Burnt burb resurrection (It's mine again!)

[campfire]

Okay. You are wrong.

GM sold thousands of half ton Suburbans with 6.5TD's in them.

https://www.gmheritagecenter.com/do...ion-kits/Suburban/1999-Chevrolet-Suburban.pdf

Martin

Martin, Martin, Martin.

Are you trying to make my wish list longer?

I'm mostly kidding, but a newer 1/2-ton 6.5 truck would be a much comfier ride than my old square box. They must not be very common, I've seen and continue to see gobs of GMT-400 rigs, and only occasionally catch a diesel clatter of any sort (and nearly all of those are trucks).

I wonder where they're hiding.

 

[shady]

Ram has done a decent job with their new little diesel engine. Lots more power than the old coal burners, QUIET (for yer Wifey), and EPA ratings near 30MPG in a half-ton. Even Ford is doing quite well with their Ecoboost engines. We just wish GM would catch on to the trend.

yeah I'd like to have one of those new small dizzle dodges..... way out of my price range though lol. And for some reason I've seen quite a few 1 year old ones for sale Used.....?

 

[ZooMad75]

Ram has done a decent job with their new little diesel engine. Lots more power than the old coal burners, QUIET (for yer Wifey), and EPA ratings near 30MPG in a half-ton. Even Ford is doing quite well with their Ecoboost engines. We just wish GM would catch on to the trend.

Hmm, I've lost count how many customers with 2014 or newer Silverados tell me they are getting 20-23 mpg (highway) out thier gas 5.3 direct injected V8's. Not nearly as complex as the diesel in the Ram or the turbo v6 in the ferd. No where near the warranty issues on the DI v8's from GM vs the problems Ram and Ford have had with the diesel or ecoboost.

 

[shady]

My buddy and his gf both have matching 2015 Chevy half tons and both get 18 pretty regularly. Don't know about the Dodge or its issues but it's supposed to get 27-28. Pretty big difference. If they get the bugs worked out that would be a nice truck to have

 

[shady]

I don't know if that 18 is strictly highway or not... just what he told me they get when I asked about mpg

 

[ZooMad75]

Most of what I heard back is 18 is common with combined city/highway. Pretty much every truck we sell we order with the optional "towing" gear at 3.42. It's nuts to call 3.42's towing gears, but when the standard gear is less than that we always go for as deep as we can in the gearing department so our customer's don't suffer with crappy tow manners. Still, I would bet one with the standard gear ratio might inch that number up a little.

I also look at it this way. The diesel Colorado is a great truck. But for the price one could buy a comparable 1/2 ton Silverado with a V8 for a similar price. More room, better road manners with mileage numbers not far off of the oil burner Colorado. I've driven both, the Dmax Colorado is a torquey little beast but it's tight inside for a big guy. I can't justify almost $40 large for a truck for the sake I can say I have a diesel and get a little better fuel economy than a 1/2 ton gasser. Oh yeah I'd have to pour diesel exhaust fluid in every 4-5k miles. No thanks..

 

[campfire]

Hmm, I've lost count how many customers with 2014 or newer Silverados tell me they are getting 20-23 mpg (highway) out thier gas 5.3 direct injected V8's. Not nearly as complex as the diesel in the Ram or the turbo v6 in the ferd. No where near the warranty issues on the DI v8's from GM vs the problems Ram and Ford have had with the diesel or ecoboost.

Ford and Dodge may have growing pains, but when they get their respective systems perfected and GM is still pushing reworked 1997 technology, GM is going to have a harder time competing. Dodge may have a habit of making medium-quality trucks, but Ford has a lot of satisfied repeat customers (they have been outselling GM for a long time in the truck market). This is just my opinion, based on my limited perspective. I'm neither a manufacturer nor even a buyer of new trucks (my vehicles are all old). But you can't bet on the past and hope to do well in the future. Nobody would buy a new 3/4-ton towing truck with 130HP and 8MPG, despite numerous historical engines being able to do this very effectively. The customer base has changed, and will continue doing so.

Am I missing something? Does GM have some big revolutionary idea up their sleeve? The new Colorado isn't really revolutionary, it's close enough to the 1/2-ton size that they appear to be stepping on each others' toes.

 

[ZooMad75]

You can't call direct fuel injection on a gas engine 1997 technology. If you really want to get picky, the pushrod OHV v8 architecture dates back to 1955 and seems to be doing just fine in it's most current form. You can't fault GM for taking the keep it simple approch. Dodge tried the OHC stuff with the 4.7 used in the jeeps, durango/dakotas and rams. They went back to a cam in block V8 for durability and power. Add in transmission technology to get the engine into it's sweet spot for power and economy and you have a good combination.

