Help from GMC/Chevy 1500 6.2L owners with NHT package.

[teraandjim]

Hello All,
I would like some real numbers from owners of GMC and Chevy 1500 owners with the NHT package. I interested the actual sticker numbers on owners truck pertaining to payload of their rigs. I plan to order a fairly loaded 1500 with the 6.2L and the NHT package and tow package. Not sure if the NHT package automatically gives you the tow package, but I will be setting up the truck for towing. Previous threads of mine from December or last year have us in a 28-32 footer with a gross weight of 7500-9500 Lbs. Upon looking at the trailers at shows and in showrooms, we really like the idea of the smaller bunkhouse trailers. These are around 6500 Lbs. gross with tongue weights around 700 Lbs. I'm hoping to have enough payload in a 1500 with NHT package to tow these trailers. I would like to avoid a 2500 if possible, the truck will be my daily driver. I was wondering if I could get some real numbers from truck owners with the NHT package. My current payload is around 950 Lbs. (that is people, dogs, truck cap and 150 Lbs of travel stuff). Then add 700 Lbs of tongue weight and my working payload is around 1700 Lbs. Would like some input from owners to see if the truck will have enough payload for my needs. The GMC website has a NHT configured truck with a payload north of 2000 Lbs. That would be great but does that truck exist with the options I want. Thanks for any input.

Trailers we are looking at Jayco 25BHS, Keystone Bullet 243 BHS, to name a few, but these are the leaders.

Jim

[ksss]

Mike Up wrote:

BenK wrote:
Ditto that it is NOT designed for +8K GVWR usage...ditto reading that discussion
and wished I'd kept a copy as can't find it now

Why it is only available on lower class trucks

It is a fantastic 'car' engine though and another why it is available on the
lesser class trucks...AKA 1500's...AKA half ton


Same or similar to why 'P' class tires are NOT offered on +8K GVWR trucks. They
are designed for 'cars' or 'passenger cars'



Think this is the correct one for the OP's half ton SUV
GMLS866.2L L86 6.2L

Wow, I thought the curve would be much better than the Ford 6.2L. BUT the Ford with lower max torque and a higher peak rpm, still has has about the same torque down in the lower rpms.

The graph sure makes the 5.4 look bad.

[dedbird]

I had a 2004 D/Max 2500 to tow my 31ft 10,500lb 5ver. And it did a good job for the past 10 years.

I decided to trade last year and after lot's of indecision decided to buy a 14 Silverado with the tow pkg. rated at 11k lbs. This truck has a 5.3 and tows my trailer almost as easy as the 2500. Mileage is about the same with the only noticeable difference being the long hills. The torque of a diesel is hard to beat.

I drove to Florida return this year and never felt our of control or underpowered, set the cruise for 63 mph and smooth sailing.

Quite a fuel price saving with gas vs diesel.

[Mike_Up]

BenK wrote:
Ditto that it is NOT designed for +8K GVWR usage...ditto reading that discussion
and wished I'd kept a copy as can't find it now

Why it is only available on lower class trucks

It is a fantastic 'car' engine though and another why it is available on the
lesser class trucks...AKA 1500's...AKA half ton


Same or similar to why 'P' class tires are NOT offered on +8K GVWR trucks. They
are designed for 'cars' or 'passenger cars'



Think this is the correct one for the OP's half ton SUV
GMLS866.2L L86 6.2L

Wow, I thought the curve would be much better than the Ford 6.2L. BUT the Ford with lower max torque and a higher peak rpm, still has has about the same torque down in the lower rpms.

[The_Texan]

gmcsmoke wrote:

The Texan wrote:
My owners manual and the 2012 manual BOTH say premium is "recommended" but regular may be used. Then it goes into the fact that at altitudes above a certain point, mid grade fuel is recommended and again, regular may be used. The fact that I live at 5K' and 91 octane is NOT sold and I use NON-ethanol fuel, I guess I am going to grenade my engine .... NOT.

The OP is looking at a DI 6.2 engine not a 3 year old truck like yours. I posted relevant info to the engine we're discussing not yours, nobody cares what octane your engine runs.

The fact is GM's new line of high compression DI engines require high octane in certain models, perhaps if you read the link I posted I wouldn't have to repeat myself.

Well "maybe" my irrelevant information might help the OP in his quest for a truck that meets HIS needs more than yours. You failed to mention that the current crop of DI engines have fuel management and that there have been a multitude of problems with the system, where as MY old dilapidated truck has NO fuel management and has never hiccupped while driving with a heavy load in the mountains. Just a little info for him to think about.

[gmcsmoke]

The Texan wrote:
My owners manual and the 2012 manual BOTH say premium is "recommended" but regular may be used. Then it goes into the fact that at altitudes above a certain point, mid grade fuel is recommended and again, regular may be used. The fact that I live at 5K' and 91 octane is NOT sold and I use NON-ethanol fuel, I guess I am going to grenade my engine .... NOT.

The OP is looking at a DI 6.2 engine not a 3 year old truck like yours. I posted relevant info to the engine we're discussing not yours, nobody cares what octane your engine runs.

The fact is GM's new line of high compression DI engines require high octane in certain models, perhaps if you read the link I posted I wouldn't have to repeat myself.

[Vanished]

Isn't the 6.2l quite a bit more expensive than the 6.0? I'm guessing that's GM's logic....

