Any new news on GM retiring the 6.Dinosaur ?

SarahsGMC · June 14, 2018

On ‎6‎/‎1‎/‎2018 at 10:02 AM, gearheadesw said:

Don't get why some are so hung up on numbers. Does the truck work for you when you're in the drivers seat? Is everyone passing you flipping you off? Dated engine that flat out works, want a fast truck? Why? I work in my truck not race. Trucks have capabilities, not speed performance.

I like having a big lifted fast work truck

i82much · June 21, 2018

On June 12, 2018 at 9:27 AM, C/K Man said:

If the primary application for the rumored new engine will be HD pickups and medium duty trucks, a low r.p.m. large displacement naturally aspirated engine would be the logical choice. Notice that Ford has not offered an Ecoboost engine in any Super Duty? There are good reasons for that.

Ford hasn't gotten around to it yet, but smaller forced induction gas engines will arrive in HD trucks eventually. Recall the HD segment did not affect CAFE standards, that is why no ecoboost hd engine. A boosted 4.5 liter engine would handle HD applications just as well as a v8 and do better at elevation.

C/K Man · June 21, 2018

1 hour ago, i82much said:

Ford hasn't gotten around to it yet, but smaller forced induction gas engines will arrive in HD trucks eventually. Recall the HD segment did not affect CAFE standards, that is why no ecoboost hd engine. A boosted 4.5 liter engine would handle HD applications just as well as a v8 and do better at elevation.

Not sure about that. Work an Ecoboost and the fuel economy is worse than a GM 6.2L. There would also likely be durability issues. Fleets like simple and cheap. Not to say forced induction gasoline engines may eventually show up in larger commercial trucks, but the current trend seems to be back to large displacement naturally aspirated. Ford's 7X, GM's 6.0L replacement, and I am now hearing that FCA may be looking at a larger Hemi for the Ram HD's.

i82much · June 21, 2018

2 minutes ago, C/K Man said:

Not sure about that. Work an Ecoboost and the fuel economy is worse than a GM 6.2L. There would also likely be durability issues. Fleets like simple and cheap. Not to say forced induction gasoline engines may eventually show up in larger commercial trucks, but the current trend seems to be back to large displacement naturally aspirated. Ford's 7X, GM's 6.0L replacement, and I am now hearing that FCA may be looking at a larger Hemi for the Ram HD's.

Right, I tend to agree with your comment. If I am looking to buy a box van to move containers all over town, I want a big V8. But I think consumers will see a lot of benefits to a boosted, smaller-displacement engine in an HD platform. I think the real question is whether commercial buyers will ever decide the smaller boosted engines are reliable enough under tough use conditions to fully replace the naturally aspirated V8.

I guess the big distinction is there are a lot of HD consumer owners that are unloaded 90% of the time. That's not really the case for commercial users. Also, consumers tend to do things with their HD trucks like pull a big trailer through the mountains, where the boost can mitigate the effects of altitude on power output.

And of course the big 3 will have to think about how many diesel sales they will lose in the HD market if they offer boosted gas engines as well. Personally, I think they are coming and they will be successful, but at the same time, I'd buy a big naturally aspirated V8 over a smaller boosted engine myself. I'm pretty slow to jump on the new technology train, I bought a 4.3 Silverado in 2007 because I just didn't quite trust those newfangled LS engines yet

C/K Man · June 21, 2018

You are typical of many medium duty box van users. Good chance GM will have a gasoline engine in the new Silverado 4500/5500/6500 in 2020 or 2021. Not everyone wants a diesel anymore.

i82much · June 21, 2018

10 minutes ago, C/K Man said:

You are typical of many medium duty box van users. Good chance GM will have a gasoline engine in the new Silverado 4500/5500/6500 in 2020 or 2021. Not everyone wants a diesel anymore.

Just think about how cheap it would be to live in a box van with an engine that never died!

f8l vnm · June 22, 2018

On 6/1/2018 at 7:02 AM, gearheadesw said:

Don't get why some are so hung up on numbers. Does the truck work for you when you're in the drivers seat? Is everyone passing you flipping you off? Dated engine that flat out works, want a fast truck? Why? I work in my truck not race. Trucks have capabilities, not speed performance.

I'm hung up on numbers because GM is last in this category .

As I mentioned before the 6.0 is a fine great motor , a rock . Only issue i have is that its super dated .

Last time i checked no one is flipping me off but I do appreciate your concern for me.

Who said anything about a fast truck ? Who said anything about racing the truck ?

While i agree its a truck and its all about capabilities , there is also something to be said when your last in every performance category when it comes to your competitors. With or without the truck loaded the 6.0 was inferior compared to its counterparts.

The below is a nice report

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2017/03/whats-the-best-34-ton-work-truck-for-2017.html

Daly · June 22, 2018

As long as theres no AFM, DFM, or start/stop... But the way GM is playing with this technology, I wouldn't be surprised if they do start introducing that shit into the HD's.

i82much · June 23, 2018

i just wanted a basic steel truck with no fuel economy gimmicks something that would last forever. the few extra ponies on the ram and ford never weighed into my decision one bit.

