The 3.0 liter Duramax inline-six turbodiesel engine found in the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado and 2019 GMC Sierra is rated at 277 horsepower and 460 pound-feet of torque.
General Motors had been playing coy with the new output figures of the new 3.0L Duramax LM2 turbo-diesel, but a reader noticed the engine’s horsepower and torque figures listed on GMC’s website and sent a screenshot, unearthing GM’s well-kept secret.
These figures make the Duramax-equipped 2019 Chevrolet Silverado and 2019 GMC Sierra the most powerful half-ton diesel trucks on the market. The 2019 Ford F-150’s 3.0 liter diesel makes 250 horsepower and 440 pound-feet of torque. Fiat Chrysler has not announced the EcoDiesel engine for the new Ram 1500 yet, but if the engine does return in the truck, it will probably make the same amount of power it did before – 260 horsepower and 442 pound-feet of torque.
3.0 Duramax LM2 I6 Engine
GM will begin taking orders for the 2019 Chevrolet Silverado and 2019 GMC Sierra with the 3.0 Duramax LM2 engine in the near future, with deliveries expected to commence in the summer. The diesel is the last variant of the trucks to arrive. Crew Cab models with V8 engines were first to go sale in the third quarter of last year, while Regular Cab and Double Cab models with the 4.3L V6 LV3 and turbo-charged 2.7-liter I-4 L3B engines were launched in the fourth quarter.
GM wanted to offer customers more variety with its new generation of pickups – particularly with the mass market and more affordable Silverado. It offers eight trim levels and six engine/transmission combinations for the truck, with Silverado chief engineer Tim Asoklis saying the automaker placed a “major focus,” on expanding the trucks range of choices for this next-gen model.
Like this story? Be sure to subscribe to GM Authority for more Chevrolet Silverado news and GMC Sierra news.
Comments
“Not by much”? Funny, that’s never been used when another automakers vehicle is rated better then a GM vehicle in some category!
Is this website hanging onto its integrity?
Not by much!!!
That by a 10% increase, and I imagine that it can be tuned up easily for future models. if it can weild that power without being a slug like fords v6 it would be all the difference. Still no torque advantage over the 6.2, id still take the 6.2
The difference is the 6.2 is 460 at like 4000 rpms and the diesel is at 1500 rpm. that makes a huge difference
Same price premium over the 5.3 that the 6.2 is. Going to be a tough decision for people to make. Especially with common diesel prices in the US close to the 91 octane price that 6.2 needs.
At least in Canada diesel is usually cheaper than even 87 octane.
5.3 RST with custom PCM/TCM tune is still what i would go for.
ANDREW, what’s with you? You know little about diesel fuel prices in Canada. Each city and market area is different. I suggest you go to the website Gasbuddy dot com to get the real hour by hour fuel prices for both gasoline and diesel fuel. For example, in London, Ontario, the price of diesel is more than gasoline today as off 2:30 PM today, but in Toronto, up until this past week, diesel was more than gasoline prices. That all changes next week. Remember the Justin Trudeau carbon tax starts on April Fool’s Day in Canada and the extra cost at the pump will be 5.99 cents per liter including the 13 percent HST for diesel fuel. The Trudeau carbon tax is bit lower by about 1.5 cents for gasoline including the HST.
The 6.2 doesnt need 91. It can run on 87 octane. Where i live, 87 is about $1.00 less per gallon than diesel.
I have a 2018 Yukon with the 6.2 engine,..it is an awesome powerplant, but it requires 91+ octane. I’ve tried 87 in a pinch, but I could hear a knock under heavy acceleration.
MATT, I notice that you said “per gallon”. That means you don’t live in Canada, as we don’t use gallons for the last couple of decades. You are trying to compare oranges to apples. Did you vote for Hillary or AOC??? LOL
I don’t believe the 2019s can be tuned yet, to tune a 2017-2018 tcm (8 speeds) require far greater costs and effort than most will deem worthwhile.
Why is it not available in the LT Trailboss?
I see this going into the refreshed Colorado and Canyon and should go into the full size 1/2 ton SUV’s and cargo vans.
LT Trail Boss: priced $6k-ish more than the LT and $4k-ish more than the RST, but doesn’t get the Duramax.
WHY does the really cool “aggressive off road” trim not get more power? The “Rally Sport Truck” should be getting the 6.2 as well if we’re talking trim levels again.
Complaints aside, I’m still excited for this engine. Fingers crossed the Tahoe and Burb get it right off the bat!
