What's new
CK5
Register an account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members.

Gm's new 6.6l gas engine

yellowK20 said:
Fleets I can kind understand going with gas trucks , I was talking about the average joe consumer.

And like out not , a gasser with 200,000 vs a Diesel with 200,000 Diesel wins hands down .

Residual value IS important , not as important to fleets because they can write it off but to the guy trading his truck in on a new one it makes a huge difference. 10,000 in trade in equity makes a huge difference on that new payment.

(I never trade mine in just saying)
Click to expand...

I agree with that part of it, the average Joe that buys a truck, doesn't even need a truck at all. A minivan would often suffice.

I just meant that if buying a new truck, I wouldn't base anything off of the potential resale value. Yes, currently used diesel trucks still bring a lot of money when they sell. But a large part of that is because the trendy types are still buying so many of them, it drives the price way up on the used trucks. If the trendy types find something else to focus on, the resale values will start to come down.
 
Capt Ron said:
I assume PSI sells the current 8.8 in crate form for replacement purposes, any idea on cost? I looked around on the internet a bit with no luck.
Click to expand...

PSI isn't selling to the public. The guys down at Raylar in CA have got a hold of a few of the PSI 8.8 blocks. They take all the 8.1 hardware. Pricy stuff though...

6872xtc said:
@ZooMad75 that seems crazy that your dealership has a truck on its 4th engine. I know a guy who has 260K on a D-max which he has put the trans in limp mode more than twice while towing in "extreme " on his tuner. No, he doesn't tow with it daily, but it has a service bed on it full time. And one of his other trucks drove 50 miles with no fan to get into town. I accidentally got a blister trying to change the idler pullies. The guy said the temp gauge was pegged when he shut it off, but I thought that an hour was long enough to tackle it.
:doah:
It still is going.

Sorry for the derailment.
Click to expand...

I'll be brief on the tale of woe that is our 2004 C4500. First engine failed at about 140k. Cause of death: #7 glow plug broke off while at highway speed. Destroyed cylinder, broke the top ring land on the piston, beat the shit out of the valves and head and embedded itself between the seat and one exhaust valve.

Due to a shortage at GM a replacement engine was not available. Enter the Jasper. Wanking frigging POS assembled by drug-addled monkeys while supervised by blind morons that can't tell the difference between used parts and new. Within 20,000 miles it developed a noticeable valvetrain noise. We pulled the covers off to find the rockers and bridges were reused parts with heavy wear and the tops of all the valves were mushroomed. Jasper punked out on the warranty but sent parts (mind you it was two sets of cylinder heads worth of parts making 3 total to get enough decent parts to make 1). That POS lasted a while longer and after getting more valve train noise coming back we cut our losses and yanked that junk out and put in an actual GM reman (aka #3). Number 3 lasted up to Oct. 2017 when yet again a glow plug committed suicide and took out another cylinder.

#4 went up to about 4 weeks ago. Another noise started coming on and upon further inspection the noise was deep. So out it came and we found 90 degree's worth of the crank gear had broken teeth. We found the teeth in the pan. The inaccurate timing caused the valves to lightly kiss the pistons and metal debris was throughout the pan. New GM reman installed 2 weeks ago and before it could reach operating temp the engine was PUKING oil out of the rear main seal. We pulled the trans to confirm our suspicion. New seal going in tomorrow.

Something about this truck is cursed. We have an identical C4500 but 5 years newer and it's going along just fine. 110K for mileage. We have instituted a policy of yearly replacement of glow plugs regardless of mileage. But the Crank gear failure is a new one for all of us. Never seen one do that.

Back to the gasser discussion....
 
woah that is gnarly..

as for the rest I too wanna see these curves.. 6.6 is nice but 8.8 is better.. I want ford to cough up their 7.3 numbers because if it lands in the 500lb ft territory, you bet your ass GM is gonna jump on that in a sec.. I see a Gen 8 BBC on the pipe.
 