Direct injection allowed GM to raise compression to take advange of the power that could be had without the problem of pinging on the crap gas we have today. 355 hp out of a 5.3 and having the ability to get better fuel economy than the 5.3 Non-DI engine it replaced is giving us the best of both worlds. Is there more to be had? For sure. The government is mandating it. The corporate average fuel economy numbers are forcing the OEM to get better. How will they go? Not sure. What ever they are up to, the secret is well kept. Could be turbo technology, could be hybrid technology. I'm betting we see another hybrid truck in the near future. GM has been perfecting the electric game with the Volt, so adding a couple of motor/generators in the drivetrain is not a far leap. The Feds are trying too hard to mandate diesels out of existance with tighter emissions regs.

 

[campfire]

You can't call direct fuel injection on a gas engine 1997 technology.

Fair 'nuff, I should have moved my target a few years closer to now on account of that. Higher compression + DI has been a good improvement, but the basic form factor of the engine hasn't changed much. My point was that both Ford and Dodge are experimenting with serious paradigm shifts. 5, 10, 20 years ago nobody was saying "let's shrink the engine, supercharge the snot out of it and then switch to aluminum body panels." They've taken a lot of risks developing several new technologies in an effort to change the way they're building trucks. Dodge is trailing behind (as usual), but they are also trying new things with their Ecodiesel and they also lead a push toward the 9-speed transmission. Any one of these gambles may or may not pay off. But eventually some new thing is going to pay off, and the companies that are fronting the R&D costs now will be the ones that are first to benefit. The Chevy of this year looks a lot like the Chevy of last year (at least, it does to me). If they don't start pushing the envelope, and some of these larger gambles do wind up paying off, GM will be left behind.

Again, these are opinions only, it's pretty easy for me to be wrong when making guesses about the future.

 

[campfire]

You can't fault GM for taking the keep it simple approch.

As someone who modifies vehicles, I appreciate this approach quite a bit. It makes my hobbies easier, and is one reason that I personally have avoided Ford projects.

I'm just not convinced that it will keep up with the companies that are trying to accomplish larger technological leaps. Time will tell.

 

[ZooMad75]

GM has a 10 speed automatic in joint development with Ford. Going into the next ZL1 Camaro and the next F150 Raptor. 8 speeds are available now with the 6.2 in the 1/2 tons.

Despite my thoughts on the D-max Colorado, it's testing the waters for a 1/2 ton D-max. If there is one thing I've watched over the years is what worked on the little truck (S-10's and Colorado's) the changes work thier way into the full size realm. Call it a proving ground or minor league, but it's worked.

Wild card here is the Feds. If they keep cranking up the regulations on the diesel emissions, it will make it cost prohibative to develop one. The investment made by Chrysler will be all for not. The death nail would be when crude prices go up again. Diesel prices going up to $5 per gallon or higher for marginally better fuel economy due to the emissions restricted diesels will have people ask "Why am I paying more for the truck and fuel to get a little bit better MPG's?" It's a gamble. GM is working on it. The timing is long term. I can remember walking through the GM Truck Product Center in Pontiac MI back in 1997 and saw my first 6.6 Duramax. That was a solid 4 years before it went into production. I know GM or any OEM is working 4-6 years down the road most of the time on new product and technology.

Wait and see.

 

[shady]

Well.. the decisions been made... as soon as I sell the denali I'm getting a 6500 loan and rebuilding my trailer with 500 of it and the rest is going into the burb to make it a reliable DD.

I should be able to have my vortec rebuilt, get a 1k FI setup of some sort, rebuild my tranny?, And get a 14bsf for the rear. Hopefully....
Motor and FI take precedence, then tranny, etc

 

[shady]

Know anybody that wants an 08 Yukon Denali? Lol

 

[Smokinthehippies]

GM has a 10 speed automatic in joint development with Ford. Going into the next ZL1 Camaro and the next F150 Raptor. 8 speeds are available now with the 6.2 in the 1/2 tons.

Despite my thoughts on the D-max Colorado, it's testing the waters for a 1/2 ton D-max. If there is one thing I've watched over the years is what worked on the little truck (S-10's and Colorado's) the changes work thier way into the full size realm. Call it a proving ground or minor league, but it's worked.

Wild card here is the Feds. If they keep cranking up the regulations on the diesel emissions, it will make it cost prohibative to develop one. The investment made by Chrysler will be all for not. The death nail would be when crude prices go up again. Diesel prices going up to $5 per gallon or higher for marginally better fuel economy due to the emissions restricted diesels will have people ask "Why am I paying more for the truck and fuel to get a little bit better MPG's?" It's a gamble. GM is working on it. The timing is long term. I can remember walking through the GM Truck Product Center in Pontiac MI back in 1997 and saw my first 6.6 Duramax. That was a solid 4 years before it went into production. I know GM or any OEM is working 4-6 years down the road most of the time on new product and technology.