No chance Tahoe and burb get it right away.
GMC AT4 gets this engine and it’s pretty much the same as LT Trail Boss. Maybe GMC wanted something unique?
GM says for year aluminum is too weak for a truck bed, then they make their Duramax diesel head aluminum. I would never buy an aluminum head diesel, what a joke
Haha! Look at the sore losers with their aluminum head weak fake diesel!
The Duramax has had aluminum heads since the original lb7, hasnt been an issue.
In 2001 We bought a new gmc 2500 HD duramax which we still have and has been a wonderful engine except for all new injectors replaced under warranty. Still runs like brand new and with those nasty aluminum heads , it just passed 503000 kilometres.
Yep, that’s what the Ford guys used to say, and then they decided that the Duramax was right and used aluminum heads when they made their own Powerstroke.
Ah, but I don’t have a POS blow-up Ford diesel. I have a real Diesel, one without weak aluminum heads, a Cummins 6.7. Remember you and your GM guys all say aluminum is too weak for a truck bed, so it sure as hell is too weak to be used for a diesel head, no question about it. Google it- tons of GM an Ford guys with alum head problems.
If GM would please pair this little beauty to a 6 speed manual transmission and plop it into a Colorado/Canyon I’d happily go into a dealership and start signing papers tomorrow!
Hey Hugh, I was thinking that all three make the diesels with aluminum heads. Might be wrong.
Ah, but I don’t have a POS blow-up Ford diesel. I have a real Diesel, one without weak aluminum heads, a Cummins 6.7. Remember you and your GM guys all say aluminum is too weak for a truck bed, so it sure as hell is too weak to be used for a diesel head, no question about it. Google it- tons of GM an Ford guys with alum head problems.
You are wrong- the 6.7 Cummins in the RAM is all iron. There may be some baby 3.0 Cummins made for baby trucks that has some aluminum.
FINALLY!! We should have been able to buy diesel powered 1/2 tons long before now!!
finally I agree! I have waited a long time to own a Chevrolet truck like this. I currently own two Mercedes diesel 3L sedans. Sprinter vans have had diesels for 14 year plus. The duramax 6.6L is a beast of a truck that I owned a in a LBZ. That truck with 37’s new turbo proper supporting mods was insane and got good fuel mileage. Although I wanted a smaller truck with a diesel to just out stupid miles and wear out. Although I wanted a good manual 4×4. Now the autos are gone and really this diesel in my opinion is too late. Electric trucks are coming fast and far more capable. Still no manuals in the future though.
So let me guess, tomorrow Ford will probaby have a software update to theirs and offer it to the ones already out to 278 hp and 461 lb-ft, so they have the best numbers on paper again.
Looks like a great engine. Many of us don’t need a 6.7, 7.3 or Godzilla liter engine for everyday use.
This almost hits the sweet spot for me.
I wish one of the big three would come out with a 4.0 liter 385hp with 550 lbs of torque.
Throw in 1800 lb payload and 8500 lbs towing and I’m good.
To put it in perspective, this 3 liter only makes 23 less HP and 60 ft-lbs less torque than the original LB7 6.6 liter Duramax (with its excellent aluminum heads thank you). Those are pretty stout numbers for a half ton that should knock down close to 30 mpg on the highway. Looking forward to seeing the economy numbers when published.
Now that GM’s engineering and development time/money to install the inline-6 diesel in the SIlverado/Sierra line is a “sunk cost”, is there any scuttlebutt about a future inline-6 gas version? Same block (probably bored out a bit due to the lower pressures. 3.2? 3.4?), same mount configuration, etc. so lots of “technology re-use” possibilities.
MARC, I thought about a gas version using the inline 6 diesel block. Some engines around the world use a separate head for each cylinder. Just slice some LS heads into six different heads and design your own rocker system. If there was some other brand of rocker system, it is very possible this could be a very easy fix. It would make a great HD boat engine or industrial engine too. GM is still marketing the old 5.7 liter 350 V8 as an industrial engine. Not everyone around the world needs a 5.7 liter engine for farm or industrial work. The 3 liter size is perfect, for smaller street sweepers and forklift trucks that mostly run on much cheaper propane or CNG natural gas. Obviously the 3 liter block is bullet proof and so is the crank, so converting it to a gas engine and adding a turbo system would be a killer small engine. Mercury Marine often takes GM engines and modifies them for heavy duty marine use. The other advantage of starting with a heavy diesel block is that you can machine off some of the external metal to lighten up the engine, for gasoline use.