When General Motors was developing the all-new 2014 Chevy Silverado and GMC Sierra, it spent more than 10 million computational CPU hours designing and analyzing the trucks’ new Ecotec3 engine family, with an impressive 6 million of those CPU hours being used for the combustion process of the new powerplants. And that’s not even counting the human hours invested in engineering the new truck-specific engine lineup.
Are the efforts paying off for GM? It seems so, as the automaker recently announced fuel economy and towing ratings for the 2014 trucks, with figures for both measurements being best-in-class.
When it comes to towing, GM’s 2014 1500-range trucks powered by the mid-level 5.3 liter V8 Ecotec3 rated at an SAE certified 355 hp and 383 lb.-ft. of torque are rated at 11,500 pounds of maximum towing. That’s 200 pounds more than the Ford F-150 powered by the 6.2 liter V8 or the 3.5 liter EcoBoost V6. Compared to Ford’s own mid-range 5.0 liter V8, the GM trucks are up by 1,500 pounds.
But the good news for GM’s new trucks doesn’t end there: the mechanically-identical Silverado and Sierra have the upper hand in fuel economy as well, being rated at 16 MPG in the city and 23 MPG on the highway (19 MPG combined) when equipped with the new 5.3 liter Ecotec3 V8. Ford’s EcoBoost-powered F-150, by comparison, is down by one mile per gallon in each measurement, carrying a rating of 16 MPG city and 22 highway; meanwhile, the Blue Oval’s 5.0 liter V8 is rated at 15 MPG city and 21 MPG highway.
“Extreme testing” was necessary for today’s truck customer since they “are some of the most discerning and demanding people in the business”, said Jeff Luke, GM’s Executive Chief Engineer for the new trucks.
The GM Authority Take
It would seem that all the prepwork and testing is paying off for GM — at least initially, and on paper. It would also appear that the mid-range 5.3L Ecotec3 is the sweet spot for GM’s new light-duty trucks. However, we’ve also heard that the range-topping 6.2L Ecotec3 will be a beast of an engine — so we can’t wait for GM to release the numbers for that powerplant. And to top all of that off, we imagine that fuel economy will further improve once GM replaces the six-speed automatic transmissions in the new 2014 model year trucks with all-new eight-speed units.
In addition, we’ve heard several times that GM is the most diligent automaker when it comes to testing its powerplants for durability — and that’s not the fanboy (in yours truly) talking. With these recently-released ratings and the information about GM’s engineering preparation for the launch of the new trucks, nothing would seem closer to the truth.
[nggallery id=493] [nggallery id=494] [nggallery id=539] [nggallery id=540] [nggallery id=541]
Comments
That’s a lot of work for 1mpg and no weight loss. As an engineer, results are the only things that count. If I work 6 months on a project, and I yield no cost cuts or no production increase same on me. This is a massive investment with a marginal return. I hope this investment yields more than obviously apparent at first glance.
a 50 HP / 60Ft/LB increase with a 2 MPG increase…doesn’t seem like no gain to me.
Well Theo is like a lot of engineers I have worked with in a GM assembly plant for thirty years (retired tool maker). The bottom line on the engine changes benefit folks who actually use their truck to haul or tow. I understand the desire to want as much MPG as possible but we do not drive our pick ups around empty all the time The HP and torque increases will delight the consumer and the eight speed trans. will put the MPG up in the happy range. I have had three travel trailers and the 2013 Silverado I now have is a delight to drive and towing any style trailer is easier than the old Surburbans (generation engines) I have owned. Isn’t technology great
I just bought a 2014 silverado High Country 5.3 and put a size larger tire with a little more agressive tred, and it will not go to 4 cyl. my fuel milage has went from 22 to 14. Very displeased. What can be done other than going back to the street tire??
I’m very impressed! I don’t think it can dethrone the Ford in sales immediately, though. It will need some time to win the support of the market over before that.
Funny thing is ford is not actually king of sales, GM sold more half tons and way more 2500s last year despite their models being at the end if their production cycle.
You know what I mean…
That is a good gain but the question is how much farther can they take it? We are way beyond what was ever expected for a 2 valve engine.
I expect some major changes coming in how puck up trucks are built and sold. I have a funny feeling the Colorado is setting the stage for the future of the 1/2 ton truck.
Café rules for a 1/2 ton are much different from the heavy trucks. I suspect that the Automakers will move to the Colorado and Ford to the Ranger for half ton sales and do a light 3/4 ton to skirt the CAFE regs on the light trucks.
It could be this 1/2 ton may evolve into the light 3/4 at some point.
The only disappointment for me on this truck is that for as all new as it is I just feel the styling should also reflect the great change in the truck. To me they just evolved the styling. Don’t get me wrong as I think it looks better but just not different enough to get the unwashed public to understand it is all new.
But I guess they had their reasons.
There is still much on the table for this truck with other engines and trannys too.
It may dethrone Ford sooner than later though.I read that they are not offering V8 on the next F150,no Raptor and going to an aluminum unibody construction.I could not believe it because I read it on 4/1,but nobody has said Ford was kidding.
How much of the new truck is going to be made in china
Good question. Do you know?
and all of this from a cam in block 2 valve pushrod engine that the ohc trolls refer to as “ancient or dinosaur” technology! remind u this 5.3 now has the power output of the LQ4 6.0 now and with a 23 mpg that lets you know the tune on it is quite conservative so there is considerable power left to be tapped into! the 4.3 liter will really be the one to impress im sure we should expect at least 290-310 hp and around 300-330 ftlbs!!
Di has done wonders for all engine with power.
