1st reports on the new 2015 GM p/u's

[jim_summers]

is it too soon to hear some first hand reports on the new GM trucks ? I'd love to hear real towing reports from 1500 owners that have the 6.2 max towing pkg and from 2500 owners with the same pkg in the 6.0L engine. I can't believe GM won't put the 6.2L in the 2500's. Thnx

[Dadoffourgirls]

Jim - In 2014, GM made the 4.10 axle standard. There was information that the 4.10 improved fuel economy over the 3.73 up to 60 mph. If all your driving is over 60, it was not going to be improved. If the majority of time you are under 60, it was better.

[APT]

jim summers wrote:
The HD truck wins hands down in the payload of the bare truck, but as far as towing (which is my concern mostly), there hardly seems to be a diff. 700 lbs is all. And the details on the max towing pkg that I can find & read for the 1500, looks like it includes everything that makes up a 2500HD.

700 pounds in tow rating is insignificant, I agree. But there are far more improvements in the 2500HD that make it better for towing an RV.

The NHT package for 2007-2013 was very good. It offered a lot of upgrades for heavy towing and reliability. I would not call it a 2500. It is not quite up to 8200GVWR F150 range even. That said, it should be plenty for a Nash 25R. Do you plan to replace that with anything heavier?

[monkey44]

Jim - Don't take my word for the 2500HD with no 3:73 RE on an order. I don't want to be the one that makes that choice for you. Ask a Chevy Dealer first. I only know I couldn't ... but orders change often.

[jim_summers]

Thnx for the input. Seriously. I only know what I read and this is what I read.

pickuptruck.com says - the NHT maximum tow package (avail in the 1500), has stiffer rear springs, a bigger axle and different shock tuning.

GM's website says - MAX Trailering Package (NHT) – available on Double Cab and Crew Cab 1500 models; includes increased Rear Gross Axle Weight Ratings (RGAWRs), heavy-duty 9.76" rear axle, 3.73:1 rear axle ratio, locking rear differential, 18" bright machined aluminum wheels, Trailering Package, trailer electric brake controller and enhanced engine radiator cooling system

The transmission was news to me. Seems the 1500's have the 6L80 and the 2500HD's have the 6L90 tranny. I can't find out if the 6L90 is avail for the 1500 Max Towing or if it's also a part of the Max Towing. from the GM site it says the 6L80 is rated up to GVW of 8000lbs & 14000 GCVW. If that is so- the max towing of the 1500 as advertised at 12000 lbs could not be correct. So I'm wondering how they can tow 12000lbs in a 6500lb truck with / a tranny rated for 14000 ?
Thnx for the info. Gives me more technical questions to ask before purchasing.

[ksss]

Buck50HD wrote:
All you have to do is look at the gas SD/HD empty and towing comparisons and you will see that there still is no real "standout" in performance or mileage, regardless of advertised #'s. Just a slight variation in gear ratios will make one or the other have a slight advantage in a particular situation. It's nothing like the difference between the ecoboost and base V8's where it just dominates in towing performance and more importantly desirable towing characteristics.

That is exactly right. When the Ford 6.2 came out I was expecting something more. I just thought since it was the newest gas motor in quite a while that it would somehow raise the bar. It did not take long to realize that the 6.2 did not appear to be significantly better than the 6.0. Now that the earlier reports of the Ram 6.4 are out, it appears to be much the same. Certainly powerful as its specs would indicate, but it is not setting any mpg records. I doubt there are any Ram fans that will trade their Cummins in for one.

I think since the DI addition to the gas engines, the low hanging fruit is gone. I doubt there is really much more that can be gained without some radical changes to the gas engine. I am hoping that GM puts a HD quality 6.2 in their HD pickups, but I am not holding out for it to be a game changer in a real way, except perhaps a little more "go".

[lbrjet]

What any 1500 is missing (including the F150 HD) is a full floating axle, a stronger frame, a stronger axle, a stronger transmission and better brakes when compared to any 250/2500 truck. You won't find an aluminum block in any 250/2500 truck either.

[Buck50HD]

jim summers wrote:
thnx for the quick reply. GM's sure making this decision hard for me. I've just about compared vehicles to death. The 1500 w/ the Max Towing pkg looks like it's winning out. Esp now after hearing the 3.73 isn't avail in a 2500HD. Regardless of what GM says about the towing capabilities of their trucks IF you subtract the GVWR (curb weight plus payload) of the trucks from the GCWR (combined weight of truck & tow) of the trucks you get the real "max weight" that the truck can haul. the 2500 HD is 20500-9300=11,200. The 1500 w/ (Max towing pkg)is 17700-7200=10,500. The HD truck wins hands down in the payload of the bare truck, but as far as towing (which is my concern mostly), there hardly seems to be a diff. 700 lbs is all. And the details on the max towing pkg that I can find & read for the 1500, looks like it includes everything that makes up a 2500HD. Except for the 1700 lb payload increase of the 2500HD, I'm finding it hard to justify the HD and its 4.10 rear end. Pls somebody, tell me what I'm missing. (I am assuming I am missing a lot) thnx again everyone. Love the feedback & info. This forum sure seems like it has a nicer , easier going bunch of guys than some of the "truck forums".