Edited June 24, 2018 by i82much

gearheadesw · June 23, 2018

22 hours ago, f8l vnm said:

I'm hung up on numbers because GM is last in this category .

As I mentioned before the 6.0 is a fine great motor , a rock . Only issue i have is that its super dated .

Last time i checked no one is flipping me off but I do appreciate your concern for me.

Who said anything about a fast truck ? Who said anything about racing the truck ?

While i agree its a truck and its all about capabilities , there is also something to be said when your last in every performance category when it comes to your competitors. With or without the truck loaded the 6.0 was inferior compared to its counterparts.

The below is a nice report

http://news.pickuptrucks.com/2017/03/whats-the-best-34-ton-work-truck-for-2017.html

That was an interesting read, thanks. When I test drove the top three, just a quick test drive didn't reveal a drastic difference in power between the trucks. Obviously there is this disparity, with the GM product being the oldest and least powerful of this bunch. I'm happy enough with the capabilities of my 2500, if I was disappointed enough, I'de switch, but I like my truck, the ride, looks, power are all good in my eyes. I agree with some of the previous statements saying that all the start stop, cylinder deactivation, direct injection, etc, just seem to increase maintenance just as much as power. I dunno. Put turbo's on this engine and see what the factory could do with that, not just on the 4 bangers and 6's, this proven engine could make a lot more easy hp and torque. Seems easy and economical, again, I dunno.

C/K Man · July 7, 2018

Funny rumor, Ford's upcoming 7X engine is said to 'borrow' many LS features, particularly cylinder head and combustion chamber design.

Cowpie · July 10, 2018

The L96 is going nowhere. Maybe dropped from future 2500/3500 offerings, but Fuso is putting the L96 6.0 into its mid range cargo trucks starting this year along with the Allison trans behind it.

And GM or any other OEM for that matter, must calculate in how much they will screw themselves over with their primary market for the HD pickups.... fleets. The L96 6.0 is one reason fleets buy so many GM HD pickups. If GM starts monkeying around with engine changes and starts moving in the direction their 1/2 ton engines have gone, it is likely to cause many fleets to jump ship and shop elsewhere.

That article about work trucks was interesting, but not really much in the way of informative. And different segments of the country tend to favor different brands. In Iowa where I live, GM HD pickups are the majority by far. And the bulk of those business and fleet trucks are 6.0L. Like the local Key Cooperative that caters to the farm sector. Those guys have no problem pulling around double anhydrous ammonia tank trailers with the lowly Chevy 2500 6.0. Those anhydrous trailers, when the tanks are full, go well beyond the 13,500 lb towing capacity of the 2500. The key there is that there is no tongue weight to speak of. Those trailers are the draw bar variety. I myself have pulled double grain wagons with a 2500 6.0 and it did the job just fine. Both of those trailers, by themselves, exceeded the total GCWR 20,500 lb of the pickup. And each trailer was equivalent to the typical 5th wheel travel trailer in size.

If individuals don't like the performance of the stock L96 6.0, then supercharge the dang motor and quit fussing about not having any performance edge. Turn that "dinosaur" L96 into a modern thoroughbred. The L96 has strong enough guts to easily deal with a supercharger. Why should GM have to come up with something for the smallest market segment for their HD pickups when one can just do it themselves and make sure it is done right.

Edited July 10, 2018 by Cowpie

redwngr · July 10, 2018

For 2019 MY the L96 will again be standard equipment.

C/K Man · July 10, 2018

The latest I am hearing is that the L96 will indeed continue, but there will be another larger gas engine option. Very true about Fuso now using the L96, along with Freightliner and Isuzu who have been offering it for years.

From what I understand, need for a larger gas engine is being driven by the new Silverado 4500/5500/6500. Where the L96 would probably be fine for the 4500, it is limited to around 20,000#'s GVW. I believe GM wants to match Ford in offering a gas option in trucks over that GVW.

Keep in mind the Ford 7X will not replace the current 6.2L.

By the way, the company I work for has been flogging L96 6.0L's for years. We own 100's of them, vans, HD pickups, and 3500 HD dually cab and chassis. Very rarely do we have any issues with them, and about the most common problem is the occasional broken exhaust manifold bolt. My experiences with the L96 at work is why there is one in my garage.

Edited July 10, 2018 by C/K Man

magnum74 · July 11, 2018

On 7/9/2018 at 9:44 PM, Cowpie said:

If individuals don't like the performance of the stock L96 6.0, then supercharge the dang motor and quit fussing about not having any performance edge. Turn that "dinosaur" L96 into a modern thoroughbred. The L96 has strong enough guts to easily deal with a supercharger. Why should GM have to come up with something for the smallest market segment for their HD pickups when one can just do it themselves and make sure it is done right.

Simply removing the nannies found with the current programming makes a world of difference in performance and feel, too. I'd like to see them continue with the L96 but I'm also curious about the new option. My replacement will happen around timing of the 2021's. An L96 with more gears maybe? Or a new GM 7.X torque monster? Could possibly end up being a tough decision depending what they do and how they configure them. I don't now that I could resist old fasioned GM big block-like torque on 87 octane with modern comfort and driveability.

Edited July 11, 2018 by magnum74