2019 Chevy Silverado Fuel Economy Surprise - Headed Down, Not Up

[pronstar]

Are you guys really going to post pics comparing the Trailboss models to regular models?
 
Seems a bit misleading.
 
Also read that there were changes to EPA testing procedures.  Don't forget that the 2018 models with the 6 speed had 3.08 gears standard, I believe these 6 speed 5.3s are 3.42 standard. Lots of factors at play. 

The EPA revised testing procedures for 2017 model vehicles [emoji106]
The test hasn’t changed since then.

Info here:
https://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/basic-information-fuel-economy-labeling


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Colossus]

There is only so much fuel economy you can squeeze out of a brick. 

[CadillacLuke24]

10 minutes ago, Colossus said:

There is only so much fuel economy you can squeeze out of a brick. 

EXACTLY!

 

Until they can shrink the front end (never), improve efficiency of the internal combustion engine (possibly), or significantly streamline it (and ruin ground clearance), you'll see a plateau they cannot crest. 

 

 

[Yondu]

8 hours ago, pronstar said:

 

 

The EPA revised testing procedures for 2017 model vehicles
The test hasn’t changed since then.

Info here:
https://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy/basic-information-fuel-economy-labeling


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

 

I don't recall numbers changing for the model year 2017 vehicles.  A few refreshed vehicles for 2019 have seen mpg drops though.  It seems like they aren't having to re-rate them until they're refreshed or redesigned.  A all new vehicle is a bag of variables but we have seen cars like the Camaro get a new front bumper and taillights and the mpg down down for both automatics and manuals.  

[Grumpy Bear]

14 hours ago, Yondu said:

Are you guys really going to post pics comparing the Trailboss models to regular models?

 

Seems a bit misleading.

 

Also read that there were changes to EPA testing procedures. 

Yes. Honda Civic HX 1998. stickered 44 mpg highway. Morons driving 85 mph couldn't get that number so they....'changed the test' and by 2003 they stickers said 38 mpg. Here is the reality. The 98 did get 44 and the 03 did get 38. I owned both each for over 200K a piece. The EPA number is about as much smoke and mirror as it gets. The only thing is seems to be reliable in is predicting direction of change so if they are saying the 2019 models are getting worse mileage make that bet. My 15 stickered 24 mpg highway...I have no trouble besting that number in the dead of winter by 10%. I waiting on, and fully expect to see, the 2.7 fall flat on it's face in this regard. 

[Grumpy Bear]

5 hours ago, CadillacLuke24 said:

EXACTLY!

 

Until they can shrink the front end (never), improve efficiency of the internal combustion engine (possibly), or significantly streamline it (and ruin ground clearance), you'll see a plateau they cannot crest. 

 

 

Wife and I looked at a New Trail Boss sitting beside last years 2500. These things are the same size (frontal area)....HUGE!!!! 

[gearheadesw]

It just goes to show us all, and the manufactures, that smaller engines and more gears isn't the way to good fuel milage. A big engine using less of it's total capabilities, is more effective then a small engine working hard in all situations.

[BIGDOGx]

Wow this 2019 silvy/sierra rollout has gone about as bad as possible for GM.

[pickmeup]

Of coarse nowhere have i read has it stated better fuel mpg was a goal for 19. In fairness to GM they have been giving as good and mostly better than competition. No doubt the 2 inch lifted truck is pushing thru the wind with slightly more resistance. Who knows what the fate of half ton trucks will be if they squeeze their nuts much harder for mpg. Then again if trucks are going to replace the sedan car maybe mfg. will be forced to lighten half to segment up. Meaning designate them the ''people moving '' segment with lower power and towing ratings, cargo box weight etc. Mind you it may have to be done to meet more mpg forced by epa. 

[Joe's 2017 Silverado]

I have 2017 Silverado 4X4 DC 5.3l 6 spd gets 16 mpg city and 20 mpg highway and that highway figure was towing a small travel trailer and some camping gear on the bed. I'm good with my truck.

[SS502]

5 hours ago, gearheadesw said:

It just goes to show us all, and the manufactures, that smaller engines and more gears isn't the way to good fuel milage. A big engine using less of it's total capabilities, is more effective then a small engine working hard in all situations.

