2020 GMC Sierra 2500 Denali: Spied

I-Vx546m7-XL II

Our spy shooters have been spotting different configurations of GM's new heavy-duty pickup trucks on known testing routes and public roads, which normally signals the automaker is getting close to the end of full testing cycles. Here's what our spy shooters sent us about a model we've hadn't seen in the wild before: a 2020 GMC Sierra 2500 Denali crew cab. We especially like what GM has done with the sideview mirrors. We're expecting some added camera features for the new design as well.

"Today we caught out first look of the 2020 GMC Sierra 2500 Denali crew cab. "We recently spied almost the entire lineup of GM's HD tucks, but unfortunately the Sierra 2500 Denali was a no-show. From these shots it appears that the Sierra 2500 Denali mimics the formula found on the recently debuted GMC Sierra 1500 Denali, with a bigger and bolder upscale chrome grille, unique 20-inch rims and squared-off running boards. We also could make out the word "Denali" embroidered on the head restraints. Also, like the 1500, the next-generation 2500/3500 is said to use an extensive mix of aluminum/steel materials.

"The GMC Sierra 2500 Denali seen here is a diesel (note the exhaust pipe); expect power to continue from the recently refreshed 6.6-liter Duramax V-8 engine, while the aging 6.0-liter V-8 is likely to continue soldiering on as the standard gasoline option. However, it wouldn't surprise us if GM added a more modern V-8 to the mix. We've heard no official word on transmission offerings thus far, but considering Ford and Ram are still using six-speed units in their heavy-duty rigs, we expect GM to stick with its current standard automatic heavy-duty transmission along with the optional Allison 1000 six-speed automatic transmission. There is a chance a modified version of the new Hydra-Matic 10-speed automatic transmission could show up.

"We're expecting the new 2020 HDs to debut sometime in early 2019, with an on-sale date later in the year."

Spiedbilde images

 

I-WRQBXkr-XL II

I-TdG2pwK-XL II

I-v89zHfJ-XL II

 

Comments

@ CT

Ha....facts are facts!!! U say what u want. I drive the most powerful V8 in a truck! All while averaging over 20 mpg everywhere I've gone....now that is pretty amazing!!!

@ CT

Ha....facts are facts!!! U say what u want. I drive the most powerful V8 in a truck! All while averaging over 20 mpg everywhere I've gone....now that is pretty amazing!!!


Posted by: TNTGMC | May 8, 2018 1:23:41 PM

Did you pound on your boobs when making this statement?


:D

@ Frank

No need to its a Fact! U jealous.....must be BC u responded. Lol

TNT- hook line and sinker-you are too easy. If its not all Gm you dont want to hear it. So head to head and a few tenths of a second matters, but Ford has more HP,TQ, towing capacity, and that doesnt matter?

I was waiting fro Papa to pipe in on this too, but he is out today with a headache.

-CT


Posted by: crunchtime | May 8, 2018 10:48:36 AM


CT is a Ford apologist posing as un-biased.

If the bloated spec powerstroke has all those specs in hand with proper utilization, then there should be no contest? You can't have spec and then under deliver when tested, can you CT? That would be a poor design, right CT?

Problem is in execution where they have a combination of poor torque curves and power hungry transmissions that allow the "under powered" Duramax to deliver a better driving experience with better performance numbers to the pavement where it matters.

Ford's greatest asset right now is in mindshare and marketing.

Frank is proof.

ANDORKEN- you (GM) guys think waaaay to much about this stuff. Fords greatest asset is the ability to be number one in trucks over 41 years and claim it in every commercial they make. Notice the gm boys dispute the number 1 argument, yet GM never mentions it because they know they cant. I am un biased, but it sure is fun to watch you guys continue to scramble.

TNT-0 you are the first GM guy I ever talked to that averages that much MPG with the 6.2. You must be the read the display guy

-CT

@ CT

Really?? GMS gets that on his trips to. I have no reason to lie. You must be jealous bc your Ram will never touch that!! Plus mine has 20+ more HP and 59 TQ..I see envious written all over your response! LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And your wrong about Ford...there greatest asset is marketing. So many people believe whats on TV its terrible. They see highest payload and HP/TQ...yet they don't realize that Ford always under performs on real world testing..I mean look at Super DOOOTY, and the Ecobusts,......they always under perform!

Problem is in execution where they have a combination of poor torque curves and power hungry transmissions that allow the "under powered" Duramax to deliver a better driving experience with better performance numbers to the pavement where it matters.

Ford's greatest asset right now is in mindshare and marketing.

Frank is proof.

Posted by: andrwken | May 8, 2018 3:25:55 PM

Well said, Ford likes to post numbers but it is performance that matters. The Duramax has been the most consistent at outperforming the competition in the light duty market for going on twenty years now. Ford is on their 4th engine offering since the intro of the Duramax , all in an effort to keep pace . Keeping pace is the best they can do, outperforming the Duramax has been a fleeting execise.

TNT- I do not care about MPG, I drive my truck like I stole and love it. I just have not heard that the 6.2 gets that good of mileage, and I hope the numbers would be a bit better than my ram since you have more displacement, DUH!!!!!! Per your previous emails and contradictions, I thought you didn't care about numbers???? One day yes the next no, which is it? Since you only drive gm I'm not surprised by the comments. It is very typical.

