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.

[blt2ski]

Flashman wrote:

Grit dog wrote:
You guys stayed on topic nicely........lol

I think the new Chevys are a great idea for a home owner - a small pickup makes much more sense than a mini van or station wagon - depending on the family size. The diesel option is great, more torque
and great mileage - what's not to like?

But for pulling an RV I would not give up my full size.

Depends upon the RV size, shape etc too. This new rig may do fine with some of the smaller ones, that are more aerodynamic. ALong with, not too long ago, the HP/Torque specs of this little motor were on par with some of the first diesels in 25/35 series trucks. Or in the case of the GM6.2, more power! Probably the same with the IDI6.9........More HP than the first B5.9, granted not quite as much torque......

I can see this being a good rig for a lot of us frankly, depending upon how it is used etc.......


Marty

[Flashman]

Grit dog wrote:
You guys stayed on topic nicely........lol

I think the new Chevys are a great idea for a home owner - a small pickup makes much more sense than a mini van or station wagon - depending on the family size. The diesel option is great, more torque
and great mileage - what's not to like?

But for pulling an RV I would not give up my full size.

[Grit_dog]

You guys stayed on topic nicely........lol

[Slowmover]

The good year Fords were the 1999-2003 Powerstroke. Every other year the past quarter century one was better off with the competition. And you better have stuck with the automatic trans even then. Those years weren't better than the others, but were okay. Reverence for the 7.3 is only because it was in a Blue Oval.

Pretty funny that the new Ford diesel is a Chihuahua (Made in state of).

[Dayle1]

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.

Cost of ownership?? How quickly that comes up in the gas vs. diesel debate, yet many buyers happily spend thousands for the top trim levels with leather heated seats, power folding mirrors, killer stereo and a NAV system that is out of date in a few yrs. What about that cost of ownership? DEF costs between 2/10ths and 4/10ths of a penny per mile. Routine services simply don't cost 2-3 times more than a gasser.

Now if you stated that major repairs cost more, then I agree. But then major repairs on a turbo gasser are going to be higher also. Buy the right tool for the job, mid size or full size. If you can afford new with all the extras, great. Otherwise, get the right tool w/o the extras or used.

[kevperro]

Flashman wrote:

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.

What were the good-year fords??

Between 1908 & 1927 Ford made a pretty good vehicle.

Just because I was bored last night I shopped for a NEW RAM 3500 configured with the 6.7 dually, Aisin transmission and I found a 2015 in Spokane for $47,000. I did a pretty extensive search on used ones 2010-2015 and found several in the $35K range with about 100K miles on them. I found very few gasser duallies but I did find a couple around $20K with about the same miles (1000 miles away).

So.... I would concur. If I were buying a diesel I'd buy the new one. For $15K I'd rather smell the new vehicle and enjoy the first 100K miles myself. The used gasers I'd note do not have anywhere near the towing capacity so it is apples-oranges comparison. The new RAM had > 20,000lb capacity while the research I did on the gaser duallies was limiting them by at least 5000lbs less rated towing capacity. If you are full-timing with a DRV there is no doubt a diesel is the right tool. If you are pulling an ultra-light the gaser will work.

[Flashman]

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.

What were the good-year fords??

[goducks10]

otrfun wrote:

APT wrote:
I love my diesel car, and would love a diesel 3-row SUV too. But I would not recommend to everyone. And I tell people not to buy the diesel to save money. It's a $2000 upcharge on a car, $3700 upcharge on the GM midsizers, and $8k+ on the HD trucks. Buy the diesel because you can afford it and like how it drives. Any "savings" is a bonus.

Ditto.

I can understand why some feel the need to quantify the net return on investment in terms of trying to decide whether to purchase a gas or diesel vehicle.

However, for those who ignore, leave out, or don't know the value of a given "experience", they may be leaving out the most critical part of their ROI process. Fortunately, this particular value is discrete and unique for every person. If it wasn't we'd all be living the same dream, or nightmare, as the case may be.

Many purchase TV's with all the non-drivetrain related bells & whistles which can easily add $10k-$15k to a vehicle's price. You rarely see an ROI debate on this 5-figure "investment". For some, they're a complete waste of money---they do nothing to increase payload or tow capacity. Others find it difficult imagining a tow without bluetooth controlled heated seats.

