk say that there are more Chevy's on the road? Lets face it they are both very good pickups with their own advantages and faults.

CarGuy54: your post was one of the most intelligent here on this post, with the one little exception being Chrysler does not buy their 8spd tans. from an outside supplier, but has paid ZF for the rights to build them with their proprietary design. This give Chrysler the right to give it the name from their past Torque Flite. Which is built under agreement with ZF in the Kokomo plant.

Impressive reviewed on this post, Best one with good features.Good post.

The comments to this entry are closed.