ZooMad75 said:
PSI isn't selling to the public. The guys down at Raylar in CA have got a hold of a few of the PSI 8.8 blocks. They take all the 8.1 hardware. Pricy stuff though...



I'll be brief on the tale of woe that is our 2004 C4500. First engine failed at about 140k. Cause of death: #7 glow plug broke off while at highway speed. Destroyed cylinder, broke the top ring land on the piston, beat the shit out of the valves and head and embedded itself between the seat and one exhaust valve.

Due to a shortage at GM a replacement engine was not available. Enter the Jasper. Wanking frigging POS assembled by drug-addled monkeys while supervised by blind morons that can't tell the difference between used parts and new. Within 20,000 miles it developed a noticeable valvetrain noise. We pulled the covers off to find the rockers and bridges were reused parts with heavy wear and the tops of all the valves were mushroomed. Jasper punked out on the warranty but sent parts (mind you it was two sets of cylinder heads worth of parts making 3 total to get enough decent parts to make 1). That POS lasted a while longer and after getting more valve train noise coming back we cut our losses and yanked that junk out and put in an actual GM reman (aka #3). Number 3 lasted up to Oct. 2017 when yet again a glow plug committed suicide and took out another cylinder.

#4 went up to about 4 weeks ago. Another noise started coming on and upon further inspection the noise was deep. So out it came and we found 90 degree's worth of the crank gear had broken teeth. We found the teeth in the pan. The inaccurate timing caused the valves to lightly kiss the pistons and metal debris was throughout the pan. New GM reman installed 2 weeks ago and before it could reach operating temp the engine was PUKING oil out of the rear main seal. We pulled the trans to confirm our suspicion. New seal going in tomorrow.

Something about this truck is cursed. We have an identical C4500 but 5 years newer and it's going along just fine. 110K for mileage. We have instituted a policy of yearly replacement of glow plugs regardless of mileage. But the Crank gear failure is a new one for all of us. Never seen one do that.

Back to the gasser discussion....
Click to expand...
Instills a lot of faith in GM crate engines :haha:
 
Bent77 said:
Instills a lot of faith in GM crate engines :haha:
Click to expand...
You have a crate engine. These were remanufactured. Big difference. For all I know Jasper is doing it for GM by what I've experienced. My owner just got back from a hunting trip and I had to tell him about the rear main puking and he wants me to call GM to complain about it. Problem is short of my useless rep that has zero authority they don't give us dealers a phone number for the rebuilder. So, I'll be screaming at the wall here because it's just as good.
 
sreidmx said:
I see a Gen 8 BBC on the pipe.
Click to expand...

We can only hope. If GM finally came out with a Gen 8 BBC and offered them as an option for their 2500 and 3500 trucks...I would seriously consider buying a new truck (which I never have, and never plan to do at this moment), and just know I would keep the truck forever.

Interesting to say the least. I will be interested to see how the motor really performs in the real world. Obviously it will be better than the 6.0 it's replacing, but towing anything close to 10k, I find it hard to see 6.6 liters still being enough displacement. The more gear options in the tranny's will help obviously. And I too wonder why all the R&D goes into building a motor that pretty much produces the same peak numbers as a motor they already produce. I just can't imagine 0.4 more liters affecting the curve that much, even with DI, but can't say too much until you see the curves next to each other. Just interested to see how it all works out.

And we could get into the diesel vs gas debate again, but in the end we are all bias. If you have a bunch of diesels, you will focus on the plus's of owning diesels, if you have a gas, you will crap on diesel and focus on your plus's for gas. In the end, I truly think diesel has ruled the market for 2500 to 3500 and up trucks because their really hasn't been a good option given to the public for 10+ years. So if the average joe walks down to buy a truck and tells the dealer they plan to tow a somewhat larger hardside trailer or 5th wheel or larger boat, really their only good option is diesel. I think if there was a legit fat block option in gas, you would see more on the road. Who knows.