I am interested in the 4.3 as I have owned two a Pre Vortech and a Vortech and while ok they were not my favorite engines. Lack of power and low MPG in my S 10 and Sonoma were nothing to write home about.
I am wondering how this one turned out and look forward to a test drive.
I know the TT V6 would not be cheap but the low end torque and the flat torque curve world be amazing. I know with my Turbo Ecotec I would have loved to have had it in my Sonoma.
What a meaningless statistic.
whats meaningless about it?
No sense of what the number represents versus what say typical PC can do.
I’m an owner of a 2005 2500HD Gas – GMC Sierra. I CAN’T WAIT to get my hands on the 2015 1500 Sierra or the 2500 HD!!!!
looks like the new 4.3 is an LS engine for the first time, that should be the best for mileage and some good power.
Actually Rocky, the number isn’t meaningless. In the engineering world, it correlates to quality control development (adverse situation mitigation), tells us how much time and forethought went into development and testing (the project wasn’t a rush job, unlike others) and correlates to how many human hours went into the quality assurance process.
I’m not an engineer, but I work very closely with them… still think its meaningless?
Where is the economics on this big ass truck? Need a step ladder just to get in. Too big and too fancy for me. Ya who needs a Colorado when you could have this QEII parked in your driveway. Looks? yes I’ve never seen anything that looks better. Improved over the 2013 model.
I can’t find a passenger assist grab handle! Remember us old folks!! 🙁
@bamp there is a passenger grab handle… Just have a look at any of the interior shots, such as this one:
http://gmauthority.com/blog/2013/04/gm-spent-over-10-million-computational-cpu-hours-developing-new-engines-for-2014-silverado-sierra/#foobox-1/28/2014-chevrolet-silverado-25.jpg
What are the fuel mileage numbers on the new 6.2L? Are the horse power and torque in the vette range but detuned a little. My 2011 Sierra 6.2 had 403hp,that was 3 more hp than an automatic SS Camaro.
10 MILLION COMPUTATIONAL HOURS… AND WE GET 1 MPG IMPROVEMENT. Our government needs to quit suppressing technology to gouge oil profits. I’m not sure who else sees this as a failure, but how does GM think this is a great improvement. One can make the simple conclusion that by putting a cold air intake and CPU programmer on a 2010 Silverado will achieve better MPG and comparable HP. (I would know… I did exactly that) Something huge is going down in Washington DC and I’m curious to look back on this 20 years from now and have a good laugh.
The 2014 Silverado/Sierra with the 5.3 V8 Ecotec3 deliver a 1 MPG city and 2 MPG highway improvements in fuel economy PLUS a 40 horsepower, 48 lb.-ft. of torque increase in power. Usually, increased fuel economy comes at the expense of power, or vice-versa. By no means are the numbers in the new trucks NOT impressive.
SEVEN YEARS OF R & D, AND TESTING= 2 mpg hwy , 1 mpg city??? EPIC FAILURE ALEX. I’m wondering if you’re employed by GM or possibly some government agency…. Or are they one in the same? Or we have option 3 here, You’re as dumb as your avatar and believe whatever the Silverado commercials say. IT HAS TO BE ONE OF THOSE THREE… Because you’ve replied to every post and defended, promoted, and shined a blinding light on everything GM has accomplished with the silverado release… DUDE!
Dearest Luke: I sincerely hope that you pull your head out of your (what I can only imagine to be an epically-dumb) derriere, and see GM’s new trucks for what they really are: a realistic improvement in fuel economy and capability. That’s reality, and you can’t hide from the numbers.
You continue to bring up the slight improvement in fuel economy, without so much as mentioning the vast power/capability improvements. Do you simply choose to ignore those? Are you employed by Toyota, or the Japanese government, or both?
Because the only thing that’s an epic failure (your words) is your inability to realize that fuel economy has improved while power and capability have increased. Unfortunately for you, facts are facts.
In regards to my being “as dumb as [my] avatar and [believing] whatever the Silverado commercials say”: I’m sorry to inform you, but there aren’t any commercials about the 2014 Silverado or Sierra as of this writing. Looks like you’re either out of touch, are greatly uninformed, or are simply as dumb as you look in real life. I’m convinced it has to be one of those three.
By contrast, I’m an educated, informed, and cultured professional in what I do. Hence my replies to your severely skewed, distorted, and otherwise erroneous remarks.
Alex, I see the grab handle on the Chevy, but I still can’t find one on the GMC. There’s one pic in the GMC group taken from the left side, you can see the complete front windshield/door post. there’s no handle there.
Fucking Grab Handle??? God people are stupid. That’s like somebody asking for cup holders on a jet ski.
Hope you live long enough to get old, then you might realize the importance of a grab handle.. lotsa difference in a cupholder and assistance in getting into a truck. Talk about stupid, son, you win that award…….
OK… I apologize, Just thought it was another one of those people throwing fits about whether the new Silverdo would have some meaningless obscure feature (like an optional interior LED dome light, or something along those lines) But your question is valid. AGAIN, I apologize.
Apology accepted, understand where you’re coming from! My apologies for my harsh words. 🙂 🙂
Are we ever gonna see anything on the new Yukon?
@bamp Yes we will, but I have a feeling it will be towards the end of 2013.
Mercy, hoped to see it sooner, got one promised to the “old woman”. 🙁 🙁
As a Ford fan I am impressed with this so far. that being said I want to see a torture test just like or similar to what the ecoboost did. Numbers are one thing but I would like to see head to head. I also want to see the engine full bore hours on end like the ecoboost. Right now I would still go with ecoboost due to those test and high altitude testing. So is GM going to do that?