Wait and see.

That $5 a gallon diesel is what made me sell my cummins. I feel like this would be an interesting discussion to have in a thread that's not Shadys build thread.

 

[campfire]

Well.. the decisions been made... as soon as I sell the denali I'm getting a 6500 loan and rebuilding my trailer with 500 of it and the rest is going into the burb to make it a reliable DD.

I should be able to have my vortec rebuilt, get a 1k FI setup of some sort, rebuild my tranny?, And get a 14bsf for the rear. Hopefully....
Motor and FI take precedence, then tranny, etc

Aside from the carb, are you having issues with the other systems, or is this all preventative?

 

[shady]

Preventative maintenance type things. The engine seems fine but sounds like it makes more noises now.. not sure if it has to do with filling the whole block with gas or what. And i have been wanting a new one with MO'POWA for a while soooo.

The tranny is a personal ocd thing again.. I've had like 5 just sh1t out on me in the past, 2 just died with nearly no warning. So I've wanted to rebuild this one and add a mild shift kit since I bought the truck.

And the FI is for drivability and mpg.

Id like to do the bearings and such in the rear end for the same reasons.... I'd just like to know that all the big mechanicals are good to go if i decide to drive it a long ways...... I know it's not really needed and that your proof that these things will drive all over as is lol.. but being stranded in BFE hrs from home SUCKS,,,, been there done that .

And lastly..... I recently made up my mind to sell it and by/build a hotrod of some sort. And Chrissie said 'NO!.. your keeping that burb.' so I told her that if I did I was putting a bunch of money in it to make it what I want..... she said 'Fine'.

So I am

 

[shady]

Got a quote today from the local race shop,. Right at $3k for the total long block rebuild and new cam. Thats for a balanced 383.
That's 500 cheaper than the crate engines I found, and no shipping.. so now I just gotta sell that denali lol

 

[shady]

In looking at the price of that rebuild, and doing a bunch of online and ck5 searches, I have to realistically rethink the ls idea.

My con list for LS (pathetic sorta when I look at it, but all valid concerns I think)
1. They all seem to sound like paint cans when you get on it...?
2. I've never really worked on one so I feel intimidated about future maintenance.
3. I'd be back with a complicated OEM injection system
4. All the power numbers and curves I can find show them making good numbers, but not so great low end torque. 800-2500 rpm. Which is what I want. I couldn't care less what it does past 4500.
5. Spending the same amount for a 100+k mile engine instead of a fresh one. (Whole swap total)

Now the gen 1 cons
1. They ARE old technology.
2. They are a less efficient design according to about everything thing I've read.
3. ........ I really can't think of another one

LS pro's
1. Proven longevity (even if they DO rattle, lol)
2. More mpg, from what I've seen anyway.
3. ...... at a loss again--

Gen 1 pro's
1. Familiarity, I know them and feel comfortable with them.
2. Vortec motors at least, have the same longevity as the LS (main reason I bought one when it came available)
3. Use of an aftermarket, self-contained, simpler, FI unit like fitech or FAST
4. Better low end torque.
5. If set up right with gears and FI mentioned above, similar mpg's can be attained. (Proven by a few on here)
6. It'd be NEW

Diesel is not an option. (Sorry Ethan )

 

[shady]

Forgot to mention third option of just putting the aftermarket FI and maybe a cam in/on my current motor and driving it till it won't no more.... half the cost but quite a bit of money for a motor that will eventually be replaced and a FI kit that will be obsolete if I went LS when this engine dies.

That idea is actually what got me looking at the ls a little harder again....

 

[campfire]

Forgot to mention third option of just putting the aftermarket FI and maybe a cam in/on my current motor and driving it till it won't no more.... half the cost but quite a bit of money for a motor that will eventually be replaced and a FI kit that will be obsolete if I went LS when this engine dies.

That idea is actually what got me looking at the ls a little harder again....

If you someday go LS, the FI kit will be obsolete either way. That would also be true if you went Ecoboost or Cummins or Dmax or Toyota or anything else out there.

IMO, you should focus on building one engine well and disregard the others. It's likely that any of your 3 options will outlast the body anyways (even the old tired motor isn't THAT tired, right?). If you want a modern engine, grab that $350 5.3L over in CR. If you want to built it old-school, use that vortec that you already have. If you want it to be on the road quickly, set the truck up for FI and then you can later swap in the new block without having to redo any of the wiring.

I'd bet, given the dirt-cheap price, you could rebuild that LS and still be pretty cheap. You'd be starting several hundred dollars cheaper than the standard internet price, and you'd already have the donor wiring harness & all the accessories. If I understand it correctly, all you'd really hafta do is combine the harnesses and get a set of motor mounts. A couple of days spent fiddling with wiring isn't a deal breaker, you'll be redoing some of the wiring either way.