There is no accounting for taste. May the gas vs. diesel debate rage on 🙂

x2.

[MPond]

otrfun wrote:

APT wrote:
I love my diesel car, and would love a diesel 3-row SUV too. But I would not recommend to everyone. And I tell people not to buy the diesel to save money. It's a $2000 upcharge on a car, $3700 upcharge on the GM midsizers, and $8k+ on the HD trucks. Buy the diesel because you can afford it and like how it drives. Any "savings" is a bonus.

Ditto.

I can understand why some feel the need to quantify the net return on investment in terms of trying to decide whether to purchase a gas or diesel vehicle.

However, for those who ignore, leave out, or don't know the value of a given "experience", they may be leaving out the most critical part of their ROI process. Fortunately, this particular value is discrete and unique for every person. If it wasn't we'd all be living the same dream, or nightmare, as the case may be.

Many purchase TV's with all the non-drivetrain related bells & whistles which can easily add $10k-$15k to a vehicle's price. You rarely see an ROI debate on this 5-figure "investment". For some, they're a complete waste of money---they do nothing to increase payload or tow capacity. Others find it difficult imagining a tow without bluetooth controlled heated seats.

There is no accounting for taste. May the gas vs. diesel debate rage on 🙂

Very well said...

From some of these debates it seems like "because I wanted it" isn't a valid reason, which is strange when you consider the concept of RVs and travelling is based on "Want", rather than "Need". Very few people here need to travel by RV; most of us want to.

I buy my diesel truck and my Denali SUV because I enjoy driving them. The value I get is worth more (to me, not everyone else) than the incremental cost.

[Perrysburg_Dodg]

Have to say after owning this Ram with the heated wheel and heated/cooled seats I would be hard pressed to own a vehicle without them again. The wife's 300 has the headed wheel and seating just not cooled.

Don

[otrfun]

APT wrote:
I love my diesel car, and would love a diesel 3-row SUV too. But I would not recommend to everyone. And I tell people not to buy the diesel to save money. It's a $2000 upcharge on a car, $3700 upcharge on the GM midsizers, and $8k+ on the HD trucks. Buy the diesel because you can afford it and like how it drives. Any "savings" is a bonus.

Ditto.

I can understand why some feel the need to quantify the net return on investment in terms of trying to decide whether to purchase a gas or diesel vehicle.

However, for those who ignore, leave out, or don't know the value of a given "experience", they may be leaving out the most critical part of their ROI process. Fortunately, this particular value is discrete and unique for every person. If it wasn't we'd all be living the same dream, or nightmare, as the case may be.

Many purchase TV's with all the non-drivetrain related bells & whistles which can easily add $10k-$15k to a vehicle's price. You rarely see an ROI debate on this 5-figure "investment". For some, they're a complete waste of money---they do nothing to increase payload or tow capacity. Others find it difficult imagining a tow without bluetooth controlled heated seats.

There is no accounting for taste. May the gas vs. diesel debate rage on 🙂

[APT]

I love my diesel car, and would love a diesel 3-row SUV too. But I would not recommend to everyone. And I tell people not to buy the diesel to save money. It's a $2000 upcharge on a car, $3700 upcharge on the GM midsizers, and $8k+ on the HD trucks. Buy the diesel because you can afford it and like how it drives. Any "savings" is a bonus.

[ksss]

I have had two Gas HD pickups in the last couple years a 2012 2500 CC with a 6.0 and a 2015 3500 CC with the 6.0. As far as resale, I came out great on the 12 and good on the 15. I sub .18 cents a mile on the 12 and .22 on the 15. I traded out of the 15 way early due to business requirements changing but I don't regret the gas purchases. The 2015 Duramax seems to get 3-4 mpg better doing the same work as the 6.0 3500. As my luck would have it, gas was more expensive than diesel here when I had the gas trucks. I buy another new diesel and it flip flops again. The new Duramax can really tow, no doubt about that.

[IdaD]

kevperro wrote:

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.

I bought new because I wanted a diesel and the price of used diesels was insane outside of the bad Ford year models which I didn't want. So I agree with you completely - if buying used, by in large you're better off going with gas. If you want a diesel, I think new makes better sense currently unless you're going with a very old model.