-CT

I hope the numbers would be a bit better than my ram since you have more displacement, DUH!!!!!!Per your previous emails and contradictions, I thought you didn't care about numbers???? One day yes the next no, which is it? Since you only drive gm I'm not surprised by the comments. It is very typical

@CT

Contradictions?? I care about numbers when those numbers show proof to real world testing!!! Get it straight!! Fords numbers don't show up in real world testing!! DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! So more displacement means more FE?? Then whats your argument on the ecoboosts?? Fords whole marketing was FE. Smaller displacement more FE...its WRONG!!! But people believe it!!! Whats your argument about the Duramax 6.6L gets better FE than superdooty 6.7L?? GM's 4.3 get better economy than the 5.3L or 6.2L!! My old 5.3 got about 2 mpgs better than my 6.2L.

You make no sense man!! Your scrambling for excuses...Your worse than any fanboys I see on this site. You need to change your user name to "Pot Stirrer"

BTW..You have to be completely "insane" if you don't care about FE....bc gas is going up and every extra mile you can get will be beneficial!!!

I could see u as one of those guys who, bails on his trucks after a year and goes an buys a dodge dart or Ford Focus bc gas is so high and cant afford to fill his new RAM up bc it doesn't get MPG's!!! Just like in 2006 when gas was over $4 a gallon. Saw this so many times when I was working with my buddy tinting car windows! People bringing in their new cars bc they got rid of their SUVs and Trucks.

@TNT- Mic drop.

-CT

ANDORKEN- you (GM) guys think waaaay to much about this stuff. Fords greatest asset is the ability to be number one in trucks over 41 years and claim it in every commercial they make. Notice the gm boys dispute the number 1 argument, yet GM never mentions it because they know they cant. I am un biased, but it sure is fun to watch you guys continue to scramble.

TNT-0 you are the first GM guy I ever talked to that averages that much MPG with the 6.2. You must be the read the display guy

-CT

////////

I won’t resort to your petty name calling.

Thanks for bringing nothing to the conversation. I mean even your comment to TNT shows your lack of understandng. This site recently showed 6.2’s gettng similar mileage as 5.3’s. Well into the 20’s. But yet its the first time you ever heard of it? I would imagine you dropped plenty of unbiased comments on the article.

You (Ford) guys have nothing but a fleet crown to wear. The most truck sales is not your 41 year title.

TNT-0 you are the first GM guy I ever talked to that averages that much MPG with the 6.2. You must be the read the display guy

-CT


Posted by: crunchtime | May 9, 2018 9:12:05 AM

Read down through the follow data taken from the max towing tests conducted right here at PUTC. I consistently get above 21 mph summer or winter.

http://cars.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451b3c669e201b8d1921483970c-pi

@GMS

You know after looking at that chart...and how well both GM vehicles did while weighing 500lbs more. The 400+ lbs weight loss in the 19s, man those trucks are going to fly!!

My opinion is that they should be 5.3L 385hp 425tq
6.2L 450hp and 490tq...here's wishing...but a few articles have stated they are basically the same??? Can't beleive GM would do this

Did you ever notice that Biggie Smalls, Jeff S and Frank are never on the comments section at exactly the same time?

Do you care?

Thank you

@ TNTGMC:

I wouldn't be expecting too much of a power increase, if any. However, performance and efficiency increases are a given with the lighter weight and new DOD system. When viewing the chart, the GM's dominated or finished no lower than third place. The Chevrolet was running the 5.3L and it beat the RAM and Toyota in nearly every measured test. So there is no real need for a engine power increase.

Good point re: Power

Today's engines are adequate, and coupled with 8 speed and 10 speed transmissions the topic becomes a bit of minutiae that guys like us kick around on comments pages.

This topic will need revising from time to time because fuel cost increases (or reductions) might move the needle a bit.

I agree with what both of u are saying but since 1999/when the 5.3L came out its gone up 30/to 40 Hp each time its been revised....385 hp with the technology we have isnt out of reach! Same goes for the 6.2L. 450hp and same efficiency is easily achievable... Just a modest boost.

I agree with what both of u are saying but since 1999/when the 5.3L came out its gone up 30/to 40 Hp each time its been revised....

Posted by: TNTGMC | May 13, 2018 5:06:25 PM

There are many different factors that influence engine power. 2 of those basic factors lie within the engine design and those would be compression ratio and volumetric efficiency (feed more air into the engine = more power.) If you alter VE then you are playing with camshaft profiles. So for example, you want more power, you end up with a power band that is higher in the RPM range of the engine. What you gain on one end of the RPM range you lose on the other. So with that explanation, more power on the top equal less torque in the lower RPM ranges. Not good for pick-ups.
Now, currently the 5.3 doesn't require premium fuel, so GM could bump the compression ratio of that engine to obtain more power and more importantly, more torque without changing the actual power band. However, premium fuel would be required to deal with the higher compression ratios and stabilize combustion.

Been a solid GMC guy for many years but the GMC engineers have not figured out how to put towing mirrors on the trucks that allow the drive to see around a 102" trailer. RAM and every big truck manufacturer know the mirrors need to extend beyond the object you are pulling. Most newer trailers and 5th wheels are 102" wide and the mirrors measure 103" wide to the outside. GM is going to be using the same inferior mirrors on the new 4500-6500 medium duty trucks. Seems like this should be an easy fix by making the mirrors have a double telescoping arm. I'm looking at RAM for my next truck based upon having mirrors I can see past my trailer.

Just make sure you fold your Ram's mirrors in when you aren't pulling a trailer or I'll break them right off the door lol. I can't stand the guys that drive their cummins around with the mirrors folded all the way out, pulling a ghost trailer behind them. It gives the rest of us a bad rep.



The comments to this entry are closed.