I have found the same thing...my 2018 SLT with the 6.2L gets better city and highway mileage than my 2008 5.3, the downside is the requirement for Premium fuel but really the costs are not that far apart.

[L86 All Terrain]

In all honesty, pick-ups have only improved maybe 2 mpg going all the way back to the 1996+ Vortec trucks. Mind you we are now making 60% more horsepower than the old Vortec 350. But I used to drive my 98 to the city 250 miles away and burn 50L(12.5gal), 350 4x4 DCSB with 4L60e on 31" tires, my leveled 2010 with 5.3L AFM and 6L80e burned 45L(11.25gal) on 33's, and my 15 6.2L burns 55L(13.75gal) on 33's. 

 

You can only get X amount of mileage out of a 5500lb pick up truck, especially growing the power and size each generation. People expecting 2mpg gains every generation along with a 50 horsepower increase are not being realistic. While it is upsetting to see it go the wrong way with no power gains, I don't think 1mpg difference will break the bank for anyone. The EPA should quit putting out ridiculous demands because they are not feasible in pick up trucks. Guys thinking they will buy a V8 truck, throw on 35" tires and still get 20+mpg are dreaming. 

Edited December 12, 2018 by L86 All Terrain

[BigBadSierra]

I went back to a full size truck in 2014 when I finally saw a GM 4x4 truck that finally got out of the 10 to 13 MPG hole they been stuck in for years.

 

I just traded to a 2018 CC Silverado from a 2016 GMC Sierra. The Crew Cab is getting better winter millage as it is comparable to my summer millage form the old truck. The active shutters are helping more with keeping the engine at a prime operating temperature. I'm not seeing this truck drop to 12 to 13 MPG in the cold weather like the other two did.

 

The 2019 did noting to impress me and the dealer tried hard to sell me one. I decided to go with the 2018 and wait this new design out a bit.

 

Now I'm glad, loosing millage would not have been fun at least for me anything not working as it did before would bug the crap out of me.

[Paintor]

Losing 2 city/4mpg highway with the same motor and transmission pushing about the same weight.

 

I am saying tires. Trade war maybe we cant get rubber. Tire manufacturers were meeting last year about nanoparticles in tires for traction due to inability to get materials to make tires. Skipped a whole buncha environmental bullpucky...must be important.

[newdude]

On ‎12‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 2:54 PM, Gorehamj said:

John Goreham
Contributing Writer, GM-Trucks.com
12-10-2018

 

The EPA posted the new fuel economy numbers for a variety of Silverado combinations this week. The new 2.7-liter engine is one highlight. What struck us after reviewing the info is that the numbers are not that impressive. Chevrolet made a lot of noise about the new truck's aerodynamics and engine technology, leading us to get the impression that some interesting numbers would follow.  Now that we see the numbers we are not so sure. First off, there are 38 different Silverado 1500 combinations listed by www.FuelEconomy.gov. Four pages of different fuel economy numbers for the model years 2018 and 2019. You can find them all yourself on the site to view which interest you, but we are pulling out a few for discussion purposes. 

 

First Up 5.3L V8 4x 4  2018 vs. 2019

To our eyes, the 2019s (denoted by "K") look like they get lower fuel economy. Are we mistaken?

 

Next Up 4.3L V6 4 x 4 2018 vs. 2019

The 4.3-liter V6 was more efficient last year is our take. What's yours?

 

Next Up 2019 2.7L 4-cylinder turbo in 2WD vs. 4.3 V6 in 2WD for 2018 vs. Ram V6 2019

The reason there are two Silverados is one is the work truck, the other not the work truck. They get different MPG ratings. The Ram is the new mild hybrid eTorque V6. Hmm.   

 

Our friends at Automotive News asked Chevy's Monte Duran why the new trucks have lower fuel economy numbers than the old and he replied, "We increased towing capacity, payload, and it's a much larger bed and a much larger cab."  

 

 

On the first one.  You have the 2018 E85 version compared to the non flex fuel 2018.  Flex fuel is an option, so if we just go gas vs. gas, 5.3/A8: