Canyon Diesel MPG - 22 city 31 hwy 25 combined

[Dadoffourgirls]

DETROIT – With efficiency that complements its leading capability, the all-new 2016 GMC Canyon diesel is rated at a segment-topping 22 mpg in the city and 31 mpg on the highway in two-wheel drive – or 25 mpg combined – according the U.S Environmental Protection Agency.

Canyon diesel four-wheel drive models are rated at 20 city and 29 highway – and 23 mpg combined.

In addition to the fuel economy ratings, the EPA has issued a “Certificate of Conformity” for the GMC Canyon diesel. The agency expressed no issues or concerns following its recent, extensive testing and evaluation of the emission control system on the Canyon diesel.

“GMC Canyon is designed for those who want a smart-sized premium pickup that is quiet, capable and efficient and the new Duramax diesel engine gives customers another choice for handling heavier work and recreational needs – while doing it efficiently,” said Duncan Aldred, vice president of GMC Sales and Marketing. “It’s the very definition of GMC’s professional grade ethos.”

The Canyon diesel’s fuel economy is not only segment-best, it tops all full-size truck mileage ratings while offering a higher trailering rating than all 2015 Ram 1500 V-6 models and some 5.7L V-8 models, as well as the 2015 Ford F-150 equipped with the 3.5L naturally aspirated V-6 – and even the 2015 Nissan Titan S model with the 5.6L V-8.

The diesel’s efficiency also means it can go farther between fill-ups. With its 21-gallon fuel tank, it offers an estimated highway-driving range of up to 651 miles.

Duramax details
Canyon’s all-new 2.8L Duramax turbo-diesel engine generates 181 horsepower (135 kW) and 369 lb-ft of torque (500 Nm) to enable trailering ratings of 7,700 pounds (3,492 kg) on 2WD models and 7,600 pounds (3,447 kg) for 4WD models – ratings unmatched by other midsize competitors.

The Duramax 2.8L has been certified to the cleanest standards of any diesel truck ever produced by GM and meets tough U.S. emissions standards largely with a cooled exhaust gas recirculation system. It is also B20-capable.

Additionally, a variable-geometry turbocharger helps optimize power and efficiency across the rpm band and a balance shaft contributes to smoothness.

The engine is paired with the Hydra-Matic 6L50 six-speed automatic transmission, which uses a unique Centrifugal Pendulum Vibration Absorber in the torque converter to reduce powertrain noise and vibration.

Canyon diesel models also feature a diesel exhaust brake and an integrated trailer brake controller. The exhaust brake enhances vehicle control and can reduce brake wear. It uses engine compression to slow the truck down, reducing the amount of conventional braking needed while traveling downhill. The integrated trailer brake controller system works with the anti-lock brake system to provide immediate and measured brake force, signaling to the electric-controlled trailer brake systems so there is no need for an aftermarket trailer brake controller.

Additionally, models equipped with 4WD feature a new, electronically controlled two-speed transfer case. A 3.42 rear axle ratio and four-wheel disc brakes with Duralife™ brake rotors are standard on all models.

The Canyon diesel goes on sale this fall, offered on SLE and SLT Crew Cab models. It is priced $3,730 more than a comparably equipped V-6 model. Diesel models will require the available trailering package, which includes a hitch receiver and seven-pin connector, as well as the segment-exclusive automatic locking rear differential.

[RobertRyan]

Hone Eagle wrote:
Cars - (not trucks of which there are very few,)the EU will discourage diesel use going forward by increasing the tax on it.
So fewer sold and more fuel for us.
It also illustrates why North america is suddenly seeing a bunch of small diesel engines,the original market is shrinking.