I'd be interested to see the longevity of this new 6.6l too. Time will tell how the public takes it I guess
 
All good points discussed above. Here are a few more comments...

There are people out there in which a diesel truck makes sense, it's just that I think a lot of people don't make their decision based on need but rather because they think it's cool or for bragging rights. There are also people out there that need a 3/4 or 1 ton truck but don't need a diesel. You can have a big service body or maybe a flatbed where you haul a lot of stuff and need the brakes and suspension of the larger truck, but you don't need the power to pull a 15k trailer up a mountain pass at 75 mph. Speaking of which I think that is a big difference in towing....are you pulling mountain grades on the freeway or are you running lower speed stop and go on rural or urban routes? It's a lot easier to maintain 40-50 mph on back road than 75 mph on the freeway. It's also a question as whether it's required to do the job, or it gets does the job better or faster. I also see a lot of fleets that go with gas trucks over diesels. Say what you want but if a large company is looking at the financial numbers the right way they are carefully calculating which direction to go on these vehicles. There is not some guy randomly deciding to buy a gas or diesel version truck but they are looking at the ROI (return on investment) and determining if that extra $10k per truck is worth it or not. Unless you can prove that the added cost of the diesel will pay for itself in a certain period of time, either through fuel, maintenance, or even just allowing the job to get done quicker, you will not get the okay to spend the extra money. As far as the resale value it depends on how you look at it. If you pay an extra $10,000 up front to get a diesel in a new truck and then when you go to sell it the truck is worth $10,000 more than the equivalent gas version I don't see where you are really gaining anything. Now if the truck is worth $15,000 more than the equivalent gas truck when you go to sell it that is a different story.

With all of that said, if I won some contest and they told me I could pick out any truck on a dealer's lot I wanted there is a good chance it would be a diesel. I am by no means saying that a diesel truck is "bad" or that you are stupid for buying one, just that a lot of people don't truly "need" one or use it to it's full potential. Kinda' like somebody buying a Corvette to drive back and forth to work when a Malibu will do the exact same thing.
 
The way I see this, GM is adding cubes into the LS platform to get by with two HD engine options, when in reality there should probably be three. IMO there should a small block, big block for those who need more than a small block, but not quite a diesel, and the diesel.

I think Ford has the upper hand in this, as I'm guessing the 6.6 gasser might be lacking low end, like the other LS engines in HD use.
 
I'm not sure what more was needed, unless you are using you pickup to tow a tractor regularly or something..
With the transmissions now even the 5.3 becomes a nice tow rig.

My trip last summer convinced me of that.
I towed a CC 4x4 Chevy on a 20' trailer for a combined weight of nearly 10k lbs. Through mountain passes with up to 10% grades. With a half ton Silverado, 5.3, 6l80e, 3:73 combo.

I never once did underpowered or that it was even really working hard. :dunno:
Sitting in stop and go traffic on a 10% grade made the trans temp rise... That was it lol.
I was running as fast as I wanted up any grade I came to, and barely even worked it running 75 on the flats of S. Dakota into the wind.

With the 6.2 version of the same year as my truck id have never even known the CC was behind me. Barely noticed it as it was on anything besides super tiny switch backs.

The need for a massive redesign and all that goes with it just wasn't there in my opinion
 
Last edited:
Not that improvement isn't cool... And I'd love to see what one of these is capable of. My only concern was the fact of it not being a huge improvement from the effort.

And the 6.2 curve is much lower than a 6.0s was. Which was a motor that definitely was designed for more rpm.

I'll have to look up the curve again, but I believe the l92 had 300+ftlbs at idle and all the way to 6000rpm.
This is for the l94 version of the 6.2. given the numbers and such from the 6.6, on this graph, even a 50ftlb increase across the curve wouldn't look much different probably.

2010-62L-L94-Escalade-engine-dyno.jpg
 
I was just stickin with the torque down low idea..... Turbos don't do 'that' well..

roots pull numbers off of HP, but add it in the low grunt department enough to make up for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest Posts

Top Bottom