Remember that some of the weight in the truck's GVW is part of the trailer.

[jim_summers]

thnx for the quick reply. GM's sure making this decision hard for me. I've just about compared vehicles to death. The 1500 w/ the Max Towing pkg looks like it's winning out. Esp now after hearing the 3.73 isn't avail in a 2500HD. Regardless of what GM says about the towing capabilities of their trucks IF you subtract the GVWR (curb weight plus payload) of the trucks from the GCWR (combined weight of truck & tow) of the trucks you get the real "max weight" that the truck can haul. the 2500 HD is 20500-9300=11,200. The 1500 w/ (Max towing pkg)is 17700-7200=10,500. The HD truck wins hands down in the payload of the bare truck, but as far as towing (which is my concern mostly), there hardly seems to be a diff. 700 lbs is all. And the details on the max towing pkg that I can find & read for the 1500, looks like it includes everything that makes up a 2500HD. Except for the 1700 lb payload increase of the 2500HD, I'm finding it hard to justify the HD and its 4.10 rear end. Pls somebody, tell me what I'm missing. (I am assuming I am missing a lot) thnx again everyone. Love the feedback & info. This forum sure seems like it has a nicer , easier going bunch of guys than some of the "truck forums".

[monkey44]

jim summers wrote:
which rear-end (pardon the expression) are you guys driving in the new 2015 F-150'2 and GM p/u trucks ? 3.73 or 4.10? All I can see on the GM website that is avail in the 2500HD is the 4.10, but I hear the 3.73 can be ordered. I had an old (1985,reliable) Chevy w/ the 4.10 rear end and the old 4 sp automatic. All it would get at 60mph was 10mpg. Empty, towing a boat, p/u camper with or without a boat in tow, air condit. on or off, summer or winter. I don't want to repeat that.

I tried, you can't order the 3:73 (well, last month anyway) for the 2500HD unless a diesel. But, I'm getting 10.5 mpg hauling my Truck Camper (3200 lbs) and about 16/17 mpg empty with the 6.0 gas and 4:10 and the 4x4 Dbl Cab Sht-bed.

My last GMC was 3:73 and 6.0L gas too, and got a little bit less, but not much difference between the two. I'm guessing the mileage gain in 2015 performance new in the older 3:73 is eaten up in the 4:10 RE, but it does climb hills better. So, it's a toss up, but if I could have done it, I'd have ordered the 3:73 again, and probably gained at least some mpg in the 2015 4x4 2500HD. The older 2003 4x4 6.0L - 3:73 hauled my camper just fine, hills and all.

[APT]

Ecoboost offers an even better than Ecodiesel torque curve (90% of it's 420 lb-ft peak from 1700rpm to 5000rpm vs. 90% from 1500-3000rpm). The fuel economy is worse than the Ecodiesel though. Not sure what that has to do with HD trucks.

jim summers, today's 6-spd trans offers a pretty tall 6th gear (0.67:1). 6th gear with 4.56 axle would be very close to GM's HD 4-spd 4th (0.75:1) and 4.10. The 2015 HDs have not been in consumers driveways long (a month?), but my 2011 6.0L/3.73 gets 14mpg mixed, up to 18mph highway non towing.

[jim_summers]

which rear-end (pardon the expression) are you guys driving in the new 2015 F-150'2 and GM p/u trucks ? 3.73 or 4.10? All I can see on the GM website that is avail in the 2500HD is the 4.10, but I hear the 3.73 can be ordered. I had an old (1985,reliable) Chevy w/ the 4.10 rear end and the old 4 sp automatic. All it would get at 60mph was 10mpg. Empty, towing a boat, p/u camper with or without a boat in tow, air condit. on or off, summer or winter. I don't want to repeat that.

[lbrjet]

The Eco-diesel needs more payload before it can become a viable tow vehicle for most trailers. I agree about potential though.

[parkersdad]

The problem is the eco-boost gets no better gas mileage just like you are saying. The new eco-diesel ram has the most potential in my opinion. Chevrolet is coming out with one next year as well. I think you will see more of that in the future.

[Buck50HD]

All you have to do is look at the gas SD/HD empty and towing comparisons and you will see that there still is no real "standout" in performance or mileage, regardless of advertised #'s. Just a slight variation in gear ratios will make one or the other have a slight advantage in a particular situation. It's nothing like the difference between the ecoboost and base V8's where it just dominates in towing performance and more importantly desirable towing characteristics.

[monkey44]

Mr.Beebo wrote:

mtofell1 wrote:

That looks like a super nice setup. IMO, the 6.0 is a total dog and not worth anyone's time but I tend to get a lot of flames for saying that.

I'm glad it is just your opinion. My first hand experience as a contractor is that the 6.0 has and is doing everything we ask of it without issue.

Well, I just bought another 6.0L "dog" because I liked the last one enough to buy it in the 2015. Course, I really like dogs too ... plenty of those in my life too. Loyal, faithful, easy to feed, love you and protect you, and take it any where you want to go ... but, of course, that's just me and my dogs.