Yes you will see a lot more Diesels in NA The market for Diesel is NOT shrinking in Europe. Conjestion in some Cities is getting bad,but not like the US. 5 US Cities are rated as clean cities, 5 Canadian, are as well, but 11 European ones qualify.
Yes Diesels will grow in the US, maybe not for cars, but certainly for Pickups and Vans

[rjstractor]

Once they have been on the road for a while I'll have to see what real-world mpg turns out to be. I'm hoping for a high-20s average. I really like the idea of a good mpg daily driver that can tow a 4-5K travel trailer without screaming. But when the time comes in a couple of years I'll have to look hard at other offerings including the Ecodiesel, 2.7 Ford Ecoboost and possibly the new Ranger if it comes out. I'd like to see Ram come out with a midsize using the same 3.0 diesel as the full size. Dodge (Ram) basically invented the midsize truck segment and I found it puzzling when they dropped it.

[hone_eagle]

RobertRyan wrote:

hone eagle wrote:
France Portgal Belgum etc etc


From a year ago ,its no fantasy they are backing away from diesel cars and the VW debacle can only speed it up .
More diesel for us .

Not Diesel Pickups, all Commercial vehicles in Europe are Diesel. Although ,Diesel Pickups are exploding Globally , Gas options dying. Europeans do not buy Pickups only , Vans and Cab Chassis variants. Diesel cars used for towing a lot.
They are in Europe are coming down heavily on older Gas engines and the high particulate DFI engines used on , newer Gas engines

Cars - (not trucks of which there are very few,)the EU will discourage diesel use going forward by increasing the tax on it.
So fewer sold and more fuel for us.
It also illustrates why North america is suddenly seeing a bunch of small diesel engines,the original market is shrinking.

[kevperro]

APT wrote:

kevperro wrote:
The gasers are cheap used relative to a diesel, often more than the $8K point of entry due to demand.

That just proved your original point invalid, at least with new. If you pay $8k more new and it's worth $8k more in 5 years compared to a similarly equipped gas model, then you get all the benefits of the diesels for "free".

It is a case by case basis. Buying used is much different than doing the comparison on new prices and the market determines what is cheap. If a model is unpopular on the used market it sells for a much bigger discount. How that shakes out isn't always obvious at the time you buy a new one.

So... use whatever logic works for you.

[RobertRyan]

hone eagle wrote:
France Portgal Belgum etc etc


From a year ago ,its no fantasy they are backing away from diesel cars and the VW debacle can only speed it up .
More diesel for us .

Not Diesel Pickups, all Commercial vehicles in Europe are Diesel. Although ,Diesel Pickups are exploding Globally , Gas options are dying. Europeans do not buy Pickups , instead Vans and Cab Chassis variants. Diesel cars used for towing a lot.
Europeans are coming down heavily on older Gas engines and the high particulate DFI engines used on , newer Gas engines.
Expect to see more Diesel options in the US. Ford is introducing the Ranger, Nissan with their 1/2 ton Cummins. Newer Vans will have diesel options

[Grit_dog]

donn0128 wrote:
About the same as the Ram 1500 Ecodiesel huh?

That's what I was going to say!
Not all want a full size pickup, but IMO bang for the buck is in the Eco diesel unless the comparable GMs are considerably cheaper.

[APT]

kevperro wrote:
The gasers are cheap used relative to a diesel, often more than the $8K point of entry due to demand.

That just proved your original point invalid, at least with new. If you pay $8k more new and it's worth $8k more in 5 years compared to a similarly equipped gas model, then you get all the benefits of the diesels for "free".

[45Ricochet]

FishOnOne wrote:

45Ricochet wrote:
I'm not sure I would want to spend $3700 more for the diesel for a couple of MPG better mileage. The V6 gasser is pulling in a good 22 MPG combo. If I needed more pulling power I would have just bought a regular sized pickup.

So how does the GMC tow the boat?

Fair but it's only a 10 mile drive from the lake but you climb 1500'.
Biggest complaint is the mirrors along with the smaller width of the truck.

[kevperro]

IdaD wrote:

APT wrote:
The prior two posts neglect the higher used value of vehicle with more equipment, especially the diesels. For the first 10 years or so, diesel powered HD trucks retain at least 50% of that new up front cost. We don't know what the used values will be for the GM twins baby duramax, but I expect similar 50%-ish over the next 10 years.