[ksss]

If GM thought they could get away with putting the 6.2 in an HD they would have done it already. While the 6.0 continues to hold it's own and in some tests even outperform the more powerful offerings from RAM and FORD, it kills them in the ad wars to be underpowered on paper in comparison. The 6.2 gets great mileage for the power level and runs as well as the spec sheet says it should. I am happy with my second 6.0, especially with the 4.10's, even the mileage is not bad, but I would be way more happy with 460 hp/450 ft and a solid 18 mpg at 75 mph.

[The_Texan]

gmcsmoke wrote:

The Texan wrote:

gmcsmoke wrote:
if you think a 1500 with a 420HP motor that gets a EPA estimate of 14/20 and requires premium gas is going to be leaps and bounds above a 360HP 2500 6.0L in gas mileage you got another thing coming.

Please show me where the word requires is published in ANY GM publication. I know for a fact it is NOT in the 2011 or 2012 owners manual.

For all vehicles except those with
the 6.2L V8 engine, use regular
unleaded gasoline meeting ASTM
specification D4814 with a posted
octane rating of 87 or higher. Do not
use gasoline with an octane rating
below 87, as it may cause engine
damage and will lower fuel
economy.
If the vehicle has the 6.2L V8 engine
(VIN Code J), use premium
unleaded gasoline meeting ASTM
specification D4814 with a posted
octane rating of 91 or higher.

http://www.chevrolet.com/owners/chevy-manuals.html

My owners manual and the 2012 manual BOTH say premium is "recommended" but regular may be used. Then it goes into the fact that at altitudes above a certain point, mid grade fuel is recommended and again, regular may be used. The fact that I live at 5K' and 91 octane is NOT sold and I use NON-ethanol fuel, I guess I am going to grenade my engine .... NOT.

[therink]

gmcsmoke wrote:

BenK wrote:
Ditto that it is NOT designed for +8K GVWR usage...ditto reading that discussion
and wished I'd kept a copy as can't find it now

Why it is only available on lower class trucks

It is a fantastic 'car' engine though and another why it is available on the
lesser class trucks...AKA 1500's...AKA half ton


Same or similar to why 'P' class tires are NOT offered on +8K GVWR trucks. They
are designed for 'cars' or 'passenger cars'



Think this is the correct one for the OP's half ton SUV
GMLS866.2L L86 6.2L

I wouldn't post a hp/tq curve for a 6.2L and say that's the reason it's not in a HD truck because I can post the exact same hp/tq curve for a 6.0L making peak HP and tq at those RPM's.

I agree, however how many engine hours can an aluminum block motor sustain running at max torque RPM and not have heat stress take its toll compared to an iron block?

[gmcsmoke]

BenK wrote:
Ditto that it is NOT designed for +8K GVWR usage...ditto reading that discussion
and wished I'd kept a copy as can't find it now

Why it is only available on lower class trucks

It is a fantastic 'car' engine though and another why it is available on the
lesser class trucks...AKA 1500's...AKA half ton


Same or similar to why 'P' class tires are NOT offered on +8K GVWR trucks. They
are designed for 'cars' or 'passenger cars'



Think this is the correct one for the OP's half ton SUV
GMLS866.2L L86 6.2L

I wouldn't post a hp/tq curve for a 6.2L and say that's the reason it's not in a HD truck because I can post the exact same hp/tq curve for a 6.0L making peak HP and tq at those RPM's.

[gmcsmoke]

The Texan wrote:

gmcsmoke wrote:
if you think a 1500 with a 420HP motor that gets a EPA estimate of 14/20 and requires premium gas is going to be leaps and bounds above a 360HP 2500 6.0L in gas mileage you got another thing coming.

Please show me where the word requires is published in ANY GM publication. I know for a fact it is NOT in the 2011 or 2012 owners manual.

For all vehicles except those with
the 6.2L V8 engine, use regular
unleaded gasoline meeting ASTM
specification D4814 with a posted
octane rating of 87 or higher. Do not
use gasoline with an octane rating
below 87, as it may cause engine
damage and will lower fuel
economy.
If the vehicle has the 6.2L V8 engine
(VIN Code J), use premium
unleaded gasoline meeting ASTM
specification D4814 with a posted
octane rating of 91 or higher.

http://www.chevrolet.com/owners/chevy-manuals.html

[Mike_Up]

New 5.3l and 6.2l are direct injection. They tend to get carbon build up more than other fuel injection types especially at idle conditions where most HD trucks tend to be when waiting on the job site.

Read the same problem with the a fleet owner of F150 Ecoboost trucks, which is direct injection as well. They were getting carbon buildup under 100,000 miles, which also can lead to turbo failure when it breaks loose.

Ford's 6.2L is used on both F150, F250, and F350s. Time to change to a Ford and reap the benefits. 🙂

[kw_00]

The 6.2 is no doubt a great engine. I have heard the same that has been stated above by mechanics at the local Chevy shop. Both engines are used in applications that they are created for. The 6.0 though lessor power of the 2 is made for HD use and has been proven now for several years. It's funny that the 6.0 is still lesser power on paper then the competition, but has no problem during independent testing to keep up or even pass the other gas offerings in other 3/4 ton trucks. I am thinking GM will keep this engine and add direct injection along with some other improvements in a year or so. I have always viewed the GM 6.0 as detuned from the factory, but ultimately built for the long haul. I have had great luck with this engine combo and for a gas motor I have been very happy with it. Now as far as the electronic throttle issue in the morning... Ugh it has a mind on its own for the first mile or 2..

[MARK_VANDERBENT]

GMs 6.0 gasser is one of the most tried and true engines !! a real work horse!! low maintenance cost.