Anyone getting 22mpg with the 3.6L would likely get over 30mpg in a diesel. I've never gotten more than 16mpg in the crossovers and 19mpg in cars equipped with that engine. The 3.6L driving experience has never impressed me either.

Yep. The cost is a wash, at least on the big diesels (excluding the bad-year Fords). Your up front cost is higher and maintenance costs may be somewhat higher, but your fuel cost if lower and your resale is better. Overall when you think about all the money you're going to spend on that truck in terms of up front cost, fuel, tires, maintenance, brakes, shocks, etc., etc., etc., the marginal difference in cost between big gas and big diesel is immaterial. I'm not quite sure why people get so hung up on it.

Performance and driving enjoyment are far larger factors to me, and they're the reason I drive an oil burner.

It is a good point... but I've never bought a new truck. The gasers are cheap used relative to a diesel, often more than the $8K point of entry due to demand. Also, when you buy a used truck your maintenance cost is higher so the gaser is even a better purchase after the depreciation hit with impending wrench time approaching. You also have the benefit of knowing what year products were troublesome which isn't a gas/diesel point but is a benefit generally.

Either one of them will do what I need it to do. Ultimately what tickles your tickler and what you can afford is what you should buy.

[vortec22]

It seems to me that most of the diesels perform better in real world driving than they do on the EPA cycle. The opposite is usually true with gasoline vehicles, due to the fuel used during the testing.

[IdaD]

APT wrote:
The prior two posts neglect the higher used value of vehicle with more equipment, especially the diesels. For the first 10 years or so, diesel powered HD trucks retain at least 50% of that new up front cost. We don't know what the used values will be for the GM twins baby duramax, but I expect similar 50%-ish over the next 10 years.

Anyone getting 22mpg with the 3.6L would likely get over 30mpg in a diesel. I've never gotten more than 16mpg in the crossovers and 19mpg in cars equipped with that engine. The 3.6L driving experience has never impressed me either.

Yep. The cost is a wash, at least on the big diesels (excluding the bad-year Fords). Your up front cost is higher and maintenance costs may be somewhat higher, but your fuel cost if lower and your resale is better. Overall when you think about all the money you're going to spend on that truck in terms of up front cost, fuel, tires, maintenance, brakes, shocks, etc., etc., etc., the marginal difference in cost between big gas and big diesel is immaterial. I'm not quite sure why people get so hung up on it.

Performance and driving enjoyment are far larger factors to me, and they're the reason I drive an oil burner.

[APT]

The prior two posts neglect the higher used value of vehicle with more equipment, especially the diesels. For the first 10 years or so, diesel powered HD trucks retain at least 50% of that new up front cost. We don't know what the used values will be for the GM twins baby duramax, but I expect similar 50%-ish over the next 10 years.

Anyone getting 22mpg with the 3.6L would likely get over 30mpg in a diesel. I've never gotten more than 16mpg in the crossovers and 19mpg in cars equipped with that engine. The 3.6L driving experience has never impressed me either.

[Perrysburg_Dodg]

For someone towing a boat or smaller RV this would make a great tow vehicle. GM should have a winner on their hands with this small diesel.

I do take exception with their best tow rating claim. The Ram Eco-Diesel V6 has a higher tow rating then 7,700 in a 2WD regular cab configuration. But it's marketing thing too cherry pick what you are going to compare to right ;). Didn't see any payload ratings for it though.

Again good luck to GM hope it sells well for them.

Don

[kevperro]

Vulcanmars wrote:
A major factor often overlooked is ownership cost. $4K more to purchase (6-8 for full size trucks), 2-3 times more for routine services, def fluid, etc.

Bingo... cost is higher and the fuel efficiency, even considering equal fuel cost, doesn't make up the difference in most consumer vehicles. A tractor trailer is another situation. Where you drive 100,000+ miles a year the equation shifts.

But if you like that throaty growl and loads of torque... you have to pay for the right to forget your trailer is back there.

[Vulcanmars]

A major factor often overlooked is ownership cost. $4K more to purchase (6-8 for full size trucks), 2-3 times more for routine services, def fluid, etc.